United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1991 HQ Rulings > HQ 0731024 - HQ 0732487 > HQ 0732085

Previous Ruling Next Ruling



HQ 732085


January 17, 1989

MAR 2-05 CO:R:C:V 732085 pmh

CATEGORY: MARKING

Resident Agent in Charge
Birmingham, Alabama

RE: Proper Country of Origin Marking Requirements for Fur Coats

Dear Sir:

This is in response to your memorandum dated December 22, 1988 (BIO8XM8BIO17 V:E:S:BI MAH:mbh), requesting our opinion on the country of origin marking requirements for fur coats imported by Henig Furs, Inc. You ask that we review the country of origin marking on the coats with regard to the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR 134.46.

According to your memorandum and a telephone call with a member of my staff, during the months of June, July and August, 1988, Customs Inspectors issued marking notices to Henig Furs, Incorporated (the importer) for importing fur coats without proper marking labels or with labels not permanently attached. Subsequent to issuing the marking notices, Customs Inspectors attended a public sale hosted by the importers. Inspectors found that 48 coats had no country of origin marking. The importer stated in a petition dated September 20, 1988 that the markings came loose through everyday handling.

In December 1988 the importer imported another shipment of fur coats. You have enclosed photographs showing the country of origin marking on a sample coat from that shipment. The pictures indicate that the country of origin marking appears on a small tag stitched into a side seam inside the coat. A ruler is used in one of the photographs to show that the small tag is located approximately 10 inches inside the coat. Furthermore, the tag is looped in such a way that the words "MADE IN" appear on one side and the name of the country of origin appears on the other side.

A manufacturer's label, measuring approximately one inch by four inches in size, is attached to an inner breast pocket of the coat, midway between the side hem of the coat and the seam bearing the country of origin tag. This label bears the name of the importer and the words "Fine Furs For Four Generations, New York, Montgomery." In addition, a photograph shows that a hangtag is attached to the sleeve of the coat. This hangtag indicates the type of fur, the origin of the fur, the color of the fur and the words "Made In Korea." You have advised us that some shipments of coats are marked with hangtags and some are not. You wish us to address the acceptability of the marking in each situation.

As you know, section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), requires that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly and permanently as the nature of the article will permit in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser the English name of the country of origin of the article. Section 134.41, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.41), provides that the marking of an imported product must be conspicuous enough so that the ultimate purchaser will be able to find the marking easily and read it without strain.

In addition, section 134.46, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.46), requires that if the name of any city or locality in the U.S., or the name of any foreign country or locality other than the country of origin, appears on an imported article or its container, special marking requirements are triggered. Section 134.46 requires that the name of the country of origin must appear legibly, permanently and in close proximity to such words, be in letters of at least comparable size and be preceded by the additional words "Made in," "Product of," or other words of similar meaning. The purpose of this section is to prevent the possibility of misleading or deceiving the ultimate purchaser.

With regard to the marking requirements for coats, Customs ruled, by a Circular letter published as T.D. 54640(6), that on and after October 1, 1958, wearing apparel such as shirts, coats, sweaters, etc. must be legibly and conspicuously marked with the name of the country of origin by means of a fabric label sewn or otherwise permanently affixed on the inside center of the neck midway between the shoulder seams or in that immediate area. ORR Ruling 638-69 dated January 2, 1979, in effect modified this ruling by holding that suit jackets, overcoats and sportcoats may be marked to indicate the country of origin by means of a label affixed over or below the inside pocket if such marking is included on or is in close proximity to a brand name label affixed in that area.

In this case, the coats are not marked in either of the requisite locations. They do not bear a permanent country of origin marking in the inside neck area as required by T.D. 54640(6) and no reasons have been given as to why that practice has not been followed. Nor are they marked, pursuant to ORR ruling 638-69, on the brand name label affixed over the inside pocket. Rather, the only permanent label bearing the country of origin is the small fabric tag stitched to the inner seam. This tag is not in compliance with the country of origin marking requirements for coats. Consequently, we find that neither of the coats (i.e., with a hangtag or without) is adequately marked.

Furthermore, we note that the marking in these coats is particularly misleading due to the names of the two domestic cities that appear on the brand label affixed to the inside pocket. As noted above, 19 CFR 134.46 requires that the name of the country of origin not only be conspicuous, but that it also be in close proximity to and comparably-sized lettering as the names of the two domestic cities. In this case, neither the small fabric tag stitched to the inner seam nor the hangtag attached to the sleeve in some of the coats appears in close proximity to the brand name label. Thus, the requirements of 19 CFR 134.46 are not satisfied.

We hope this information is helpful to you. If we can be of any further assistance to you please do not hesitate to let us know.

Sincerely,

Marvin M. Amernick
Chief, Value, Special Programs

Previous Ruling Next Ruling