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 > 1993 HQ Rulings > HQ 0734548 - HQ 0734681 > HQ 0734633

Previous Ruling Next Ruling


HQ 734633


February 8, 1993

MAR-2-05 CO:R:C:V 734633 AT

CATEGORY: MARKING

Mr. Thomas Caldecot Chubb, III
Oxford Industries, Inc.
222 Piedmont Avenue, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30308

RE: Country of origin marking of imported men's dress shirts assembled in foreign country of U.S. components; "Tailored in" in lieu of "Assembled in ______ from materials of U.S. origin"; 19 U.S.C. 1304: 19 CFR 10.22; C.S.D. 89-37; HQ 734031

Dear Mr. Chubb:

This is in response to your letter dated May 7, 1992, requesting a ruling regarding acceptable country of origin marking of men's dress shirts.

FACTS:

Oxford Industries intends to import men's woven dress shirts from Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. The dress shirts are to be assembled from fabric that has been cut into garment parts in the U.S. and then exported for assembly abroad. You believe that the U.S. value of the components incorporated into the shirts will be exempt from duty pursuant to subheading 9802.00.80 HTSUSA. You are proposing to mark the imported dress shirts with the phrase "Tailored in" in place of "Assembled in ______ from material of U.S. origin". You assert that although the use of this phrase is not specifically provided for in the Customs Regulations, the proposed legend will allow the purchaser, upon inspection, to determine the origin of the goods, and therefore the intent of the marking regulations will be satisfied.

ISSUE:

Does the phrase "Tailored in" to designate the country of origin of imported men's dress shirts satisfy the marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR 10.22? LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that unless excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or its container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304 was "that the ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the marking on the imported goods the country of which the goods is the product. The evident purpose is to mark the goods so that at the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where the goods were produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if such marking should influence his will." United States v. Friedlander & Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 297 at 302; C.A.D. 104 (1940).

Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Section 134.35 requires that imported articles be marked with the English name of the country of origin. However, Section 10.22, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 10.22) modifies part 134 with a special marking provision for goods assembled abroad entirely from U.S. components which are eligible for a duty exemption under subheading 9802.00.80 HTSUSA (as claimed here). Section 10.22 provides that:

Assembled articles entitled to the exception are considered products of the country of assembly for the purposes of the country of origin marking requirements of section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304). If an imported assembled article is made entirely of American-made materials, the United States origin of the material may be disclosed by using a legend such as "Assembled in --- from material of U.S. origin," or a similar phrase.

The question presented in this case is whether the proposed phrase "Tailored in ______" properly indicates the country of origin of the shirt and is similar in meaning to the legend "Assembled in ______ from material of U.S. origin" set forth in 19 CFR 10.22.

This office previously has ruled that the phrase "Tailored in" is acceptable when used to indicate the country of origin of men's shirts. In C.S.D. 89-37 (December 1, 1988), Customs ruled that the phrase "Fabric made in U.S.A. Tailored in Honduras" properly indicated that the country of origin of men's shirts was Honduras. In so determining, Customs stated that shirt manufacturers have used the phrase "Tailored in" to mean "Made in" for men's shirts and it has that connotation within the industry. Evidence was presented in support of this conclusion. In HQ 734031 (May 20, 1991), Customs ruled that the term "Tailored in" to designate the country of origin of imported men's shirts satisfied the marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304. The ruling specifically stated that it applied only to the marking of imported men's shirts.

Similarly, in this case, as in C.S.D. 89-37 and HQ 734031, the proposed phrase is only to be used to mark the country of origin of men's shirts. Accordingly, we find that the proposed phrase "Tailored in ______" is a proper indication of the country of origin of the shirt and the marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 are satisfied, provided that the marking is permanent, conspicuous and legible (a determination we cannot make since a sample of the marked article was not submitted for review).

We also find that the proposed marking "Tailored in _______" is similar in meaning to the legend "Assembled in ______ from materials of U.S. origin" provided in 19 CFR 10.22. The proposed legend "Tailored in _______" satisfies the marking requirements of 19 CFR 10.22 when used on the shirts in question.

HOLDING:

The proposed phrase "Tailored in ______" to designate the country of origin of imported men's shirts satisfies the marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304, provided that the marking is permanent, conspicuous and legible.

The proposed phrase "Tailored in ______" is similar in meaning to the legend "Assembled in ______ from materials of U.S. origin" and satisfies the marking requirements of 19 CFR 10.22.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: