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 > 1995 HQ Rulings > HQ 954720 - HQ 955034 > HQ 955014

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 955014




April 11, 1994

CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 955014 DFC

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 6404.19.20

John A. Bessich, Esq.
Gibney, Anthony & Flaherty
665 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10022-5305

RE: Footwear, sports; Boots, riding; Protective footwear

Dear Mr. Bessich:

In a letter dated August 4, 1993, to the Area Director of Customs in New York, on behalf of Eisers, Division of Caldwell Supply Co., Inc., you inquired as to the tariff classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), of certain riding boots which will be produced in the People's Republic of China. Your letter, together with samples of the riding boots submitted for examination, was forwarded to this office for a response.

FACTS:

The footwear involved consists of two styles of riding boots, identified as the DBR-062-S Nordic riding boot, Eisers style 855937 (Nordic boot) and the DAR-786 Winter paddock riding boot, Eisers style 857180 (Paddock boot).

You describe the boots as follows:

The Nordic boot is made of adhesive or cement construction with a 100% rubber outer sole. The upper is encircled by polyurethane plastic foxing material and when measuring the total external surface area of the upper, excluding reinforcements and accessories, such as overlays, patches, etc., is constructed of 100% nylon textile material. When including the overlays, patches etc., the total external surface area of the upper is 65.5% nylon textile material and 34.5% polyurethane plastic. The boot is not waterproof.

The Nordic boot includes a brushed nylex (nylon) inner lining which provides additional insulation when riding during winter months. The boot utilizes an adjustable "Velcro" type closure at its top, thereby insuring the tight, snug fit that is necessary for safe riding.

The Winter paddock boot is also made of adhesive or cement construction, with a 100% rubber outer sole. The upper is encircled by polyurethane foxing material and is 61.7% nylon textile and 38.3% polyurethane plastic, when measuring the total external surface area of the upper, excluding reinforcements and accessories, such as overlays, patches, etc. When including the overlays, patches, etc., the total external surface area of the upper is 57.8% nylon, 42.2% polyurethane plastic. The boot is not waterproof. The Paddock boot, like the Nordic boot, includes a brushed nylex (nylon) inner lining which provides additional insulation when riding during winter months. The boot is closed by the use of laces.

Your statement that both styles have uppers which are predominantly textile when accessories and/or reinforcements (A- R) are excluded is clearly true for the Nordic boot. However, it not so clear for the Paddock boot. We note the outside back counter and the mudguard around the rest of the upper are not A-R since they mostly cover the foam lining rather than the textile upper. It is not apparent to us what were considered A-R in the measurements you provided. However, we will accept your figures for the purpose of this ruling.

You claim that these boots are classifiable under subheading 6404.11.90, HTSUS, which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of textile materials, footwear with outer soles of rubber or plastics, sports footwear, other, valued over $12/pair. The applicable rate of duty for this provision is 20% ad valorem.

In the alternative you claim that these boots are classifiable under subheading 6404.19.90, HTSUS, which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of textile materials, footwear with outer soles of rubber or plastics, other, other, valued over $12/pair. The applicable rate of duty for this provision is 20% ad valorem.

ISSUE:

Are the riding boots considered "sports footwear" for tariff purposes?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification of goods under the HTSUS is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's). GRI 1 provides that "classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes, and provided such headings or notes do not otherwise require, according to [the remaining GRI's taken in order]." In other words, classification is governed first by the terms of the headings of the tariff and any relative section or chapter notes.

Subheading note 1(a) to Chapter 64, HTSUS, reads as follows:

1. For the purposes of subheading 6402.11, 6402.19, 6403.11, 6403.19 and 6404.11, the expression "sports footwear" applies only to:

(a) Footwear which is designed for a sporting activity and has, or has provision for the attachment of spikes, sprigs, cleats, stops, clips, bars or the like;

You maintain that the riding boots qualify for classification as "sports footwear" for the following reasons:

1. The boots will be sold exclusively through Eisers equestrian catalog and through retailers of equestrian supplies. The boots are not sold as everyday footwear.

2. Horseback riding is a sport.

3. Both boots were designed exclusively for use by horseback riders with special features that are useful only to such riders. Each boot includes specially ribbed outer soles to ensure the firm grip of the stirrup, spur rests at the back of the heel at the back of the shoe to permit attachment and retention of spurs, and in the case of the Nordic boot a polyurethane leg patch which assists the rider in gripping the saddle and which extends the boot's life at the point of greatest wear.

We are of the opinion that the boots in issue are not "sports footwear" within the meaning of that term as used in subheading note 1(a) to Chapter 64, HTSUS, for the following reasons:

1. The "provision for the attachment of" the stirrups is the stirrup grip, (i.e., a small bump on the back of the counter). The textile straps of the stirrup are clearly the essential "provision" for attaching the stirrups to the boot. The "bump" is presumably of use in helping to keep the stirrup from sliding down farther than desired, but the stirrup will stay attached without it. The "bump" is basically incidental to the attachment.

2. "Stirrups" are not "like" the spikes, sprigs, cleats, stops, clips, bars" that are cited. As best as we can tell, all these have relatively sharp points or edges which are designed to dig into the ground (turf or ice). The metal wishbone of the stirrup is quite large and it does not have a point or edge, but a small wheel with a serrated edge, which is designed to irritate the horse by scraping it; not to dig in to the ground for firmer footing.

We agree with you that horseback riding is a sport. However, as stated above, the riding boots in issue do not qualify as sports footwear and it is apparent that both the Nordic boot and the Paddock boot with their special thermal insulation are designed to be a protection against cold weather as compared to "regular" riding boots. Consequently, they are more specifically described under subheading 6404.19.20, HTSUS, which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of textile materials, footwear with outer soles of rubber or plastics, other, footwear designed to be worn over or in lieu of, other footwear as a protection against water, oil, grease or chemicals or cold or inclement weather.

HOLDING:

The Nordic boot and the Paddock boot do not qualify as "sports footwear" within the meaning of that term as set forth in subheading note 1(a) to Chapter 64, HTSUS.

Both boots are protective footwear dutiable at the rate of 37.5% ad valorem under subheading 6404.19.20, HTSUS.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: