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 > 2002 HQ Rulings > HQ 965775 - HQ COPYOF96 > HQ 965819

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 965819




November 1, 2002

CLA-2 RR:CR:TE 965819 BAS

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 6505.90.5090

Brian Kavanaugh
Trade Advisor
Deringer Logistics Consulting Group
1 Lincoln Blvd, Suite 225
Rouses Point, NY 12979

RE: Classification of a Mosquito Head Net; HQ 965505, dated September 25, 2002, Incorporated by Reference.

Dear Mr. Kavanaugh:

This is in reply to a letter you submitted, dated June 27, 2002, on behalf of Helly Hansen Canada, in which you requested a binding ruling concerning the classification of several mesh items used for protection from bugs. Specifically, you request a binding ruling concerning the Bug Beater Olive Mesh Pants - Adult, Style 774555-21208-8, Bug Me Not Mesh Headnet – Mossy Oak, Style 774555-00401-0, Bug Me Not Mesh Gloves, Style 774555-60602-1, and Bug Me Not Mossy Oak Camo Mesh pants, Style 774555-11808-3. This ruling only concerns the Bug Me Not Mesh - Headnet, Style 774555-00401-0, and the textile pouch in which it is enclosed, as the other three items have been classified in New York Ruling Letter (NY) I84352, dated July 31, 2002. Your letter states that you provided samples of each of the items. Our office received only a sample of the mosquito head net and the pouch in which it is stored.

FACTS:

The subject merchandise measures approximately sixteen inches in length. It is constructed of knitted net man-made fiber fabric and of a circular solid fabric piece designed to fit over the crown of a hat. The base of the head net has a braided elastic band serving to keep the merchandise secured under the armpits. The item is worn to protect the face and neck from mosquitoes and it is sold with a drawstring pouch that stores the item when not in use. The drawstring pouch is also constructed of knit man-made fiber fabric. It is 4.75 inches in width and 6 inches in length. A braided elastic band serves to close the pouch.

ISSUE:

Is the subject merchandise classifiable under heading 6505, HTSUSA, as a hat or other headgear, or heading 6507, HTSUSA, as a cover for headgear?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The classification of substantially similar merchandise was addressed in Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 965505, dated September 25, 2002. The mosquito head net composed of knit net man-made fiber fabric is substantially similar in construction and function to the mosquito head net classified in HQ 965505. In HQ 965505, it was determined that the mosquito head net was properly classified in subheading 6505.90.5090, HTSUSA, which provides for hats and other headgear, knitted or crocheted, or made up from lace, felt or other textile fabric, in the piece (but not in strips), whether or not lined or trimmed; hair-nets of any material, whether or not lined or trimmed: Other: Of man-made fibers: Knitted or crocheted or made up from knitted or crocheted fabric: Wholly or in part of braid, Other: Other. The legal reasoning and analysis employed in HQ 965505 is attached to and made a part of this ruling letter. As the subject merchandise is substantially similar to the merchandise addressed in the aforementioned ruling, the merchandise would be classified accordingly.

In addition to determining the proper classification for the mosquito head net, we must also determine the proper classification of the textile pouch in which it is stored. In some circumstances, a drawstring pouch can be classified with the article it encloses. In HQ 956661, dated October 7, 1994, we classified a textile drawstring pouch that encompassed a handheld mirror with the mirror it enclosed, as it was determined that the mirror imparted the essential character to the entire composite article. In HQ 953605, dated December 23, 1993, we classified plastic blocks enclosed in a textile drawstring pouch as a composite good on the grounds that the pouch was intended to provide a carrying/storing case for the blocks. The essential character of the goods was imparted by the blocks. Thus, the pouch was classified with the blocks. In HQ 086343, dated July 13, 1990, we classified a windbreaker enclosed in a drawstring pouch as a composite good on the grounds that the pouch was intended to be used as a carrying/storing case for the windbreaker. We concluded that the essential character of the composite good was imparted by the windbreaker. Thus, the carrying bag was classified with the windbreaker. In HQ 087280, dated July 16, 1990, we classified a poncho enclosed in a drawstring pouch as a composite good on the grounds that the pouch was intended to be used as a carrying/storing case for the poncho. We held that the essential character of the composite good was imparted by the poncho. Thus the carrying bag was classified with the poncho.

In each of the above cases, classification of the drawstring pouch/bag with the article it enclosed was based on General Rule of Interpretation (GRI) 3(b), which provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

3. When, by application of rule 2(b) [pertaining to goods consisting of more than one material or substance] or for any other reason, goods are, prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be effected as follows:

(b) Mixtures, composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets for retail saleshall be classified as if they consisted of the material or component which gives them their essential character

Since, in the above cited cases, the articles enclosed in the drawstring pouches/bags imparted the essential character to the entire composite good (comprising both the pouch/bag and the article enclosed therein), both the pouch/bag and the enclosed article were classified under the tariff provision applicable to the enclosed article.

We conclude that the drawstring pouch at issue should be classified with the mosquito head net it encloses, since the pouch appears intended to be used as a carrying/storing container for the mosquito head net. The mosquito head net imparts the essential character to the entire composite article. Therefore, by application of GRI 3(b), the pouch is classifiable along with the mosquito head net in subheading 6505.90.5090, HTSUSA.

HOLDING:

The proper classification for the mosquito head net and pouch at issue is subheading 6505.90.5090, HTSUSA, hats and other headgear, knitted or crocheted, or made up from lace, felt or other textile fabric, in the piece (but not in strips), whether or not lined or trimmed; hair-nets of any material, whether or not lined or trimmed: Other: Of man-made fibers: Knitted or crocheted or made up from knitted or crocheted fabric: Wholly or in part of braid, Other: Other. The rate of duty is 6.9 percent ad valorem and the textile category is 659. Headquarters Ruling Letter 965505 is attached to and made part of this ruling letter.

The designated textile and apparel category may be subdivided into parts. If so, visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject merchandise may be affected. Since part categories are the result of international bilateral agreements which are subject to frequent renegotiations and changes, to obtain the most current information available, we suggest your client check, close to the time of shipment, the Status on Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels), an internal issuance of the U.S. Customs Service, which is updated weekly and is available for inspection at the local Customs office. The Status Report on Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels) is also available on the Customs Electronic Bulletin Board (CEBB) which can be found at the U.S. Customs Service Website at www.customs.gov.

Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa) categories, your client should contact the local Customs office prior to importing the merchandise to determine the current applicability of any import restraints or requirements.

Sincerely,

Myles B. Harmon

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: