HQ 083765: Internal Advice Request 1/89; Raincoats

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                          HQ 083765

                        MARCH 6, 1990


CLA-2 CO:R:C:G  083765  PR

CATEGORY:  Classification

TARIFF NO.:  381.05, TSUS

Area Director of Customs
Building 178
J.F.K. International Airport
Jamaica, N.Y. 11430

RE:  Internal Advice Request 1/89; Raincoats

Dear Sir:

     This ruling is in response to your memorandum of
December 7, 1988, your file CLA-2 K:C:B FW, concerning a
Request for Internal Advice submitted by the law firm of Ross
and Hardies on behalf of George Weintraub & Sons.

FACTS:

     One sample, a man's trench-style raincoat, was
submitted.  The single feature in question is a flap, located
in the right front shoulder area on the sample.  The flap is
stitched down on two sides--along the raglan sleeve seam and
along the collar seam.  The remaining two sides are free
hanging except that the flap is buttoned to the garment
where those two sides come together to form a point.  The
flap is made from the same fabric as the rest of the
garment.  The garment is cut so that the flap must be left
unbuttoned (hanging loose) when the top button on the full
front opening is utilized.

ISSUE:

     The issue presented is whether the shoulder area flap on
the sample garment constitutes ornamentation for tariff
purposes.


LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     In order for a feature to cause a garment to be
classified under an "ornamented" provision of the tariff
schedules, that feature must be more than incidentally
decorative and it must not have a functionality that is
primary to its ornamental nature.  United States v. Endicott
Johnson Corp., 67 CCPA 47, C.A.D. 1242, 617 F.2d 278 (1980),
at 281.

     When determining whether a garment is ornamented for
tariff purposes, each garment must stand on its own merits.
In regard to the instant sample, the flap is made of the
same material as the body of the garment.  However, its
presence on the garment is noticeable and it serves to
enhance the frontal appearance of the coat.  When viewing
the garment as a whole, and considering the little, if any
functional value it may have, we conclude that the flap is
primarily decorative in nature.  As further support for this
conclusion, we note the September, 1987, issue of Consumer
Reports, which contains a report on trench coats.  That
report describes the flap in question as a "storm" flap and
states that "it's often more decorative than functional."

HOLDING:

     The sample garment is classifiable under the provision
of the tariff schedules for ornamented men's wearing apparel.
Assuming that the garment is in chief value of cotton, it is
classifiable in item 381.05, Tariff Schedules of the United
States (TSUS).  A copy of this ruling should be furnished to
the inquirer.


                              Sincerely,




                              John Durant, Director
                              Commercial Rulings Division