HQ 956723: Country of origin of women's trousers; Section 12.130, CustomsRegulations

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 956723

                        October 13, 1994

CLA-2  CO:R:C:T 956723 CAB

CATEGORY:  Classification

Mr. Ted Chiu
Tuntex Incorporation
B2 No. 99, Sec. 2 Tunhwa South Road
Taipei, Taiwan 106 R. O. C.

RE:  Country of origin of women's trousers; Section 12.130, Customs
Regulations

Dear Mr. Chiu:

     This is in response to your inquiry of June 23, 1994,
requesting a country of origin determination of women's pants.  A
sample was submitted for examination.  

FACTS:

     The submitted sample is a pair of women's woven 65 percent
polyester/35 percent cotton pants.  The pants contain an
elasticized waistband, a drawstring means of closure, a rear patch
pocket, and side pockets on each leg.  The manufacturing processes
for the subject trousers are as follows:  Fabric is woven in
Taiwan;  The fabric is cut into garment pieces in Taiwan; The cut
garment pieces are then transported to China for assembly, sewing,
and packaging.  

ISSUE:

     What is the country of origin for the subject merchandise?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Country of origin determinations for textile products are
subject to Section 12.130, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130). 
Section 12.130 provides that a textile product that is processed
in more than one country or territory shall be a product of that
country or territory where it last underwent a substantial
transformation.  A textile product will be considered to have
undergone a substantial transformation if it has been transformed
by means of substantial manufacturing or processing operations into
a new and different article of commerce.

     Section 12.130(d), Customs Regulations, sets forth criteria
for determining whether a substantial transformation of a textile
product has taken place.  This regulation states these criteria are
not exhaustive; one or any combination of criteria may be
determinative, and additional factors may be considered.

     Section 12.130(d)(1), Customs Regulations, states that a new
and different article of commerce will usually result from a
manufacturing or processing operation if there is a change in:

     (i)  Commercial designation or identity, (ii)  Fundamental
character or (iii)  Commercial use.

     Section 12.130(d)(2), Customs Regulations, states that for
determining whether merchandise has been subjected to substantial
manufacturing or processing operations, the following will be
considered:

     (i)       The physical change in the material or article;

     (ii)      The time involved in the manufacturing or processing
operation;

     (iii)          The complexity of the manufacturing or
processing operation;

     (iv)      The level or degree of skill and/or technology
required in the               manufacturing or processing
operations; and 

     (v)       The value added to the article or material.

     Section 12.130(e)(1), Customs Regulations, describes
manufacturing or processing operations from which an article will
usually be considered a product of the country in which those
operations occurred.  Section 12.130(e)(1)(v) provides the
following:

     Substantial assembly sewing and/or tailoring of all cut pieces
     of apparel articles which have been cut from fabric in another
     foreign territory or country, or insular possession, into a
     completed garment (e.g. the complete assembly and tailoring
     of all cut pieces of suit-type jackets, suits and shirts).

     According to T.D., 85-38, the final document rule establishing
     19 CFR 12.130:

     The assembly of all cut pieces of a garment usually is a
     substantial manufacturing process that results in an article
     with a different name, character, or use than the cut pieces. 
     It should be noted that not all assembly operations of cut
     garment pieces will amount to a substantial transformation of
     those pieces.  Where either less than a complete assembly of
     all the cut pieces of a garment is performed in one country,
     or the assembly is a relatively simple one, then Customs will
     rule on the particular factual situations as they arise,
     utilizing the criteria in Section 12.130.  

     Customs has consistently determined that cutting fabric into
garment pieces constitutes a substantial transformation of the
fabric and the clothing pieces become products of the country where
the fabric is cut. (See e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL)
952531, dated November 25, 1992, HRL 089539, dated April 22, 1994).

     Customs has also held that the mere assembly of goods
entailing simple combining operations, trimming or joining together
by sewing is not enough to substantially transform the components
of an article into a new and different article of commerce.  (See
HRL 082787, dated March 9, 1989).

     In this instance, the sewing and assembly operation performed
in China involves the simple assembly of garment pieces.  The
sewing does not amount to the complex sewing operation required by
Section 12.130(e)(1)(v).  The cutting process in Taiwan, however,
does result in a substantial transformation.  The cutting
materially changes the fabric into designated garment pieces, which
constitute new and different articles of commerce.  Also, the value
added to the merchandise in Taiwan is significantly more than the
value added in China. Therefore, the country of origin of the pants
at issue is Taiwan.  

HOLDING:

     The country of origin of the subject pants is Taiwan.

     This ruling is issued pursuant to the provisions of Part 177
Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 177).  The holding in this ruling
only applies to the specific factual situation presented and the
merchandise identified in the ruling request.  If the information
furnished is not accurate or complete, or there is a change in the
factual situation, this ruling will no longer be valid.  In such
an event, a new ruling request should be submitted.

                                   Sincerely,



                                   John Durant, Director
                                   Commercial Rulings Division