Footwear HTS Classification: Chapter 64 Upper, Sole and Value Tests

How is footwear classified under HTS Chapter 64?

Footwear HTS classification turns on four measurable facts: the material of the upper by external surface area, the material of the outer sole in contact with the ground, the type of footwear, and the value per pair. The product name decides none of them.

Which of those facts moves the duty rate the most?

The upper and the outer sole pick the heading. Value per pair and footwear type then pick the subheading, and inside one heading the general rate on a single shoe can range from 6% to a compound 90 cents per pair plus 37.5%.

TL;DR: Chapter 64 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule classifies a shoe by what the upper is made of, measured by external surface area, and what the outer sole is made of, measured by the surface in contact with the ground. Those two tests pick the heading (6401 to 6405). Footwear type, ankle coverage, construction details and the per-pair value then pick the subheading, where several lines carry compound duties such as 90 cents per pair plus 20%. For a footwear brand classifying 300 styles a season, every one of those facts lives in the tech pack, not the product description. GingerControl's HTS Classification Researcher asks for the measurements that separate the candidate codes before it proposes one, and cites the Chapter 64 notes it relied on.

Last updated: October 2026

All headings, notes and rates below are from the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, Revision 20 (2026), Chapter 64, published by the U.S. International Trade Commission and retrieved October 8, 2026. Rates change. Check the current revision before you rely on any of them.

Which Chapter 64 heading does your shoe belong in?

Chapter 64 has five headings for complete footwear and one for parts. The heading is a function of two materials: the outer sole and the upper.

Heading	Outer sole	Upper	Example
6401	Rubber or plastics	Rubber or plastics, waterproof, with the upper neither fixed to the sole nor assembled by stitching, riveting, nailing, screwing, plugging or similar processes	Molded waterproof rain boot
6402	Rubber or plastics	Rubber or plastics	Molded sandal, synthetic-upper sneaker
6403	Rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather	Leather	Leather dress shoe, leather work boot
6404	Rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather	Textile materials	Knit or mesh running shoe, canvas sneaker
6405	Other combinations	Other combinations	Footwear not covered by 6401 to 6404
6406	Parts of footwear	Parts of footwear	Uppers, removable insoles, gaiters

Bottom line: For a classification lead handling a mixed catalog of 200 or more styles, the first question for every shoe is the same pair of measurements, upper and outer sole. Get those two right and the remaining work sits inside one heading.

Check note 1 first: it sends textile footwear without an applied outer sole to Section XI, orthopedic footwear to heading 9021, and toy footwear and skating boots with skates attached to Chapter 95.

How do you determine the constituent material of the upper?

Note 4(a) to Chapter 64 sets the rule in one sentence:

"The material of the upper shall be taken to be the constituent material having the greatest external surface area, no account being taken of accessories or reinforcements such as ankle patches, edging, ornamentation, buckles, tabs, eyelet stays or similar attachments."

Three consequences follow.

1. Surface area, not weight or cost. Whichever material covers more of the outside of the upper wins, even if another weighs more.
2. Accessories and reinforcements drop out. Measure what is left after ankle patches, edging, buckles, tabs and eyelet stays.
3. Coated textile can count as plastics. Note 3(a) provides that "rubber" and "plastics" include woven fabrics or other textile products with an external layer of rubber or plastics visible to the naked eye. A PU-coated fabric overlay counts toward plastics, not textile.

Some subheadings then apply a second, stricter threshold to the same measurement. Inside heading 6402, several lines require uppers of which "over 90 percent of the external surface area (including any accessories or reinforcements such as those mentioned in note 4(a) to this chapter) is rubber or plastics." The heading test excludes accessories; this subheading test includes them. Subheading 6404.11.20 (10.5%) runs a parallel over-50-percent leather test that also counts leather accessories.

Quotable insight: Chapter 64 measures the same upper twice with two different rulers. The heading test in note 4(a) ignores accessories and reinforcements; the 90 percent test in subheadings of 6402 counts them. A shoe that is 70 percent plastics for the heading can fall short of 90 percent for the subheading. In heading 6402, that gap separates a 6% line from a ladder that can reach 90 cents per pair plus 37.5%.

What counts as the outer sole, and when does textile not count?

Note 4(b) to Chapter 64 states:

"The constituent material of the outer sole shall be taken to be the material having the greatest surface area in contact with the ground, no account being taken of accessories or reinforcements such as spikes, bars, nails, protectors or similar attachments."

The test is the ground-contact surface, not the midsole. A leather sole with a rubber heel pad depends on which material has more area touching the ground.

Textile outer soles have their own limit. Additional U.S. note 5 says that, for note 4(b), "no account shall be taken of textile materials which do not possess the characteristics usually required for normal use of an outer sole, including durability and strength." Lower-rate lines for textile outer soles, such as 6402.99.41 and 6404.11.75 at 12.5%, depend on the textile passing that test.

The felt-soled sneaker case in our tariff engineering strategies guide sits here. That post covers redesign; this one covers classifying what you already import.

Is it sports footwear, or a tennis shoe and the like?

The word "athletic" does not appear in the legal test. Chapter 64 separates two groups that marketing copy usually merges.

Category	Legal source	What it covers	Where it goes
Sports footwear	Subheading note 1	Footwear designed for a sporting activity with, or with provision for, spikes, sprigs, cleats, stops, clips, bars or the like; skating boots, ski-boots, cross-country ski footwear, snowboard boots, wrestling boots, boxing boots and cycling shoes	6402.12, 6402.19, 6403.12, 6403.19, 6404.11
Tennis shoes, basketball shoes, gym shoes, training shoes and the like	Additional U.S. note 2	Athletic footwear other than sports footwear, "whether or not principally used for such athletic games or purposes"	6404.11 for textile uppers; statistical suffixes in 6402 and 6403
Protective active footwear	Additional U.S. note 6	Outdoor footwear such as hiking, trekking, running and trail running shoes valued over $24 per pair with water protection from a coated or laminated textile fabric	6402.91.42 and 6402.99.32, both 20%

Bottom line: For an athletic brand with 40 performance styles, the classification question is not "is this a sports shoe" but "does it have cleats or spikes, or is it one of the named sports boots." A road running shoe without either is a training shoe and the like, which in heading 6402 is not in the sports footwear subheadings at all.

In heading 6402, a cleated soccer boot with an upper over 90 percent plastics falls in 6402.19.15 at 5.1%. A road running shoe with the same upper falls in 6402.99.31 at 6%.

Why do value breaks and compound rates matter so much?

Many Chapter 64 subheadings split by value per pair, and several carry compound duties: a specific amount per pair plus a percentage. The 6404.11 ladder for textile-upper athletic footwear (not over 50 percent leather, including footwear with a foxing-like band):

Value per pair	Subheading	General rate
Not over $3	6404.11.59	48%
Over $3, not over $6.50	6404.11.79	90 cents per pair plus 37.5%
Over $6.50, not over $12	6404.11.89	90 cents per pair plus 20%
Over $12	6404.11.90	20%

Bottom line: For a value footwear importer buying textile training shoes at $8 to $12 per pair, the 90 cent specific duty is the bigger lever, not the 20%. For a premium brand above $12 per pair, the specific duty drops away entirely.

Construction matters in the lower bands. For pairs not over $6.50, 6404.11 separates soles "affixed to the upper exclusively with an adhesive" from footwear "having a foxing or a foxing-like band." Between $3 and $6.50, the adhesive-only shoe falls in 6404.11.69 at 37.5%; add a foxing band and it moves to 6404.11.79 at 90 cents per pair plus 37.5%.

Worked examples: one shoe, several codes

General (Column 1) rates only. Origin-based duties follow in the next section.

Example 1. Mesh training shoe, men's, laced, below the ankle, $14.00 per pair. Upper: knit textile on 62 percent of the external surface area, PU-coated overlays on 38 percent. Rubber outer sole, no cleats. The overlays count as plastics under note 3(a), but textile has the greatest area, so heading 6404. A training shoe is "the like" under additional U.S. note 2, so 6404.11. Valued over $12: 6404.11.90, 20%, which is $2.80 per pair.

Example 2. The same shoe at $11.00 per pair. It drops into 6404.11.89, 90 cents per pair plus 20%. Duty: $0.90 + (20% x $11.00) = $0.90 + $2.20 = $3.10 per pair. The cheaper shoe pays 30 cents more duty per pair than the $14.00 shoe, an effective rate of 28.2% against 20%.

Example 3. The overlays grow to 58 percent. Plastics now has the greatest external surface area, so the shoe moves to heading 6402. It is not sports footwear and misses the 90 percent test, so at $14.00 it is 6402.99.90, 20%, the subheading CBP applied in N361892 below. Same rate, different heading, different rulings to compare against.

Example 4. A fully molded plastics upper. If the upper is over 90 percent rubber or plastics by external surface area, counting accessories and reinforcements, with no foxing-like band and not designed as protective overshoe footwear, the training shoe falls in 6402.99.31 at 6%, or $0.84 per pair at $14.00.

The code moved three times on facts that never appear in a product title. If the tech pack does not carry them, nobody downstream can classify the shoe defensibly.

Material changes can lower duty or raise it, so route any redesign through classification review before the first entry. GingerControl identifies and documents the opportunity; your licensed broker or counsel files.

What tariff layers stack on top of the Chapter 64 rate?

The Chapter 64 general rate is the first layer, not the whole bill. The layers below were checked against HTSUS Revision 20 (2026), Chapter 99, on October 8, 2026.

• Column 1 general or special rate. The special column lists free treatment for many Chapter 64 lines under program symbols such as AU, CL, CO, KR, PA, PE and SG, subject to each program's rules of origin.
• Section 301 forced labor duties, in effect since July 24, 2026. The notice of action at 91 FR 47318 applies additional duties to products "entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern time on July 24, 2026." U.S. note 52 to subchapter III of Chapter 99 applies them to "all products of the countries provided for" in headings 9903.05.20 to 9903.05.84, with listed exceptions. No Chapter 64 subheading appears in the note 52 exception lists. Rates relevant to footwear sourcing: Vietnam (9903.05.84) and China (9903.05.31) at 12.5%; Cambodia (9903.05.28), India (9903.05.44) and Indonesia (9903.05.45) at 10%. For EU member states, heading 9903.05.38 adds nothing where the Column 1 rate is 10 percent or more.
• Special program eligibility does not remove the forced labor layer. Note 52(a) provides that products eligible for special tariff treatment under general note 3(c)(i) remain subject to the additional duties of headings 9903.05.20 through 9903.05.84, except as the note itself provides. The note's separate USMCA exceptions cover duty-free products of Canada and Mexico. The full action is covered in our Section 301 forced labor tariffs guide.
• The earlier China Section 301 action. Heading 9903.88.15 adds 7.5% to products of China in the subheadings listed in U.S. note 20(s)(i). That list includes 6402.99.90, 6404.11.89 and 6404.11.90, among many other Chapter 64 lines. It does not include 6402.99.31. Check your own 8-digit subheading against the list.

IEEPA-based duties are not part of the stack: CBP stopped collecting them for goods entered on or after 12:00 a.m. eastern time on February 24, 2026 (CSMS # 67834313), although their headings still print in Chapter 99. This post does not cover antidumping and countervailing duties. Check CBP guidance for those.

Stacked on Example 1 (6404.11.90, $14.00 per pair), the arithmetic looks like this. The Section 301 duties are ad valorem, so they apply to value only.

Origin	Layers	Total rate	Duty per pair
Vietnam	20% + 12.5% (9903.05.84)	32.5%	$4.55
Indonesia	20% + 10% (9903.05.45)	30%	$4.20
China	20% + 7.5% (9903.88.15) + 12.5% (9903.05.31)	40%	$5.60

Bottom line: For a sourcing manager comparing factory quotes across three origins, the Chapter 64 line sets the base and the Chapter 99 lines decide the spread. On the same $14.00 training shoe, the difference between Indonesia and China origin is $1.40 per pair.

What do recent CROSS rulings show about the upper test?

Two 2026 New York rulings show how CBP applies note 4(a) to the athletic shoes most brands sell. Each ruling applies only to its own facts and merchandise, so read them for method, not as rules for your product.

• NY N361892 (June 29, 2026). Two athletic shoes from Vietnam with textile uppers carrying 3D-printed rubber or plastic overlays. CBP excluded widely spaced small dots as accessories and held that "exposed textile areas between the crossed rubber/plastic lines that are smaller than a collar button are considered 'filled-in' and counted as rubber/plastics." For one of the two styles, the requester had proposed 6404.11.9020. CBP classified both styles in 6402.99.9005 at 20%, noting that the outer sole overlapped the upper by a quarter inch for most of the perimeter and was "considered a foxing-like band."
• NY N358104 (February 10, 2026). A man's below-the-ankle sneaker from Vietnam with a textile and leather upper, textile the majority, valued at $17.45 FOB per pair. The requester proposed 6404.19.9030 as non-athletic footwear. CBP held it was a tennis shoe or the like under additional U.S. note 2 because it had "most of the physical characteristics of athletic footwear as defined in Treasury Decision 93-88," and classified it in 6404.11.9020 at 20%.

The first shoe looked like a textile sneaker. The surface-area measurement made it a plastics shoe.

Which facts does your tech pack need before a shoe can be classified?

Build these into the item master before the first shipment:

1. Upper materials with surface-area shares, accessories listed separately, and any visible rubber or plastics coating
2. Outer sole material by ground-contact area, and whether any textile meets additional U.S. note 5
3. Sole attachment method and any foxing or foxing-like band
4. Ankle coverage and any protective metal toe-cap
5. Cleats, spikes or other sports footwear features
6. Water protection and intended use, for protective active footwear
7. Gender, size range and per-pair value

For more on why missing attributes stall classification across a whole catalog, see how material composition drives HTS duty. For the neighbouring chapters, where fiber content by weight decides the code instead of surface area, see HTS classification for textiles and apparel.

Where this fits in your seasonal classification workflow

Footwear classification fails quietly when the code comes from a product name and a supplier's suggestion. GingerControl's HTS Classification Researcher starts from the candidate headings, asks for the facts that separate them (upper surface area, ground-contact material, foxing, value band), reads related CROSS rulings during the analysis, and returns a reasoning report citing the Chapter 64 notes. GingerControl is an HTS Classification Researcher: it follows the same GRI, section note and chapter note analysis a licensed customs broker uses, and produces documentation that supports the classification decision. It does not provide legal advice or replace licensed customs expertise, and the final classification stays with the importer and its broker.

References

1. U.S. International Trade Commission, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, Revision 20 (2026), Chapter 64, notes 1, 3, 4, subheading note 1, additional U.S. notes 2, 5 and 6, and headings 6401 to 6406. HTSUS Chapter 64. Retrieved October 8, 2026.
2. U.S. International Trade Commission, HTSUS Revision 20 (2026), Chapter 99, subchapter III, U.S. note 52 and headings 9903.05.28, 9903.05.31, 9903.05.38, 9903.05.44, 9903.05.45 and 9903.05.84; U.S. note 20(s) and heading 9903.88.15. HTSUS Chapter 99. Retrieved October 8, 2026.
3. Office of the United States Trade Representative, Notice of Actions in Section 301 Investigations of Acts, Policies, and Practices of Various Economies Related to the Failure of Each Economy To Impose and Effectively Enforce a Prohibition on the Importation of Goods Produced With Forced Labor, 91 FR 47318, FR Doc. 2026-15181. Federal Register, July 28, 2026.
4. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, New York ruling N361892, June 29, 2026.
5. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, New York ruling N358104, February 10, 2026.
6. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CSMS # 67834313, Ending Collection of International Emergency Economic Powers Act Duties. CBP Cargo Systems Messaging Service, February 22, 2026.