New regulations on shoes classification issued by EU

in the internal market of EU, products can be freely circulated among Member States, but not between EU and third countries. When importing products from outside the EU, importers are required to pay a common tariff. The common tariff system of all EU members is the same, but different products have different tax rates, depending on what products they are and where they come from. 1n order to distinguish similar products, the classification of all products (listed in the consolidated heading) has been put into effect

with the publication of regulation No. 33 / 2010 in the official journal of the European Union on January 15, 2010, the classification of footwear has made new development. The regulation amends Annex 1 to Council Regulation No. 2658 / 87 on tariff and common tariff, with a view to clarifying the terms used in the consolidated nomenclature for different categories of footwear and facilitating the classification of footwear. As a result, it will be easier for the EU to assess tax rates for each type of footwear

regulation No. 33 / 2010 was adopted in accordance with the judgment of the European Court of justice on the interpretation of the tariff terms of footwear. On May 22, 2008, the court interpreted the meaning of tax codes 6403 (shoes with leather uppers) and 6404 (shoes with textile uppers) in the consolidated nomenclature. The need for interpretation comes from a lawsuit between the Danish tax department and the shoe trading company ecoskoa / s over the tariff classification of a certain sandal. Shoe traders claimed that the sandals should be classified as leather shoes, but the Ministry of Taxation mistakenly classified them as shoes made of textile materials. How to classify has a great influence on the amount of tariff. According to the classification of the Ministry of Taxation, the tariff will be increased by 9%

as a result of this legal dispute, the European Court of justice has to interpret what vamp is before deciding on the classification of the sandal. The court stressed that the decisive criterion for judging how products should be classified in the customs category is the objective characteristics and characteristics of products

based on this criterion, the European Court of justice decided to conduct a “walk test” to assess whether a material is “upper”. According to the test, when a material supports the wearer’s foot and enables the wearer to walk with shoes, the material has the characteristics of shoe upper. The court held that a material can not be defined as an upper just because it has the same shape as an upper, such as lining

in line with the ruling of the European Court of justice, the new regulation No. 33 / 2010 adopts this kind of “walking test” to evaluate whether a certain material is safe or not. New provisions have been added to the interpretation of chapter 64 of the consolidated heading (annex to regulation 2658 / 87)

regulation No. 33 / 2010 refers to shoes that need to be secured to function. For example, shoes that require laces to function need to be laced for a walk test. Otherwise, in such cases, no material will pass the walking test and will not be rated as an upper

the introduction of walking test to explain the classification of shoes and footwear can make the legislation and classification of shoes and footwear more clear. Regulation No. 33 / 2010 applies only to footwear and will come into force 20 days after the date of promulgation (i.e. 15 January 2010)

the Council of Ministers of the European Union, by virtue of Council Regulation No. 1294 / 2009, imposed anti-dumping duties on certain types of shoes from the mainland of China and Vietnam, and decided to extend the anti-dumping measures against leather shoes from the two places for 15 months until March 11, 2011. 1n view of mainland China’s dissatisfaction, WTO Director General Pascal Lamy said on January 8, 2010 that if mainland China believes that the EU has misquoted WTO regulations, it can appeal to the WTO

if mainland China uses the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, the latter will have the opportunity to judge whether the EU’s decision to extend the above anti-dumping measures is illegal. Once this happens, the WTO ruling will have a great impact on the trade relations between the two trading systems

Back to list