UNITED STATES TARIFF COMMISSION
FOOTWEAR FOR WOMEN: FORMER WORKERS OF THE GARDENA, CALIF. , PLANT OF
SUN-CAL FOOTWEAR, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF LEHIGH MOCCASIN CORP.,
A SUBSIDIARY OF LEHIGH VALLEY INDUSTRIES, INC.
Report to the President on Investigation No. TEA-W-231
Under Section 301(c)(2) of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
TC Publication 669 Washington, D.C.
May 1974
UNITED STATES TARIFF COMMISSION
COMMISSIONERS
Catherine Bedell, Chairman Joseph 0. Parker, Vice Chairman Will E. Leonard, Jr. George M. Moore J. Banks Young Italo H. Ablondi
Kenneth R. Mason, Secretary to the Commission
Address all communications to
United States Tariff Commission
Washington, D. C. 20436
CONTENTS
Page
Report to the President 1 Finding of the Commission 2 Views of Chairman Bedell, Vice Chairman Parker and
Commissioners Moore and Ablondi 3 Views of Commissioners Leonard and Young 6
Information obtained in the investigation: Description of articles under investigation A-1 U.S. tariff treatment:
Applicable TSUS items A-6 Rates of duty A-7
U.S. consumption, production, and imports A-9 Prices A-13 U.S. and foreign wage rates A-15 Data relating to Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc.:
Corporate history and structure *** Production of women's nonrubber footwear *** Employment *** Imports ***
Data relating to Gardena, Calif. plant: The plant *** The plant's operations under Lehigh Valley Industries
Inc.: Acquisition *** Production and prices *** Sales *** Employment *** Customer comments *** Comments by a company official *** Company statement on the sale of the plant A-34
The plant's operations under Desco Shoe Corp. *** Statistical appendix A-39
Appendix Tables
1. U.S. rates of duty applicable to women's and misses' foot-wear of the types provided for in specified TSUS items, July 1, 1954, and GATT concessions to Jan. 1, 1972
A-41
2. Leather footwear for women, made principally by the cement process valued over $2.50 per pair (item 700.4540): U.S. rates of duty and imports for consumption, specified years 1939 to 1973 A-42
ii
3. Footwear having supported-vinyl uppers for women and misses (item 700.5545): U.S. rates of duty and imports for consumption, 1934, and 1964-73
A-43
4. Gardena, Calif. plant: Average number of production and related workers and total hours worked while operated by Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc. by months, January 1971-January 1973
* * *
Note.--The whole of the Commission's report to the President may not be made public since it contain certain information that would result in the disclosure of the operations of an individual concern. This published report is the same as the report to the President, except that the above-mentioned information has been omitted. Such omissions are indicated by asterisks (***).
REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT
U.S. Tariff Commission, May 3, 1974.
To the President:
In accordance with section 301(f)(1) and (f)(3) of the Trade Expan-
sion Act of 1962 (TEA) (19 U.S.C. 1901), the U.S. Tariff Commission herein
reports the results of an investigation (TEA-W-231) made under section
301(c)(2) of the act to determine whether, as a result in major part of
concessions granted under trade agreements, articles like or directly
competitive with footwear for women (of the types provided for in items
700.45 and 700.55 1/ of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS))
produced by Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., Gardena, Calif., a wholly owned
subsidiary of Lehigh Moccasin Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Lehigh
Valley Industries, Inc., New York, N.Y., are being imported into the
United States in such increased quantities as to cause, or threaten to
cause, unemployment or underemployment of a significant number or
proportion of the workers of such firm or an appropriate subdivision
thereof.
The investigation was instituted on March 11, 1974, on the basis
of a petition for adjustment assistance filed under section 301(a)(2)
of the act on behalf of the former workers of the firm. 2/
1/ Although the Commission's public notice in this investigation indicated that footwear of the types that enter under TSUS item 700.55 were produced by Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., it was learned that such foot-wear has never been produced at the firm's Gardena, Calif., plant.
2/ The Gardena plant, where the-petitioning workers were employed, was sol on Feb. 23, 1973, by Lehigh Valley Industries, Iiic., to Desco Shoe Corp., New York, N.Y., and is now operating as the Gardena Shoe Co.
2
Notice of the investigation was published in the Federal Register
(39 F.R. 10037) on March 15, 1974. No public hearing was requested,
and none was held.
The information in this report was obtained principally from Lehigh
Valley Industries, Inc., the United Shoe Workers of America, customers
of Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., official Government statistics, and the Commis-
sion's files.
This is the third worker investigation conducted by the Commission,
pursuant to the provisions of the TEA, with respect to footwear manu-
facturing subsidiaries of Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc. The other
investigations involved Dori Shoe Co., Inc., Lynn, Mass. ITEA-W-43),
and Evangeline Shoe Corp., Manchester, N.H. (TEA-W-54). In the Dori
Shoe Co., Inc., investigation, the Commission made a negative
determination, and in the Evangeline Shoe Corp. investigation, the
Commission was evenly divided in its finding.
Finding of the Commission
On the basis of its investigation, the Commission finds unani-
mously that articles like or directly competitive with the footwear for
women (of the types provided for in item 700.45 of the Tariff Schedules
of the United States) produced by Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., are not, as
a result in major part of concessions granted under trade agreements,
being imported into the United States in such increased quantities as
to cause, or threaten to cause, unemployment or underemployment of a
significant number or proportion of the workers of such firm or an
appropriate subdivision thereof.
3
Views of Chairman Bedell, Vice Chairman Parker, and Commissioners Moore and Ablondi
Our determination in this investigation is in the negative
because the criteria established by section 301(c)(2) of the Trade
Expansion Act of 1962 (TEA) have not been met. Before an affirmative
determination can be made, the Commission must find that each of the
following conditions has been satisfied:
(1) Articles like or directly competitive with those produced by the workers' firm are being imported in increased quantities;
(2) The increased imports are the result in major part of concessions granted under trade agreements;
(3) A significant number or proportion of the firm's workers are unemployed or underemployed, or threatened with unemployment or underemployment; and
(4) The increased imports resulting from trade-agreement concessions are the major factor in causing or threatening to cause the unemployment or under-employment of the workers.
In the instant case, we find that condition (4) has not been
satisfied; namely, increased imports resulting from trade-agreement
concessions of articles like or directly competitive with footwear
produced by Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., Gardena, Calif., have not been
the major factor in causing, or threatening to cause, the unemploy-
ment or underemployment of the workers of Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc. Our
determination is based on the following considerations.
4
Operations of the Gardena, Calif., plant of Sun-Cal Footwear,
Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc.,
were discontinued in January 1973, prior to the sale of the physical
assets of the firm to Desco Shoe Corp. Sun-Cal manufactured women's
leather footwear by the cement process in dress, casual-dress, and
service shoe styles, for sale at retail at about $18 to $20 per pair.
The evidence gathered during the investigation discloses that the
discontinuation of operations and sale of the Gardena facility was due
to a management decision by the parent corporation, Lehigh Valley
Industries, Inc., and was not the result in major part of competition
from concession-generated imported footwear. This management decision
was part of an overall corporate restructuring program which contem-
plated the discontinuation of several subsidiaries in the Footwear
Group of Lehigh Valley Industries. In the 1972 annual report, the
President of Lehigh Valley Industries stated, "This decision was based
on analysis that exposed the folly of dissipating the earnings of the
well-managed and on-going operations within our Company by continuing
to support those operations that consistently had been a drain on
profits." He further stated, ". . . some of our shoe companies had
lost their opportunity for profits and could no longer stand on their
own."
5
The operations of the Gardena plant were unprofitable for several
reasons. Owing to higher costs for materials and labor, production
cost were rising, while at the same time sales were declining. The
marked decline in sales was attributed to the inability of the firm to
keep up with styling demands in its principal markets and maintain
prices within the range in which Sun-Cal shoes were usually sold.
* * * * * *
Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing we conclude that articles like or
directly competitive with those produced by the workers of Sun-Cal
Footwear, Inc., are not, as a result in major parts of tariff conces-
siond granted under trade agreements, being imported into the United
States in such increased qualities as to cause, or threaten to cause,
the unemployment or underemployment of the petitioning workers, and
therefore we have made a negative determination.
6
Views of Commissioners Leonard and Young
Our determination in the instant case is negative because one of
the - statutory criteria has not been met, i.e., that the increase in
imports of footwear like or directly competitive with that produced by
Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., Gardena, Calif., is the result in major part
of concessions granted under trade agreements. Our reasoning in
support of this determination is set forth in statements of our views
in earlier Commission investigations under the Trade Expansion Act. 1/
1/ Commissioner.Leonard's views are given in Nonrubber Footwear: Report to the President on Investigation No. TEA-I-18 . . TC Publication 359, 1971, pp. 31-47, and Commissioner Young's views are given in Women's Dress and Casual Shoes: Duchess Footwear Corp. . . .: Report to the President on Firm Investigation No. TEA-F-39 and Worker Investigation No. TEA-W-139 . . TC Publica- tion 491, 1972, pp. 11-25.
A-1
INFORMATION OBTAINED IN THE INVESTIGATION
Description of Articles Under Investigation
During 1969-72, the output of Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc., Gardena,
Calif., consisted of women's leather footwear, made by the cement pro-
cess. Such footwear retailed from about $18 to $20 a pair. According
to an official of Lehigh Valley, during 1969-72, women's dress and
casual-dress shoes 1/ accounted for the major part of the output.
Women's service shoes (designed principally to be worn for any form
of work requiring sturdy footwear) accounted for the remainder.
As a share of U.S. retail sales, so-called dress shoes (a term not
defined in the TSUSA) are more important than any other type of footwear
for women. The term "dress shoes," originally limited only to shoes
worn on formal occasions, is now used to describe footwear of the types
generally worn for street wear and for business and social activities.
Depending upon fashion designs, dress shoes may be open- or closed-heel
shoes with straps, laces, or tongues over the instep and may include
high-heeled sandals with open toes, open heels, and uppers of narrow
1/ Mr. Tardiff, controller of Lehigh Valley,defined "dress shoes" as shoes styled for formal or semi-formal dress (including footwear for office work, dining, etc.) and "casual-dress shoes" as shoes appropriate for informal wear (for use with pants, slacks, etc.).
A-2
strips of leather or other materials. Women's shoes intended for for-
mal wear, which are also regarded as dress shoes, are sometimes referred
to as evening shoes, slippers, or sandals. The term "dress shoes" does
not include footwear especially made for athletic, occupational, and
leisure activities.
The materials used for the uppers of dress shoes are usually finer
(i.e., less sturdy) than those of other types of footwear. Uppers may
be of calf, kid, or reptile leathers; of silk, rayon, linen, satin,
brocade, velvet, or metallic fabrics; or of supported vinyls or other
plastics.
Women's footwear for casual wear, not considered dress shoes -, includes
certain sandals, wedge-heeled shoes, flats, clogs, loafers, desert boots,
moccasins, and sneakers. Casual shoes usually have a lower heel than
dress shoes and are generally constructed to withstand harder wear.
Women's "service" shoes are designed primarily for comfort and not
style although most firms that produce them try to incorporate both in
the construction of the shoe. A "service" shoe generally has extra
padding on the insole and is made of more pliable leather than dress
shoes. "Service" shoes are worn by women generally in occupations that
A-3
require considerable standing or walking. The "service" shoes manufac-
tured by Sun-Cal Footwear were utilized principally in occupations such
as nursing and restaurant waiting.
The range of styles and the quality of footwear increased greatly
during the 1960's as a result of new materials, technological develop-
ments in production, and new fashions in wearing apparel; this trend
has continued into the 1970's. Simultaneously, consumers demanded foot-
wear designed for specific purposes. Women today wear dress and casual
shoes suitable to their lifestyles.
For many years the principal type of dress shoe worn by women in
the United States was the classic pump--a closed-toe, closed-back, slip-on
shoe without fasteners, with lightweight soles, and with heels of 2 inches
or higher. With the advent of new fashions in wearing apparel, the pump
declined in popularity in the late 1960's. In 1967 the chunky style
(monster) shoe appeared, marking the beginning of a style revolution in
women's footwear. With footwear becoming an important accessory to
fashion, footwear styles changed rapidly. A great variety of designs
were introduced creating an even wider choice for the footwear consumer.
In the late 1960's, formfitting calf-length boots became fashionable
along with the miniskirt and other new dress styles, and continued to
be popular throughout 1970 and 1971. The popularity of boots during
this period undoubtedly had an adverse effect on the demand for other
types of women's footwear. However, with the switch by women to other
types of wearing apparel, such as pants suits, which did not complement
boot designs, the market for such boots diminished markedly in 1972.
A-4
In 1973, ankle-high boots for casual wear and higher boots with more
functional designs replaced the formfitting or stretch calf-length boots.
Changing fashions in women's apparel have continued to affect foot-
wear since the early 1970's. As changes occurred in dress lengths and
as trousers became increasingly acceptable as appropriate women's wear
for almost every occasion, footwear styles with 1-inch soles, and even
higher platforms, became popular. A variety of materials--plantation
crepe, "marshmallow" (pliable synthetic), leather combinations, and
various plastics--were used to make soles, concealed platforms, and
wedges. Some bottom assemblies were even colored, painted, or sculp-
tured. During 1970-72 such platform styles dominated most women's foot-
wear. In 1973, however, as women's fashions returned to the more clas-
sic or traditional styling, the classic pump design for footwear again
became popular, a trend which has continued into 1974. Platforms are
becoming less extreme and footwear more feminine in style is now being
offered. Examples of the new look include lighter sandalized (open)
footwear with emphasis on bows, straps, slimmer high heels, and narrower
toe shapes in both dress and casual footwear. There has also been a return
to the low-heeled flat for casual wear.
As indicated previously, all of the footwear produced by Sun-Cal
Footwear consisted of dress, casual-dress, and service shoes constructed
with uppers of leather. Such shoes were made by the cement process.
In this process, which accounts for about 80 percent of the total
U.S. output of all women's footwear, the outsole is affixed to the upper
by an adhesive without sewing.
A-5
It is estimated that about 60 percent of all women's nonrubber
shoes produced in the United States in 1973 had leather uppers, com-
pared with nearly 70 percent in 1970. The American Footwear Industries
Association (AFIA) indicates that owing to the recent shortage of
hides and the consequent increases in prices of leather, prices of women's
leather footwear have risen steadily. The president of the AFIA has
further indicated that, as the price of leather footwear increased, shoes
made from manmade materials--polyurethane, polymerics and nylon velvets--
gained a larger percentage of the U.S. market. Footwear of manmade
materials lends itself not only to the multihued new platform styles
favored by young people but also to the more conservative styles. The
following AFIA data illustrate the changes in the shares of the nonrubber
footwear market supplied by leather and by manmade materials.
Percentages of total U.S. output of nonrubber footwear accounted for by leather and by manmade materials, specified years 1950-1975
• Year : Manmade
Leather : materials : •
1950 : 85 : 15 1960 : 76 : 24 1972 : 60 : 40 1973 : 54 : 46 1975 1/ : 50 : 50
1/ Estimated projection.
Source: American Footwear Industries Association.
Industry sources, however, report that owing to recent and possibly
worsening shortages of petrochemically derived materials, a reversal
is possible in the relationship between the proportion of leather and
of manmade materials used in the production of footwear.
A-6
U.S. Tariff Treatment
Applicable TSUS items
The women's footwear produced by Sun-Cal, if imported into the
United States, would be dutiable under TSUS item 700.45. Imports entered
under this item number, which provides for leather footwear having a
foreign (export) value of over $2.50 a pair, consist predominantly
of women's footwear in a wide range of styles, types, and prices. In
terms of quantity, a substantial part of the imports in recent years
has consisted of women's sandals both for casual and for dress wear.
The remainder has probably consisted predominantly of women's moderate-
priced cement-process dress and casual shoes (i.e., in the retail-price
range of $8 to $20 a pair).
Other footwear that may be similar to the footwear produced by
Sun-Cal is entered under TSUS items 700.43 and 700.55. That entered
under item 700.43 consists of leather footwear having a foreign (export)
value of under $2.50 a pair. Such footwear would generally retail at
under $10 per pair in the United States whereas all of the Sun-Cal
output in recent years has retailed for more than $10 a pair.
The imports entered under item 700.55, footwear with supported-
vinyl uppersl have in recent years consisted predominantly of two groups:
(1) Street shoes of sturdy construction, produced in a single width for
each particular length for sale at self-service counters in variety stores,
discount stores, and department-store basements and (2) folding slippers,
sandals, and other inexpensive footwear. It is believed that before
1970 only a negligible portion of the annual imports of women's dress
A-7
shoes and boots admitted under item 700.55 retailed at more than $10
a pair; in the period 1971 through mid-1973, the annual imports of
such footwear retailing at more than $10 a pair (mostly just over that
price) probably accounted for less than 10 percent of the total imports.
Rates of duty
In the Tariff Act of 1930, women's leather footwear of cement-
process construction was originally dutiable under paragraph 1530(e)
at 20 percent ad valorem. Such footwear if valued over $2.50 a pair
is provided for in the TSUS, which became effective on August 31, 1963,
under item 700.45. The rate of duty applicable to this item was reduced
in five annual stages to 10 percent ad valorem effective January 1,
1972, pursuant to concessions granted during the Kennedy Round of
negotiations.
Supported vinyl was not used for uppers until the late 1940's or
early 1950's. Prior to the effective date of the TSUS, imports of women's
supported-vinyl-upper footwear, which were dutiable under various pro-
visions of the Tariff Act, were classified principally--
(1) By similitude, at the rate of 20 percent ad valorem applicable to leather footwear provided for in paragraph 1530(e). 1/
(2) Under paragraph 1537(b) as articles in chief value of rubber, at the trade-agreement rate of 12.5 percent ad valorem, where the soles were of india rubber and constituted the chief value of the footwear in question.
(3) Under paragraph 1539(b) at the reduced rate of 21 cents per pound plus 17 percent ad valorem where the footwear was in chief value of a product having a synthetic resin as the chief binding agent.
1/ The principal kinds of footwear with supported-vinyl uppers now being imported (i.e., those with soles of vinyl or other plastics) would have been dutiable by virtue of the similitude provision under par. 1530(e) , at a rate of 20 percent ad valorem.
A-8
In the TSUS a rate of 12.5 percent ad valorem was established for item
700.55 as the trade-agreement rate to replace the wide range of rates
previously applicable to the various types of footwear provided for in
this item. 1/ The current rate on footwear with supported-vinyl uppers
is 6 percent ad valorem.
Table 1 in the appendix shows the reductions in rates of duty result-
ing from trade-agreement concessions granted under the GATT for footwear
of the types now dutiable under items 700.45 and 700.55. Tables 2 and 3
show U.S. imports of women's shoes admitted under the TSUS items mentioned
above and the applicable rates of duty.
1/ The column 2 rate of duty for item 700.55 is 35 percent.
A-9
U.S. Consumption, Production, and Imports
During the period 1965-73, apparent annual U.S. consumption of all
women's nonrubber footwear rose from an estimated 386 million pairs in
1965 to a peak of 455 million pairs in 1968, and then declined to 402
million pairs in 1973. Annual U.S. production of such footwear declined
from 319 million pairs in 1965 to 190 million pairs in 1973. Annual
imports tripled during this period, and their share of the market
increased without interruption from 17 percent to 53 percent, as shown
on page A-10. Italy and Spain have been the principal suppliers of
women's dress and casual leather footwear; the Republic of China (Taiwan)
and Japan have been the principal suppliers of such footwear made with
vinyl uppers.
Data on U.S. consumption of women's dress shoes are not separately
reported in official statistics. It is estimated, however, that during
1965-73 apparent annual U.S. consumption (production plus imports) of
such footwear moved irregularly, rising from about 204 million
pairs in 1965 to about 231 million in 1968 but declining to 180 million
in 1973.
Estimated domestic production of women's dress shoes during this
period reached a peak of about 210 million pairs in 1968 and then
declined to 127 million pairs in 1973. Estimated imports rose from
4 million pairs in 1965 to 53 million pairs in 1973. The share of
apparent annual U.S. consumption of women's dress shoes supplied by imports
increased from 2 percent in 1965 to 29 percent in 1973, as shown on
page A-11.
A-10
Nonrubber footwear for women: U.S. production, imports for consumption, and apparent consumption, 1965-73
. • Year :
Production 1 :
Imports 2/ . — :
Apparent : : consump-
tion 3/ : — :
Ratio of . imports to apparent consumption
Million : :
Million : :
Million : : Percent pairs pairs pairs
1965 ---: 319 : 67 : 386 : 17 1966 : 323 : 70 : 393 : 18 1967 ---: 290 : 96 : 386 : 25 1968 : 322 : 133 : 455 : 29 1969 : 271 : 139 : 410 : 34 1970 : 260 : 165 : 425 : 39 1971 : 237 : 180 : 417 : 43 1972 : 223 : 198 : 421 : 47 1973 : 190 : 212 : 402 : 53
1/ Production represents the output of women's and misses' footwear as reported by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, plus shipments to the U.S. mainland from Puerto Rico.
2/ Partly estimated from the official statistics for footwear of the kinds described in pt. lA of schedule 7 of the TSUSA except imports described in items 700.32, 700.51, 700.52, 700.53, and 700.60 and except zoris (very inexpensive thonged sandals of rubber or plastics), dutiable under item 700.55. Includes imports of misses' footwear, which have been negligible compared with those of women's.
3/ Computed from U.S. production plus imports without an allowance for exports, which in 1973 amounted to about 1 million pairs.
Source: Compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce, except as noted.
A-11
Dress shoes for women: U.S. production, imports for consumption, and apparent consumption, 1965 - 73
• Apparent : : imports to
of • • Production 1 • Imports 2/. consump- .
— • tion 3/' apparent • — : consumption
Million : Million : Million : pairs : pairs : pairs : Percent
2 213 :
1965 : 200 : 4 : 204 : 1966 : 206 : 7 : 3 1967 : 188 : 11 : 199 : 6
1968 : 210 : 21 : 231 : 9
201 : 1969 : 177 : 28 : 205 : 14 1970 : 165 : 36 : 18 1971 : 156 : 43 : 199 : 22 1972 : 150 : 50 : 200 : 25 1973 : 127 : 53 : 180 : 29
: • : 1/ Dress shoes are believed to account for about 2/3 of the total
annual output of nonrubber footwear for women and misses. 2/ In recent years, dress shoes are estimated to have accounted for
about 1/4 of the total annual imports of women's and misses' footwear. 3/ Data represent estimated production plus estimated imports with-
out an allowance for exports, which in 1973 accounted for less than 1 million pairs.
Source: Estimated by the U.S. Tariff Commission, based on official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Data are not available with respect to U.S. production, imports,
or apparent consumption of women's service shoes. It is known, however,
that U.S. imports of these shoes are small.
Year
A-12
Estimates of U.S. consumption, production, and imports of women's
casual footwear are shown in the following table. The table indicates
that during the last 9-year period while domestic production was on
a downward trend and imports more than doubled, apparent consumption
fluctuated between 180 million and 187 million pairs annually during
1965-67 and between 205 million and 224 million pairs annually during
1968-73. It is estimated that the import share of domestic consumption
increased steadily from 35 percent in 1965 to 72 percent in 1973.
Women's casual footwear: Estimated production, imports for consumption, and apparent consumption, 1965-73
Year : Production 1/ : — :
: Apparent : : Imports 21: consump-
— tion 3/: — :
Ratio of imports to apparent consumption
1965 1966 1967 : 1968 : 1969 : 1970 : 1971 1972 : 1973 :
Million :
• . : : : : : : : : :
Million : Million : : : :
; : : : : : :
Percent pairs pairs : pairs
119 117 102 112 94 95 81 73 63
63 : 63 : 85 :
112 : 111 : 129 : 137 : 148 : 159 :
182
8 118 224 205 224 218 221 222
35 35 45 50 54 58 63 67 72
1/ Casual shoes are believed to account for about 1/3 of the total annual output of nonrubber footwear for women and misses.
2/ Casual shoes are estimated to have accounted for about 3/4 of the total annual imports of women's and misses' footwear in recent years. 3/ Data represent estimated production plus estimated imports
without an allowance for exports, which in 1973 amounted to less than 1 million pairs.
Source: Estimated by the U.S. Tariff Commission from official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
A-13
Prices
As indicated earlier in this report, the women's shoes produced by
Sun-Cal Footwear retailed from about $18 to $20 a pair. As shown in the
tabulation below, about 13 percent of domestic production of women's
shoes in 1972 was sold at the wholesale level of $9 to $10 a pair, or the
equivalent of $18 to $20 at retail.
Women's nonrubber footwear: Percentage distribution of domestic produc- tion, by manufacturers:selling price,-1972 and 1968
Manufacturer's selling price 1/ 1972 1968
: Percent : Percent
$1.00 or less
$3.01 to $4.00 $2.01 to $3.00 :
: 19.9
0.9 :
5.6 : 19.2
: - $1.01 to $2.00 :
$4.01 to $5.00 : 16.1 : $5.01 to $6.00 : 11.0 : $6.01 to $7.00 : 4.5 : 48.7 $7.01 to $8.00 : 7.4 : $8.01 to $9.00 : 6.6 : $9.01 to $10.00 13.3 : $10.01 to $12.00 : 11.0 : 29.3 $12.01 to $14.00 : 2.0 : $14.01 to $16.00 : 1.2 : $16.01 to $18.00 : 3 : $18.01 to $20.00 1 : 2.8 $20.01 or more 1 :
Total 100.0 : 100.0
1/ The retail selling price is generally twice the value of the manu-facturer's selling price.
Source: Footwear Production by Manufacturer's Selling Price, 1972, U.S. Bureau of the Census.
In 1972, about 57 million pairs of imported women's footwear of
leather, with an average dutiable value of about $5.12 a pair, were
entered under TSUSA item 700.4540 (table 2); and nearly 90 million
•
A-14
pairs of imported women's footwear of vinyl, with an average dutiable
value of $1.22 a pair, were entered under item 700.5545 (table 3).
Data with respect to the estimated retail price of certain foot-
wear imported into the United States are shown in the tabulation below.
Women's nonrubber footwear: Percentage distribution of imported foot- wear, by estimated retail selling price, 1972
Estimated retail selling price 1972
Percent
$3.00 or less : 33 $3.01 to $6.00 : 23 $6.01 to $10.00 : 13 $10.01 to $16.00 : 18 $16.01 to $22.00 : 8 $22.01 to $28.00 : 3 $28.01 or more : 2
Total : 100
Source: Estimated by the U.S. Tariff Commission on the basis of imports entered under items 700.4310, 700.4340, 700.4540, and 700.5543 in 1972. Such imports accounted for about 82 percent of the total imports of footwear for women and misses in that year.
A-15
U.S. and Foreign Wage Rates
The table on the following page shows the average hourly earnings and
the estimated compensation per hour received by shoe workers in eight
countries in 1970, 1971, and 1972. While of some use in comparing the labor
costs of the shoe industries in the various countries listed, the table
has several shortcomings that make such comparisons inexact. First, in
only the United - States, Italy, and Hong Kong is the industry definition
limited exclusively to footwear. In the other countries the industry classi-
fications are more encompassing. Second, as footnote 1 to the table
indicates, published hourly earnings in the various countries differ in
composition. Third, total compensation for workers includes varying factors
in the eight countries.
N
0.
H 0 N 3 0)
0 -0 0 0 .0 al
H
r-- a)
g O
•• 4-1 0 CI N. 0 01 O •-•1
V;. 0 0. u
H 1•1
.14-4 0
40, •-■
7:1 00 V) a) 4-) g CO gr1 1-1
ri •0 0 4-1 0 "0 0 0
°x +31 CO 10 0
0)
1-1 k 4- •-•-•
..s4 4.4 0 0 4-)
OH0 0 4-5
tn C..1 0 .0 -0 H 0 0 4-5 la, 0
EH 0 •ri
00 .5-1
.0 4-1
E 'Hu a.
H
0 -0 0
0)
0
1-1
e••
ti
0
g
0 0
0
A-16
CO N 0) N s
...... •5:1. ••() '0N N NJ N N 4,
0 .-Errz: V N ..0 V) .14. . 4-1
I • • 4.4 0 I g 0
.1-1 r';'''' 1 2 0 , , .•,-, .4 0 -0 0 o •-I H 0 o .0 64 0 'SO .0 0 0 0 0 8 4, 0 a)
ado I %El `9̀ '5" 3 ti, .`,D. 4::1 •Tql 4.4 g rk'l f4O
......, ...... P. H., .1 4) 0 a) >, 0 0 4-) H .0 CO 14-1 bl+ 60
H 1) 0 • 0 - rt W .c) g 0 4, 4, N ' 4:' , 4, 34 • 0 VI 1....1 "CI 0 0 4-1 CI U
.0 0 >, N 0 ai 0 H al 0 in >. En 0
cd 4) 4) 'CI .4.4-) 40 A g
(0 ,..0 -,9 0 .51 2 u!.."•■ t'0 g .0 8
\Mr.... N Nr.1 N ‘ON .....oc4 sl:)'' .1-' Er5 N 4' 44 0 V...5) 0 04 ral 1-' El .-‘ 5 H 0. 0
<1. 1 • • • • • -*I • • g 4-1 4-■ -0 0 P O 0 0 EH 0 HE la, a) 0 0
~
0
H En 4.9. t''' V.' -H VI .O 8 71.1) : 4 il, :1 00 it° 08, ,n0
En .1.. 0 0 r-4 0 al al
E4. • ,E1 .g Z. t n; ..C5 .4.9 V) r0) g 4.5 u) 2 ...... ...... En eo k 1.511 cr,1
.... •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• .. 0 Uto-2,7E 4 4-1 0 ?.4,:)I "..' §) • a, 4, H U 0 0 0
4-5 0 0 0 A4 4-1 '0 En 0 0 En ad 0 -0 .0 0 a) 0 En 0 0 . 0 I--) 0 ••
. N - - . . M OM OC ' N ir N 1 5 . ri - . . . a 11 4 • c 1•.e ° I.I. -1 •4 . rl ttl tC+ >4' g 1 -1 1) 1;1 N 'd ' 00.0
co .4 ..:, 0) 0) .,4 • •=:c• >, V 1 • • .r-I HI 41.4 01 .0 • I-1 0 .0 10 .g 0 a H
c) ,--I .-1 N .,-) '0 0 5 En 0 ,-i .g .1-1 0 4) 0 4.4 a9. H 4-I 4, "0 4-4 • ,-I 4-1 .0 0 ,-1 2 o 'R
f a I g ' H 61 , . . . . . . . • . . . . 4 AO ' . 2 °1 4 '`• I 1) ° 2 • C rl A 0 .'. f ) 0
g 0 'O .0 • 0 E v)1 cr, 1 a) 4-, a) F-1 0 0 > 4.4 .•• 0 0 •0 4-1 0 4-4 0
•• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 4-1 0 0, H 000 04.5 4.14-5
U ti 0 >,6' #e) §' 7-", .0 .0 V) 4) . ...+4 H 0 4-) ..t.c cri co cc a, m co
•Er I • • • • • • • • 0 ..N4 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:?) 2 'El 'al 15 ;•• .0 0 ET) --......7 On ..4- 05 Er) 05 VD 00
69- 0 "4 N N .0 HE Et al .0 •0 0) 4-) En
0). 0 0. 3 4.4 0 0 El)
>. g • 44 ,-, ,S t :: O (< 0 .3-i 2 - El 0 +,4 -,ZI 4 -2 0 4 0 c.>
21 +Jsk tA04) 1 0E1 ' ' 't u E 2-14j ') ..rti >.'
0 0 :1■21 tn -
g F-1 4' '8 ...,9
I, 0 . '1-1 ,--1 'CI 0 11-1 V/ 4° .• F-1 Ft 00 -.0 In 0
In 0 00 co M Mco OHO .0000 0) 0 11 £1-1) 4.1-i CO 4'01 iii
03E0,0444100 En E-5 4-)4) U 0 0, al
0
\ tr) a) 0 01 V ••■. Er) I.- ..g 4, a. VI VI .0 E > CO • C.) 0 Ed . 4 E P. 'cf.! • • • • • ..1- I • • >, O .-i N N g 0 .0 f-1 . C4 '4 g "+".! ' .. >. 1.1 In .0 0 4) 0
3 0 4-4 0
64 a) 4.) 0 0 H 0 A u) u) >, 'V 0 0 0 0 0, 4.4 d,
0 al .0 4, ,X 4-) a) '-4 ›.. El 4, 0. •H F. H HOO Ed.
•Hg k `51?) 4° Og i'''' tE 4,7', - 0
2 E 2, ri., 4 c4;') .2 E ..',=, 3 7:';:i g g
to .0 U EH 0 4-1 .0 0 a) $.4 f... P. •
-0 `1' 2 g 0 .::-.1 o 4 ,̀..1 0 il Ir'' 0 7Cl) 'o . , 9 '31 c 9 g 0 ,̀1,' 4-. .4 0 0 0 4 0 4 Ea 0 CO
i Cns -1:), )(:1 43 ,a(..), .0 5 0 (34 (, Ed En .0 •• 0 .0 .0
N t.■10 S C°00 .0° t•1°° \ .4.5+' N t FLF F... ..,8 '', 4.4 7:,, 4' R4 43 4., >. 44, gt,..... ,...,:.A H • • • 0 . N N 0 0 ••••1 H0 0 0 0 al v) 0, P 0 ra, w
gr... ,̀2 '5 '0", L2 ' 0 4c4 0 '0 .0 " '0 A' ' 49 "ci .-0 7 . 4 .E.s ........, o 0 00 {:1., >, 0 H 4, F-1 0 0 4, 4.■ 0 0 el to lun I cif-la.) HE .0 44 0 0 H 0 0 •-4 • at 0 4-1 ■-1
00 F.1 0. 0 4-4 HI 00 .0 a) 0 •1-1 0 0.0 ti-i H 0 00
o . 000 > .000 0 00 0 ii4, R.0 i g O o '
• 0..... 10 .--1 g 4-1 0 40 4, „0 .0 .0 .HF-1 a. 9 ,,.., 8 a. 0A , 0 .0 >, 0 •H •,-.5
04 H 0 0 .0 0 4-) al 0 to 0> 0 0 4-) 0 0 AC 4.)
3 00 . crl 0 •H al0 al a) En g g - 0.000
14-i EN 0 0 0., V)> Co 0 •0 4, cd COEt 0 coCIO 2 4-5 •H U 0 0 0 F.1 • 0 'L) 4, H g o •,-1 E-• X .0 0 Cd 0
•0 ".... F-1 0 0.. F-1 0 f. 0 tn •H 0 g . 0 In 0 0 co 1 0 H. 4) >. 0., ..g 0 0 Co 0 .0 H En cd 4-1 En 0 >, 0 CO ., o Ln 0 C.1 In 4, 4, g o 0 , 4., 0
..-1 N. I ts-1 4-1 ,--1 14-1 •--1 . o, g . k E ̀vi 2 '''' "" to 0 -8 F, 0- 0 ...... 0 .-.4 44 cla . 0 .0
R. H 0 , 0 ;... g 0 .. o 0 >.. 0 0 ..-. r... H .0 50 VI H 1:1 on 0 0 0 .o .0 - .0 0 0, 0oco.
to 4, 4-, F. 0 0 0 En 0., 0 0 0 4, H 0 H 00 410 0, 0
• 0 0 s... 0 .0 g V> 44 t" 41 .t. g w". .`41) 4 g )L 1) 4:1 4 '4-, :2 g u 0 0 '0 -0 et I-0 4 U) b0.1-1 ''0 rd HE 0 g . En AC .0
P 0 .0 0 g
• ba
Ea ,-,
4 •e-1 T1 0 bi) 0 E-1 CO 4) 0 0 4-5
H 01 4-5 ;-I •-1 i-I 0 0 0 0
a) 0 in 0 0 0 0 N .0 0 En 0- ••• -1 •4 v). E 11.1 +a0
0) 0 a) 00 3 0 b0 E -,..9 ›..., ..., g o., 4-1 >,, . r.' Et 8, ml ...9 0 4.. 8 al 0,0 Ea a, .0 00 0, En 0 £.4 00 >,
0 . .0 4-1 • 0 .0 'g 04 1 2 'E" 2 0 0 `,4 4 '' 0., ti>
•'7'' d •••1 .0.2 > 0'3 4'0
•H U300 4-) ••H 0 .0 >,..sa cri 4, 4-1
8 , u,., 4, 0 .1-4 •t1
0 0 0 ..0009 00 0 3 •• .0 .0 0 0 >, 41 cad 4-) 04-5 .0 001000001-1•0 0 444
a) 0 ......... r•10 0 a) 0 0 0 21 4., 0 H •,-5 0 a) 0 .0 al a) 04 ...%4 . 410 g .0 "0 .1-I 6) 0
-0 0 1.-.1 P.• 0 0, X 3 I, . 0 >, 0 0, 0., 0 g .Z 0 0• 0 .0 H 2 0., 0 4, ""......"0 0 0 4-1 CI, • 4-) 0 0 cd cn 004-) NCH •000 N 0 siDI 0 0 al 0 0 0 u) k 0 0, 0 -0
O H cal g 0 - o $., 4-. o o E.-. -0 0 00
0 .0
4-I 41 '414 2 7...1 '=" E ' wt.-, T... 0, 0 co a) CO S.4 ,..H .0 > .0 ,..1 .0 0 0
CO0 . ›,, I, 0 0 0-. g x 0 g g a) 0 -0
0 0 3 0 0 utu o > k o 44 0,0 -g .g •0 F-1 f-■ 4.4 F-1 f-1 0 a) - • ca 0 .0 •-.4 '0 4-■ 4, S.000 E-i 4-+ 0 .0 0 3 0 0 0.0 0 3 0 g g a) >. 0 H -0 .0 0 0g 0 0 ,.c . H .0 A. 0 .0 0 .0 4, .0 4, .0 a) -0 al Ho 0 -0 0 0 4, 4-, 4 0 0 0 44 3 0. 0 - 0.)
..0 0 .0 4.4 .0 0 .0 ga, a) 4-■ 0 a F-1 g H4,0-go g 4-1 • o• 0 .0
000 0.000 '0 - 4 cr k o o o !.., 0 1-5 0 En 0 E.) INI 0 0 0 a 0.. a a r...) a a. a >, c.) a) +.■ tn 0 0 El > 'CI 0 •.-4 4-i E.) 4-5 0 I-- 0 0
0 4., 0 > 0 H 4.4 3 Ent°' •H 0 0 44 cn g 0
•• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• 00 cd • ri 0 0) 0 • •• 0 0 0 '10 4-, .. .,4 0) 1-4 al 0 0+) 0 >04-1 0. $.4 4-1 • 0) 0 .4.004P•••-,0 ..,.
•H 0 -0 r-1 .0 0 ,-10 al at ,C) • ,•I 4, p. o 0 HI 0 H. 0 g 0 g S-5.0000) •00 0,-1 3 al -1-1 0 r-1 1-, F-1 la 0 .I4 '0 01 .0 •1-1 0 s-1 0 00 0 >, k - ,-1 P. .-4-) .0 • 0 00 00000 050 .00..0.0 Occlaigal0 a) I-1 - ....4 1 : 1 0 0) f• U) f-1 40,4P0.1 In 014000 0
Ga. co 0 • ■•4 .000ocogg+, 14 0 0 0 >I 0
.0 Ga.4.. ....I 4-4 ra, .-I 4-1 .--f k 0 0 F. CA 4-, .0 00 0 0 v-1 0 U) 0 0 •0 140U 0/ 0 0 .0 .0 0 .0 El 0 0 g 0144 0 .0
a) .0 In 1.1 g >a 00 0 .0 al 0 0 0 •0 .S4 0 0 0 •r1 M •R 0
.0 (4 goog 0 E.-. . 00 >••• X £-E .0 0 E., 0 0 I Ea -0
al •0 N0 11) , / , • -1 • -I cif p3 >,n, 0 o in 0 0 c.) 4-5 0 120 4-1 1-1 0 0 - .0 04 g 4, al 4-5 . 0 Hi 3 a) . >. -
O COan 0 g 0 g g 0 rd • > 0 .....-1 :a fa, g .--, >. 0 g , - 0 o 0 u-I 0000•-1 ,l)C0CA› 0 al 0-1 04, >,..0 .0 H 0 0 0 0 0
7.:1•1 >., g co g g 7) al $.4 ,--1 .01 (.4 4, g 0 d Z 0 0 -0, HE EH ca 4, 1-1 I-I 1-3 0 .0 0 0 4, tn 0 0 .0 H 3 0 . In cyn
N 00 .0 Cl) 0 •0 3 4, •, "-... > •-1 o a) ---..0 0., 4-) 0 --- --... ---. --- 4-■ -. -t 0 •-... ---. ---.. 0 cag00, H al •H ••-1 .-11 0 t.) •H NI.0 S 0 .0 m IvlEt)10 so lu E.-- I Ea -0 coladoi 0 ./) H 0 4-1 0 0 (34 41 4.4 Ed 4-5 0 .0 0 .1 0 0 0 > 0 01 = . ,'" Ef) f•-•
g 0 En
o > 4-1
H 4, t.) 4, 0 0 4-5 0 .1-1 .0 0
t,14+ MI0
4 '1.1 01 =4..4) I., 0 4 0 .0 $.■ g 01 CO 4, 0 0 •0 •0 ,-.1 0 0 0...0 4-)
Id.ri CO El 0 44
U 1 0 .
• •• > • 1.-1 HI 0 I 4-1 ..-1 0 I-■ 0 4.4 0, FA 0 Z 4, al 0 140 0 g
•00H11) ^00 CO 0 0
0 1-.4 0. 0 E...) 4.4 1.1 4 • •,10)
an .DO. . 1 H CO .0% al . _ 11 - ' : 0 00W . . i . . ,4-)H 001 0' 0 0 0 tig a) 0 1-, .--, .0 CO 00 ,.).1 00 EC 4-1 4-,
a) 0 0•r1 4-5 0 .0
4-1 = 02 0 ., ;., c(10 .0cd 4-) 0.,
...%4 H al . ...1 4-1 a) 0 0 0 0. 0 .0 0 0 >.• 4-t 4,
.0 JO I I.) 0 0
tg 3 g El 0 2 .o>" a.) 0 0 .1-1 U
>.• 4-1 01 g 4-1 g "0 I 0 01 0 0 0 0
4 H' (21 --1 Er0r-' 4 .0 0 • ••• 0 0 0
1,400 ••0205:1., 0 000 .21-1 •00 c,0 00 ....i>. ,40 r-t
1/4 En „C 4-1 0
• -SH al 4 4g.' a m g 0 .000 X
o 4.4 a
p., l
•H E...) • H 0 1 w a)
0 •• al •H 0 0 r-1 1,1 4.' I-, CO 0 a) . N. 1•5 cd 3 ••••I .0
EH 0 Ed al 0 0 I > •H 0 4-1
N •, 1 •• E-. a) k a) cn ca .0 . 0 0 -o g 14-1 4, En H 0 0
•• 0 0 Cl) E...) En E 4-) 1•0 04 0 (..) Hg • .• 4-1 4,4-, 0 L--5 404 >ctl -,.. F..1
••• 040 ..•::: En 00 Ft 0 0 0 u 0 -1-1 00 0 •-.1 .0 --I CO CIF g .0 0 4-1 EH al
En 0 al •H 0 • U •.-I 0 H 4-1 0 V) X 4-, 0 a) cd • .-1 C 4 0 0 4, 0 4, 4-1 •0 0 H 0 Cl) EN 4.) 0,, ul cd E-7 0 En .-5
S. 0 0 ,--1>' F. .4-1++ - (H0 0 CO g ..g 0 0 -0
AN . 2 4'0 2 Cl)'" 0 "4 5`id' 1 -o 'c'o°
000 Ft i I:1 0 00 g 0 -0 0 4-5 4.4 g o b4 4-.) •,-, 0 0 0 U CA 4-1
" • .1:7 H 0 4 E4 a° ',ii >" 4̀?■ 8 g}
0 (0, ,_,'"o4 4 ...i .0
0 >, • •. ..•d •• •• .0 .0 0 •-• 1444 4, 4,
> 0 F-1 r, a) '0 a) 0 0a) 00 0 4) 0 0 0 ,-4 "0 0 10 .0 .0 0 .0 0 F-I 0 02 4) > ccad.-
01 U .0
OH 0' > 4-1 -4 - 10 0 El 104 0 •• 0 0
CO 44.4-'1 H 0,-. -4,'-' 70 al 4-, LI-I 0 H 0 H 3 al 0 > 4-) 4, A)
1:1 000000 F-1 .-1 0 0 04
g 0 g F-1 0 cad, °A .--I 0 0 1 .-1 .0 .440 .00 X .00 4-40 i--10
0) 1-4 •• 01 Ed 0
Ea . .0 a) 0 • 02 al E.) 0 4-t 0 Cl)
00 -4-1 V/V) 0 0
• • .,-1 ,I1 •••1 ...,4 H cll +-
■
•1-4 0 .0 0-1 U 0 4-4 0 g 0 4
H 1-1 4, I 0 0 0
0 0
CI70 .! V). >r-1 ›....ctlf4 ,...,N.tn- .12"-111) g •H cd 0 0) CO
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
A-17 through A-23
Data Relating to Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc.
A-24 through A-34
Data Relating to Gardena, Calif. Plant
*
Company statement on the sale of the plant.--The following excerpt
from the 1972 Annual Report of Lehigh Valley Industries, Inc., proffers
the firm's reasons for selling the Gardena plant: 1/
As part of a restructuring program approved by the company's Board of Directors on December 19, 1972, the company decided to discontinue the opera-tions of certain subsidiaries in its Motivational Marketing and Footwear Groups. Subsequent to December 31, 1972, a definitive contract was signed for the sale of certain assets of one subsidiary [Sun-Cal Footwear, Inc.] in the Footwear Group and negotiations with prospective purchasers for the sale of other subsidiaries are currently being held.
1/ Words in brackets added.
A-35
Discontinuance of operations of these subsidiaries has been extended beyond 1972 in order to minimize losses attributable to the cessation of operations. All discontinued operations are expected to be either sold or otherwise disposed of during 1973.
The results of operations of the subsidiaries that have been, or will be, discontinued are shown separately in the consolidated statement of opera-tions. Accordingly, the consolidated statement of operations as previously presented for 1971 has been restated to reflect the results of operations discontinued in 1972.
Following is a summary of the operating loss of operations sold or discontinued during 1972 and 1971:
[In thousands of dollars] 1972 1971
Sales $28,273 $44,421 Cost of sales and operating
expenses (a) 37,187 48,150 Operating loss of opera-
tions sold or discon-tinued 8,917 3,729
(a) Operating expenses include expenses incurred directly by the operation units and certain corporate expenses incurred for their behalf, but do not include any allocation of interest expense or other corporate expenses.
A-36 through A-38
STATISTICAL APPENDIX
A-40
. . CO C) I-1 1-1)000)0 .0 .0 V:J r-- Cri C7) O Ch • C1 01 0) cn ri ■-1 ri ri (.) 4-4 r-1
0
ri nn 44.
1.1 I-I 1-1 I 14 ri rl V) V) V) 44") • V) C•e) C$1 tr) re)
(V %ID (N) • N C) • • • • N
U00(..)a),--100c.)00 0000 r1 a) a) a) a)
A A A ̂ A cz A cz) !III
1-4 I-I 4-1 I1 1.4-)
LI) 00 %.0 •.:1• r1 0 • r1 r1 1-1 I-I 4-1 14") I 4-1 4-1 00 r•••
•U "••■ g ,--4 NI
o •1-1 03 $. P. 0
e-N $ V) "0 tn 0 0 4-) (..) $-1 0 0 F-1 g• P. P.
H 0
g Cd N O P. 4. E o a) 1.4 U a) cn
ra4 F1 tx) a) g c::) g.
• H 1.1) gq • • 10 • 0 $-1 0 (NJ C13 r1 44:3- 00 0
. C.) g $-1 1-1
4-) r•♦ 0 > 0 •---.4 > Cd 0 0 4 •
4-i /-1 -0 ,-) ;I,
4 4-) 0 cd 4-) > 03 = > o a) o a u.
.. .. .. ..
Li)
O
O
Rate
of du
ty
• •
• •
Effe
ctive
date
, GATT
conces
sio
n Ab
brevia
ted de
scrip
tion
cn Cl)
•H Z
. . . . . . .
cd g g
cd 03 cd Cd cd 0 03 Cd cd 03 in In In In ti d h )-3 /-3 1-3 I-)
• • • • • • • • • •
L1)
r•-1
F~ 0
C)
•H
0 $-1 $:14
V) f‘I
Cd
C7)
0 ••3
V)
0 •H V) V)
•• cf) 0 g v) 0
U •H
^0 d 0 C7 cd
"ci ci)
CCdd -
0 1..0 3 0)
0 4-)
4-4
ri >,
Cd 4 5
•H ••
04 V) ra4 cd
4-) -H
4-) 0 V)
-0 0
4-1 E. 0
v) •H
Cd rl
N • Pl.
(fp v)
g 1 •H
r-1
0
footwear o
f the
A- 4 1
was the s
ame as t
he.or
iginal rate in
the Ta
rif
f Ac
t
4-) L1-1 0 >-, 0 1 0 r-1 c••1
03 • 4-) p. P •H E •H 0 0 E $.4 V)
•
Og 0$.4 4-,(1) 00 = r-4 4-) cd
Fa • cf) c >id cra
C 0 0 34+ -0 F. 0
03 0 C) 4-) ^0 -0 a) • 1-1 •H a) 4) g 00
-0p0ga) >, N •,-1 U cd 4-)
•-4 •• $-4 •H <=3 0 F. tr)
cd ".s.0 ci3") c/ ol p.,
1-r) 3 O
Cd 4-4 0 V) V) $-1 $♦ tf) tr) - H
O •• •H 4-) rg
0 0 • 4-3 Lr) 00 a)
C) - 4) 0 - L.r) g • d cd `H 03 +)O
a) 03 a) P. $-4 4-) v) NO > 0
1-4 1011 C3 •H L1-1
LI) 1J) 0 U 0 IC C) L/) 4-) .r4 e.4..i0 4-3 nzil)
4-4 e•-• •H Cl) • $1 0 .0 >
4) cd 4. p. cf) I P.
04 0 1-= g 4-4 4-) Cl) 00 H ,-1 cd 03
v-) $-) 3 a) ;..1 p v) 03
"1:3 g CN1 4•) 0, 0 4-) 0
cl) P. -0 •H g U 0) 0 0 v) g .,-i 4
00
0 •H •H 4-4 r-1
0 0 0 0'd 0 0 t--1 ,-C 04 $.4 U
N fa. .g •H U)
1-4 $-■ •r1 C•I P-1 o
1-) 4-4 03 0 -0 01 4-) 3 4-) 03 4-1
g •H • 4-3 V) 0 0 0 V) v-1 V) 4-1
tr) Cl) $-1 •H 0 0 0 001000`-' •H 4-1 Hi 0.01-1 0 $.-4
4E)) Locn 4)ct .,tc) cad
00 g $-1 ,-) g a) ›, 4-) • 4-) 0
4-)0 g F-) g •+-1 4-) 3 H L1-1 CL) 0
>0P4E 04-)3 0
-0 N g 1)) • cr.?' 4-4 4-) g 0 •H F1 4-1 0 > 4-) 4-) ba 4-1
0 cd cf) 4) U
c$:):14 )›r. 030 ctu) cad
cd .pc1)r3)
'Oct - H
4-) 4-1 k a) 0
Cl) ca., ••• 04 4-)
).4 0 •H te) C/) 3
<NIP 4-4 0 0 3 ^0 H4 4-) >.
until th
e
,.r) 0 $-1 P. 0 P.
- LH 03 0 0
$. -1-1 c.
4 a) 03 4 cf)
•,-1 4-) 4-) as MIS o 0 0 •H
A-42
Table 2.--Leather footwear for women, made principally by the cement process valued over $2.50 per pair (item 700.4540): U.S. rates of duty and imports for consumption, specified years 1939 to 1973 1/
Year Rate
of duty : Imports
: Quantity Value Unit value
: Percent : 1,000 : 1,000 Per : ad valorem : pairs : dollars pair
1939 20 : 2/ • 2/ • 2/ 1946 20 : 3/ 285 : 3/ 2,665 : -3/ $9.34 1955 20 : 11 308 : 4/ 1,526 : -47 4.96 1956 20 : 4/ 291 : 4/ 1,509 : T1-/ 5.19 1957 20 : 4/ 404 : 4/ 1,911 : 4.73 1958 20 : 4/ 621 : 4/ 2,565 : TT/ 4.13 1959 20 : 4/ 691 : 4/ 2,997 : -LT/ 4.34 1960 20 : 4/ 1,242 : 4/ 4,637 : -47 3.73 1961 20 : 4/ 1,780 : -4/ 5,225 : -4-1 2.93 1962 20 : 4/ 9,839 : 4/ 19,093 : TT/ 1.94 1963 20 : 5/ 10,416 : 5/ 17,199 : -Si 1.65 1964 20 : 6/ 1,784 : 6/ 4,594 : C,/ 2.57 1965 20 : 6/ 5,328 : 6/ 17,307 : -67 3.25 1966 20 : 6/ 8,737 : 6/ 27,258 : 6•/ 3.12 1967 20 : 6/ 14,199 : 6/ 48,285 : T/ 3.40 1968 18 : 16,884 : 76,236 : 4.52 1969 16 : 22,734 : 112,856 : 4.96 1970 14 : 28,471 : 146,161 : 5.13 1971 12 : 37,563 : 193,846 : 5.16 1972 10 : 51,250 : 262,412 : 5.12 1973 10 : 56,991 : 304,376 : 5.34
1/ Statutory rate under par . 1530(e) for 1939 and 1946 through Aug. 30, 1963, and under TSUS item 700.40 for Aug. 31, 1963, through 1967. Effective Jan. 1, 1968 , new items 700.41 (sandals of buffalo leathers), 700.43, and 700.45 replaced item 700.40.
2/ Not available. 3/ Data are for all leather footwear for women and misses made by
the cement process. 4/ Data are for all leather footwear for women made by the cement
process. 5/ Data are for all leather footwear for women made by the cement
process for January-August only; not separated for September-December. 6/ Data are for all leather footwear With cement soles for women.
Source: Compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.
A-43
Table 3' ..--Footwear having supported-vinyl uppers for women and misses (item 700.5545): U.S. rates of duty and imports for consumption, 1934, and 1964-73
Year
• Rate of duty Quantity : Value
• Unit value
Percent 1,000 1,000 • Per ad valorem pairs dollars pair
1934 1/ 2/ 2/ 2/ • • •
1964 3/ 12.5 : 27,574 : 12,429 : $0.45 1965 12.5 : 29,579 : 13,564 : .46 1966 12.5 : 33,239 : 17,024 : .51 1967 12.5: 49,767 : 27,704 : .56 1968 11 : 68,579 : 46,603 : .68 1969 10 : 70,777 : 55,820 : .79 1970 8.5 : 77,288 : 73,757 : .95 1971 7 : 86,942 : 104,196 : 1.20 1972 6 : 89,776 : 104,907 : 1.22 1973 6 : 96,942 : 136,036 : 1.40
1/ During the period before the TSUS became effective, footwear with supported-vinyl uppers (with soles other than india rubber) was generally dutiable by virtue of the similitude provisions of par. 1559 of the Tariff Act of 1930, at a rate provided for similar leather footwear in par. 1530(e), principally 20 percent ad valorem. The column 2 rate for item 700.55 is 35 percent.
2/ Not available. • 3/ Rate established in the TSUS, effective Aug. 31, 1963.
Source: Compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce (data for 1964 and 1965 are partly estimated).
Note.--Data are not available on U.S. imports of footwear with supported-vinyl uppers for the years prior to 1964. Such imports were probably negligible in the mid-1950's.
