United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 2007 HQ Rulings > HQ W968211 - HQ W968385 > HQ W968308

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ W968308




November 30, 2006

CLA-2 RR:CTF:TCM 968308 ADK

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 6116.10.5520

Angela Sargent
Kinco International, Inc.
4286 N.E. 185th Avenue
Portland, OR 97230

RE: Request for reconsideration of tariff classification of gloves from China.

Dear Ms. Sargent:

This letter is in response to your request of May 17, 2006, on behalf of Kinco International Inc. (Kinco), for reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter (NY) L87253, dated October 3, 2005.

FACTS:

The subject Ragg Wool string-knit gloves, style number 5299, are comprised of 55% acrylic, 45% wool. The palm and fingers are impregnated with a PVC dot coating which extends from the fingertips to the wrist. The glove is lined with a heavy weight 100% acrylic knit lining and features a two-ply string-knit cuff.

In NY L87253, the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) classified the gloves at issue in subheading 6116.10.5520, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”), which provides for: “Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted: Impregnated, coated or covered with plastics or rubber: Other: Without Fourchettes: Other: Containing 50 percent or more by weight of cotton, man-made fibers or other textile fibers, or any combination thereof: Subject to man-made fiber restraints.”

In your request for reconsideration, you assert that the gloves are properly classified in subheading 6116.10.0800, HTSUS, which provides for: “Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted: Impregnated, coated or covered with plastics or rubber: Other gloves, mittens and mitts, all the foregoing specially designed for use in sports, including ski and snowmobile gloves, mittens and mitts.”

ISSUE:

Are the subject gloves “specifically designed” for use in sports?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goods shall be determined according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relative section or chapter notes. In the event that the goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRIs 2 through 6 may then be applied in order. GRI 6 provides that the classification of goods in the subheadings of a heading shall be determined according to the terms of those subheadings and any related subheading notes and, mutatis mutandis, to GRIs 1 through 5, on the understanding that only subheadings at the same level are comparable.

The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory Notes (ENs) constitute the official interpretation of the HTSUS. While not legally binding nor dispositive, the ENs provide a commentary on the scope of each heading of the HTSUS and are generally indicative of the proper interpretation of these headings. See T.D. 89-80.

It is undisputed that the gloves are classified in subheading 6116.10, HTSUS. Classification beyond the six-digit level is disputed, however. At issue is whether the subject gloves are “specifically designed” for use in sports and, therefore, classified in subheading 6116.10.0800, HTSUS. The HTSUS provisions under consideration are as follows:

6116 Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted:

6116.10 Impregnated, coated or covered with plastics or rubber: Other:
Without forchettes:
Other:
6116.10.55 Containing 50 percent or more by weight of cotton, man-made fibers or other textile fibers, or any combination thereof

6116.10.5520 Subject to man-made fiber restraints

6116 Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted:

6116.10 Impregnated, coated or covered with plastics or rubber:

6116.10.08 Other gloves, mittens and mitts, all the foregoing specially designed for use in sports, including ski and snowmobile gloves, mittens and mitts You argue that the subject gloves are specifically designed for use in both hunting and fishing. To support this argument, you have established that the gloves are sold in specialty hunting and fishing stores, such as REI, Cabelas and Bass Pro. You have also provided our office with a sample of the subject merchandise and a variety of digital pictures which show different styles of gloves on display in retail stores. It is well established that whether an article is "specially designed" or "specially constructed" for a particular purpose may be determined by an examination of the article itself. See cases cited in Porter v. United States, 76 Cust. Ct. 97, 103 (C.C.P.A. 1976). We have therefore relied on the submitted sample, in addition to the digital pictures, in making our decision.

When determining whether gloves are specially designed for use in sports, CBP considers the connection the gloves have to an identified sporting activity, the features designed for that sporting activity, and how the gloves are marketed, advertised and sold in relation to the named sport. See Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 965870, on the classification of “hunter orange” gloves, dated October 8, 2002. CBP evaluates the glove as a whole to determine if its collective physical features make it “specially designed” for use in a certain sport. See generally HQ 089769, on the classification of cold weather gloves, dated October 8, 1991, and HQ 964901, dated January 31, 2002, on the classification of several models of gloves. It is important to note that the fact that a glove could possibly be used in a certain sport is not enough to make it “specially designed” for that sport. See American Astral Corp. v. United States, 62 Cust. Ct. 563, C.D. 3827 (1969); What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know about Gloves, Mittens & Mitts, Customs Bulletin and Decisions, Vol. 32, No. 51, December 23 1998; HQ 965870.

In order to classify the subject gloves in subheading 6116.10.0800, HTSUS, we must consider both (1) whether hunting and fishing are sports; and (2) whether the gloves at issue are specifically designed for use in both activities. See HQ 964901, dated January 31, 2002. CBP considers hunting a “sport” and has recognized that certain features are indicative of a special design for hunting. See HQ 965870 and HQ 964901. These features include, but are not limited to:

Non-skid reinforcements on the palmside and shooting fingers which aid in safely gripping and firing a rifle (See HQ 089769); A tapered index finger for easier finger tip access to the trigger (See HQ 957042, dated January 18, 1995); Insulation that enhances warmth without creating excess bulk (See HQ 964901); Padding that does not inhibit crucial sensitivity and movement of the trigger finger, which is necessary to the handling of a gun. (See 089769); and A tight fit to facilitate handling ammunition, and/or gel inserts to protect against recoil (See HQ 965131, dated October 25, 2001).

CBP similarly considers fishing a “sport” and has recognized that certain features are indicative of a special design for fishing. See PD C88753, dated July 2, 1998. These features include, but are not limited to:

Waterproof barriers (See NY J80828);
Complete palmside and fingertip reinforcement; (Id.); Backside textile wrist strap (Id., NY J85345); A hook and clasp (NY J80828, NY J85345);
Coated fabric that serves to protect hands from hooks, teeth, fins, gills, wire leaders and knives (See NY I86512); and Pre-curved half-fingered at the thumb and two fingers (Id.).

CBP will take the manner of retail sale into account when making specific design determinations. It is relevant, therefore, that the subject gloves are sold in retail chains that specialize in outdoor sports. This evidence alone is insufficient to establish that the gloves are specially designed for either hunting or fishing, however. As we have previously noted, the fact that a glove could possibly be used in a certain sport is not enough to make it “specially designed” for a certain sport. See HQ 965870. Although the pictures confirm that your merchandise is sold in sporting goods stores, they do not definitively establish that these particular gloves are specially designed for either hunting or fishing. To the contrary, the advertising and marketing samples provided suggest that the gloves are intended for general cold weather use. Attributes such as the ability to keep “body heat in and seal out the cold,” or being suitable for “rugged” use, establish that the gloves are intended for multi-purpose wear
www.rei.com. Kinco’s own website describes the subject gloves as “quality Ragg Wool gloves that deliver both warmth and comfort,” but fails to mention specific design or use www.kinco.com. Absent evidence that the goods are marketed solely or principally for wear during hunting or fishing, they are excluded from subheading 6116.10.08, HTSUS. Furthermore, a visual inspection of the subject merchandise confirms that they do not possess any of the above attributes indicative of a special design.

The gloves are classifiable under subheading 6116.10.5520, HTSUS. It should be noted that subheading 6116.10.5520, HTSUS, is not solely for industrial gloves as you suggest. Although the subheading does include gloves intended for industrial use, it is not limited to such items. See NY B87853, dated July 24, 1997, and NY E89526, dated November 12, 1999.

HOLDING:

The gloves, identified as style number 5299, are classified in subheading 6116.10.5520, HTSUS, which provides for: “[g]loves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted: Impregnated, coated or covered with plastics or rubber: Other: Without Fourchettes: Other: Containing 50 percent or more by weight of cotton, man-made fibers or other textile fibers, or any combination thereof: Subject to man-made fiber restraints.” The applicable column one, general duty rate under the 2006 HTSUS is 13.2 percent ad valorem.

EFFECT ON OTHER RULINGS:

NY L87253, October 3, 2005, is affirmed.

Sincerely,

Myles B. Harmon, Director
Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: