# HQ 965692

# 

## September 18, 2002

# CLA-2 RR:CR:TE 965692 ttd

CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO: 6216.00.4600; 6216.00.5820; 4203.29.1500

Peter Mento

Julie Vair

Expeditors Tradewin, LLC

1015 Third Avenue, 12th Floor

Seattle, WA 98104

RE: Classification of Gloves

Dear Mr. Mento and Ms. Vair:

This is in response to your letter, dated April 4, 2002, on behalf of
your client, Anza Sport Group, Inc., d.b.a. Mechanix Wear, regarding the
classification of six styles of gloves under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA). Your letter, which was
originally submitted to the Customs National Commodity Specialist
Division in New York, was referred to this office for reply. Samples
were submitted for review.

FACTS:

The articles under consideration are six pairs of gloves[^1], identified
as Models 100, 111, 200, 222, 300 and 400. All the Models are presented
in retail packs that are designed to hang on sales racks. Models 100,
200 and 222 are packaged in a manner to prominently display a picture of
the glove that shows the sewn on label that reads in part "engineered to
the exact specifications of professional mechanics."

Model 100 is a full-fingered glove with a synthetic leather-like
material comprising the palm, index finger, back of the fingertips and
fourchettes. A three-ply back consists of knitted spandex, foam and a
tricot liner. The glove features vented fouchettes and a 1-1/4 inch wide
elasticized strap secured with a hook and loop fabric tab over a side
vent. The words "MECHANIX GLOVES" are appliqued several times across the
back. The gloves are sold in eight different colors.

Model 111 is a leather-palmed glove that features vented leather
fourchettes, with overlays on both the palm and back and on the backs of
the fingertips. The remainder of the back is composed of knit spandex
with interior foam and tricot liner. The glove features a fully
elasticized wrist. Model 111 has a sewn on label printed with the
following: "SETWEAR an authentic product for the needs of the
entertainment industry."

Model 200 is constructed similarly to Model 100. In addition, it has
irregularly shaped padded reinforcement on the palm and along the thumb
extending to the index finger. The back of the hand features a neoprene
panel insert across the knuckles and overlaid reinforcement across the
fingers. Printing on Model 200 reads: "High performance multi-purpose
glove with a host of features that will be appreciated by both weekend
and professional mechanics alike."

Model 222 also has padded palm reinforcement along with a two-layer
palm. Additionally, the backs of the wrist and fingers have rubber shock
absorbing pads. Thick foam padding extends across the back of the
knuckles and down part of the index and middle fingers. Model 222 is
advertised as being worn by pit crews in multiple pictures. The
advertisement also depicts a mechanical function icon, a portion of
which provides the specific use for which the glove was designed. Model
222 is also advertised as "designed to excel in high-impact abuse with
precise controls needed by professional race crews."

Model 300 features a single-ply synthetic leather-like material
comprising the palm, backs of fingertips and vented fourchettes. The
back of the glove is made of knit spandex with interior foam and a
tricot liner. The glove also has a fully elasticized wrist and side
vent. The packaging of Model 300 claims that "Affordable features,
incredible fit and easy opening make this the one glove no home, auto or
garage should be without. Multipurpose glove is ideal for handling any
job around the home, garage or auto."

Model 400 is a full-fingered gauntlet glove with a reinforced overlaid
synthetic leather-like palm. The back of the hand is knit fabric and
features molded plastic knuckle protection, molded rubber finger
protection and a hook and loop fabric tab closure. The wrist is
partially elasticized and the cuff has an elasticized gaiter.

ISSUE:

Whether the merchandise is specially designed for use in sports.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Classification under the HTSUSA is made in accordance with the General
Rules of Interpretation (GRI). GRI 1 provides, in part, that
classification decisions are to be "determined according to the terms of
the headings and any relative section or chapter notes...." In the event
that goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the
headings and legal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRI may
then be applied.

The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory Notes
(EN) constitute the official interpretation of the Harmonized System at
the international level (for the 4 digit headings and the 6 digit
subheadings) and facilitate classification under the HTSUSA by offering
guidance in understanding the scope of the headings and GRI. While
neither legally binding nor dispositive of classification issues, the EN
provide commentary on the scope of each heading of the HTSUSA and are
generally indicative of the proper interpretation of the headings. *See*
T.D. 89-80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127-28 (Aug. 23, 1989).

Subheadings 6216.00.46 and 4203.21.8060, HTSUSA, each provide for, in
part, gloves, mittens and mitts, specially designed for use in sports.
As these are both \"use\" provisions, determining whether an article is
classifiable in either subheading 6216.00.46 or 4203.21.8060, HTSUSA,
requires consideration of whether the article has particular features
that adapt it for the stated purpose. In *Sports Industries, Inc. v.
United States*, 65 Cust. Ct. 470, C.D. 4125 (1970), the court, in
interpreting the term \"designed for use,\" under the Tariff Schedules
of the United States, the predecessor to the HTSUSA, examined not only
the features of the articles, but also the materials selected and the
marketing, advertising and sale of the article. The case suggests that,
to be classifiable in either subheading 6216.00.46 or subheading
4203.21.8060, the subject gloves must be shown to be, in fact, specially
designed for use in a particular sport.

Concerning the proper classification of sports gloves, numerous other
court cases have examined the term \"specially designed for use in
sport.\" In *American Astral Corp. v. United States*, 62 Cust. Ct. 563,
C.D. 3827 (1969), the court held that certain gloves were properly
classified as lawn tennis equipment because the evidence established
that the gloves were specially designed for use in the game of tennis.
At the time, the Tariff Schedules of the United States included
provisions for tennis equipment covering specially designed protective
articles, such as gloves. The court noted the glove\'s distinguishing
characteristics, which set it apart from ordinary gloves worn as
apparel. Those features included: (a) an absorbent terry cloth back; (b)
a partially perforated lambskin palm designed to aid grip, provide
protection, and prevent perspiration by allowing air circulation; (c)
fourchettes made from stretch material; (d) elasticized wrist for a snug
fit and support; and (e) a button positioned to prevent interference to
the player. Additionally, the court considered factors such as the
nature of the importer\'s business, how the gloves were advertised in
the trade, the types of stores where the gloves were sold, and the fact
that the gloves were sold only in single units and not in pairs. The
court also noted that, the fact that the gloves had other possible uses
did not preclude their classification as sporting equipment. *See*, U.S.
Customs Service, [What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know
About: Gloves, Mittens & Mitts, Not Knitted or Crocheted Under the
HTSUS]{.underline}, 32 Cust. B. & Dec. 51 (Dec 23, 1998).

In *Porter v. United States*, 409 F. Supp. 757; 76 Cust. Ct. 97, Cust.
Dec. 4641 (1976), the court held that certain motorcross gloves, which
possessed features specially designed for use in the sport of
motorcross, were accordingly, specially designed for use in sports, even
though not used exclusively for the sport of motorcross. In *Porter*,
the court based its conclusion on the fact that motorcross gloves
featured special characteristics and construction, specially designed
for the sport of motorcross. These characteristics included a shortened
palm, a reinforced thumb, an elastic band, protective strips or ribbing,
and an out-seam construction. These features complimented the particular
protective needs of the driver while racing with the specially designed
motorcross bike on a dirt track. It was also shown that motorcross
racing encompasses internationally accepted rules and that the American
Motorcycle Association Motorcross Competition Rule Book specifically
requires certain protective clothing and equipment, of which the
motorcross gloves at issue were one type that complied with the
requirements for the gloves. While the court noted that the gloves were
subject to use outside the sport of motorcross, the plaintiff had
already demonstrated that the gloves were primarily designed for the
sport of motorcross. Moreover, the features, which made the gloves ideal
for the sport of motorcross, rendered them useless or cumbersome for
other types of motorcycle riding. Thus, the court in *Porter* found that
the merchandise considered was designed to meet the needs of the sport.

Accordingly, a conclusion that a certain glove is \"specially designed\"
for a particular sport, requires more than a mere determination of
whether the glove or pair of gloves could possibly be used in a certain
sport. In determining whether gloves are specially designed for use in
sports, Customs 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.

While the term \"sport\" is not defined in the tariff, in Headquarters
Ruling Letter (HQ) 089849, dated August 16, 1991, Customs noted that
common dictionaries defined the term \"sport\" as \"an activity
requiring more or less vigorous bodily exertion and carried on according
to some traditional form or set of rules, whether outdoors, as football,
hunting, golf, racing, etc., or indoors, as basketball, bowling, squash,
etc.\" In *Newman Importing Company, Inc. v. United States*, 415 F.
Supp. 375, 76 Cust. Ct. 143, Cust. Dec. 4648 (1976), in finding
backpacking to be a sport, the court determined that the term \"sport\"
is not solely defined in terms of competitiveness, but also arises from
the development and pursuit of a variety of skills. In this respect, in
HQ 957848, dated August 10, 1995, Customs found hunting, fishing,
canoeing, archery and similar outdoor activities to fall within the
purview of \"sport.\" [The American College Dictionary]{.underline}
(1970) defines the term \"sport\" as \"a pastime pursued in the open air
or having an athletic character.\" Likewise, [Webster\'s New Dictionary
of the English Language]{.underline} (2001) defines \"sport\" as:

1: a source of diversion: PASTIME

2: physical activity engaged in for pleasure.

Notably, the term \"sport\" appears to also encompass activities in
which individuals engage professionally (i.e., professional sports).

In HQ 964901, dated January 31, 2002, Customs defines the term "sport"
according to The Random House Dictionary of the English Language, the
Unabridged Edition (1983) as:

1.  an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often
    of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling,
    wrestling, boxing hunting, fishing, etc.

> 2\. a particular form of this, esp. in the out of doors.

In your letter, you imply that all six styles of gloves at issue are
specially designed for use in sport, citing the sport of racing.
However, after review of the submitted samples and marketing materials,
we find that two of the styles, Model 111 and Model 300, are promoted
and designed for purposes other than the sport of racing. Specifically,
Model 111 is advertised as "SETWEAR" or "an authentic product created
for the needs of the entertainment industry." Model 300 is described as
a "Multipurpose" glove that "is ideal for handling any job around the
home, garage or auto."

We recognize motorsports racing as a sporting activity, as well as the
role of pit crewmembers as an integral component of the sport, for
purposes of tariff classification. However, while we acknowledge that
the term \"sport\" may encompass a variety of outdoor and indoor
activities, which may or may not have competitive aspects, we find that
neither "entertainment industry" activities nor "multipurpose"
activities fall within the purview of the term \"sport.\" When there is
doubt as to whether a certain activity constitutes a sport for tariff
classification purposes, Customs balances a range of factors, which
include the degree of bodily exertion, the use of traditional rules, the
degree of competitiveness, the origin of the activity, and common
recognition as a sport.

In HQ 962745, dated October 25, 1999, in determining whether the
activity of "dancing" is a sport, Customs found that while it may entail
competition, require athleticism, involve physical and mental exertion,
etc., dance is not a sport. Notwithstanding news accounts about the
International Olympic Committee (IOC) taking action to grant provisional
recognition to certain dancing as "sports" in the Games program, we
found that for Customs purposes, dancing is not a sport.

In HQ 965712, dated August 28, 2002, we likewise found that
"lumberjacking" is not a sport. As "lumberjacking" does not originate
from a recreational pastime as activities typically considered sports,
we found that "lumberjacking" is most accurately described as an
occupation, not a pastime. In that ruling, we noted that while
"lumberjacking" contests have stemmed from the trade, such events fell
short of establishing "lumberjacking" as a sport for tariff
classification purposes. Moreover, we found that while some may consider
"lumberjacking" to be a \"pastime\" and a \"physical activity engaged in
for pleasure,\" it has neither gained mainstream acceptance as a sport
nor is it a sport in the traditional sense of the word. Thus, we
concluded that although those gloves may have had features useful in the
activity of "lumberjacking," they were not specially designed for use in
sports.

Here, like dancing in HQ 962745 and lumberjacking in HQ 965712,
professional work in the "entertainment industry" and "multipurpose"
activities "around the home, garage or auto" are simply not sports. We
find no evidence to support the claim that the subject gloves are
specially designed for a sporting activity. *See* HQ 083450, dated
August 25, 1989 (cited below). Accordingly the styles of gloves,
identified as Model 111 and Model 300, are precluded from classification
as gloves specially designed for use in sports.

Of the remaining four samples under consideration, we find that Models
100, 200, 222 and 400, are classifiable as gloves specially designed for
use in sports. We note the claim printed on each of the four styles of
gloves stating "engineered to the exact specifications of professional
mechanics." Examination of each pair of gloves confirms that the gloves'
features would enhance performance in motorsports racing. Furthermore,
there is sufficient persuasive evidence concerning marketing,
advertising and sales of the subject merchandise in the trade channels
of the sport named for which the gloves are designed.

In HQ 965131, dated October 25, 2001, Customs found that gloves designed
for use in the sports of hunting or competitive shooting were designed
for use in sports. In HQ 965131, marketing materials were submitted,
promoting the benefits and design features of the gloves, which made
them ideal for the outdoor sportsman. Moreover, the gloves were marketed
through, and sold in, outdoor sporting goods stores that catered to
hunters and competitive shooters. Likewise, in HQ 958892, dated October
4, 1996, we found that gloves which were close fitting, unlined, and
featured palmside polyurethane coated fabric and nylon knit fourchettes,
were specially designed for equestrian sports. Based on the detailed
advertising, the term \"All Purpose\" was found to refer to the multiple
equestrian activities for which the gloves could be used within the
sport.

On the other hand, in HQ 954704, dated November 12, 1993, Customs ruled
that lined leather gloves were not \"specially designed\" for use in the
sport of snowmobiling. After examining the gloves and accompanying
advertisements, we found that the gloves were equally suited for use as
either motorcycle or snowmobile gloves. Therefore, the claim that the
gloves were \"designed, marketed and sold specifically as snowmobile
gloves\" was unsupported due to ambiguous advertising. Similarly, in HQ
088374, dated June 24, 1991, Customs ruled that the gloves at issue were
not ski gloves, because the importer provided no evidence that they were
principally used in, or designed for, the sport of skiing. In HQ 088374,
there was no evidence of marketing or sale of the gloves as ski gloves,
absent a hang tag including the word \"ski.\" Moreover, in HQ 957848,
dated August 10, 1995, Customs found that the advertisement accompanying
the gloves showed the wearer engaged in non-sport activities such as
writing, playing a trumpet, looking through a bag and taking pictures.
In that ruling, the gloves (half-fingered with synthetic palm patch)
were not considered to be designed, marketed and sold specifically for
use as sports gloves.

In HQ 083450, dated August 25, 1989, in determining whether gloves were
\"specially designed for use in sports,\" Customs found that a glove
designed as a multi-sport glove and used in many different sports did
not necessarily satisfy the meaning of \"designed for use in sports.\"
In that ruling, we interpreted the term \"specially designed for
sports\" to mean that the gloves must have special design features
particular to the identified sport. Comfort, breathability and a
reinforced thumb were not sufficient to show that special design
features pertained specifically to any one of the sports cited
(bicycling, cross-country skiing, ATV-motorcycling racing and boating).

Most recently, in HQ 965157, dated May 14, 2002, Customs ruled that five
styles of gloves were not properly classified as specially designed for
use in sports. In that ruling, the gloves had some features associated
with sports gloves, such as hook and loop closure and synthetic
materials. Yet, the gloves were not classifiable under subheading
6216.00.4600, HTSUSA, since they were not sufficiently marketed,
advertised and sold for use in the sports for which they were allegedly
designed.

In this case, the marketing and advertising materials support your claim
that Models 100, 200, 222 and 400, are specially designed for
motorsports racing. We find that the advertising and marketing materials
show a substantial association with motorsports racing and that the four
styles of gloves are primarily marketed, advertised and sold to, and
used by, participants and enthusiasts of motorsports racing. The claim
that the gloves are "engineered to the exact specifications of
professional mechanics" is substantiated by advertisements in
motorsports magazines, sponsorships, and endorsements as well as through
Mechanix Wear's catalogs, marketing plan and website information. These
materials focus almost completely on motorsports racing and specifically
market the gloves to racing enthusiasts. Moreover, the vast majority of
"Mechanix" printed advertisements are placed in magazines and
publications devoted to racing and racing enthusiasts. The printed
Mechanix Wear advertisements and catalogs are replete with motorsports
pictures, illustrating pit crews engaged in NASCAR, drag racing and
motorcross. In addition, the company\'s website is also vastly devoted
to the sport of motor racing, providing recent race results and
including multiple Internet links to racing team home pages and NASCAR
on the World Wide Web. Moreover, the gloves are officially licensed by
NASCAR and used by multiple NASCAR racing team pit crews.

Accordingly, the subject gloves, identified as Models 100, 200, 222 and
400, are properly classified in subheading 6216.00.46, HTSUSA, as gloves
specially designed for use in sports, namely motorsports racing. This
finding is also consistent with New York Ruling Letter (NY) A86298,
dated August 8, 1996 and NY B85790, dated June 5, 1997.

HOLDING:

The style of gloves identified as Model 111 is classified in subheading
4203.29.1500, HTSUSA, which provides for "Articles of apparel and
clothing accessories, of leather or of composition leather: Gloves,
mittens and mitts: Other: Gloves of horsehide or cowhide (except
calfskin) leather: Other: With fourchettes or sidewalls which, at a
minimum, extend from fingertip to fingertip between each of the four
fingers." The general column one rate of duty is 14 percent *ad
valorem*.

The style of gloves identified as Model 300 is classified in subheading
6216.00.5820, HTSUSA, which provides for \"Gloves, mittens and mitts:
Other: Of man-made fibers: Other: With fourchettes, Other.\" The general
column one rate of duty is 21 cents per kilogram plus 10.5 percent *ad
valorem* and the textile restraint category is 631.

The four styles of gloves, identified as Models 100, 200, 222 and 400,
are classified in subheading 6216.00.4600, HTSUSA, which provides for
"Gloves, mittens and mitts: Other: Of man-made fibers: Other gloves,
mittens and mitts, all the foregoing specially designed for use in
sports, including ski and snowmobile gloves, mittens and mitts." The
general column one rate of duty is 3.3 percent *ad valorem*.

The designated textile and apparel category may be subdivided into
parts. If so, the visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject
merchandise may be affected. Since part categories are the result of
international bilateral agreements which are subject to frequent
renegotiations and changes, to obtain the most current information
available, we suggest you check, close to the time of shipment, the
[Status Report On Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels)]{.underline},
an internal issuance of the U.S. Customs Service which is updated weekly
and is available for inspection at your local Customs office. The
[Status Report on Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels)]{.underline}
is also available on the Customs Electronic Bulletin Board (CEBB) which
can be found on the U.S. Customs Service Website at www.customs.gov.

Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth
and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa)
categories, you should contact your local Customs office prior to
importation of this merchandise to determine the current status of any
import restraints or requirements.

Sincerely,

Myles B. Harmon, Acting Director

Commercial Rulings Division

[^1]: 19 CFR § 177.2(b)(2)(ii)(A) provides "Individual requests for
    rulings submitted to service port offices will be limited to five
    (5) merchandise items, all of which must be of the same class or
    kind." Please note that Customs will strictly adhere to this
    provision for any future ruling submission by your firm.