In Marubeni , this court reviewed the classification of certain sport utility vehicles. See id . at 538. In Marubeni , although the vehicles were designed for the transport of goods and people, they were more designed or principally designed for the transport of people. WSI contends that the intent of the manufacturer is the main criterion that Customs must consider in classifying merchandise, and the manufacturer's intent must be determined by assessing both the physical elements of the imported item as imported and contemporaneous design development documents. As the bicycles were shipped with narrow tires and the designer has offered testimony that the bicycle was intended to be used with narrow tires, WSI contends the bicycles should be classified as bicycles with narrow tires.
Courts attach little probative value to what importers themselves call what they import.
The reference to the bicycle in the statute refers to the design of the bicycle as a whole, not merely to the type of tires with which it was shipped. The bicycles at issue do not possess any permanent structural impediment to the safe use of tires having a cross-sectional diameter exceeding 4.13 cm. As such, they were properly classified under subheading 8712.00.35. We hold that the court applied the correct legal standards and that the evidence supports the Court of International Trade's decision that the bicycles at issue were properly classified under subheading 8712.00.35. Motor vehicles for the transport of goods.