CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 951294 SK
Edward Macejka
Swany USA Corporation
Crossroads Industrial Park
Gloversville, N.Y. 12078
RE: Classification of ladies' gloves; woven nylon; vinyl
internal reinforcement; knit fourchettes; Stonewall Trading
Company v. United States, 64 Cust. Ct. 482, C.D. 4023 (1970);
heading 6216, HTSUSA; HRL 082336 (11/21/88)
Dear Mr. Macejka:
This is in response to your letter of January 31, 1992,
requesting classification of ladies' gloves. Two different
styles were sent to this office for examination.
FACTS:
Two styles were submitted for examination: style 2206T5 and
2207T5 (no indication was provided as to which glove was which
style). Each style is affixed with a tag which reads "1A" and
"2A" and the gloves, where it is necessary to differentiate,
shall be referred to by these numbers. Styles 1A and 2A are
identical in all respects except that each has a different
decorative pattern stitched onto the back of the glove and style
2A has a gathered elastic band surrounding the entire wrist.
Style 1A has a gathered elastic band extending only across the
bottom of the wrist.
The gloves are constructed from woven nylon fabric with a
2mm layer of foam rubber on the inner surface. The gloves
feature acrylic knit fourchettes, sidewalls and cuffs. The
lining consists of 100% cotton knit with "Thinsulate" and 3mm of
foam rubber. The gloves have internal textile-backed vinyl
reinforcement and foam padding across the back of the knuckles,
elasticized wrists, and a hook and clasp. A 1-1/4 inch wide
piece of textile-backed vinyl is sewn internally across the palm
and is further reinforced by three double rows of external
stitching. A separate vinyl piece is sewn under the palm side of
the thumb.
- 2 -
ISSUE:
Whether the articles at issue are classifiable as ski
gloves?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification of merchandise under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA) is in accordance
with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's) taken in order.
GRI 1 provides that classification shall be determined according
to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter
notes.
The threshold question is whether the submitted gloves have
been designed for use in skiing and whether they are properly
classifiable as "other gloves ... especially designed for use in
sports, including ski[ing]", under heading 6216, HTSUSA. Several
characteristics deemed indicative of such design were enumerated
in Stonewall Trading Company v. United States, 64 Cust. Ct. 482,
C.D. 4023 (1970). In Stonewall, the Court held that certain
vinyl gloves were classifiable as "other ski equipment" in item
734.97, TSUS, (now provided for in various HTS subheadings)
because the gloves were deemed to have been especially designed
for use as ski gloves by exhibiting the following:
1) A hook and clasp to hold the gloves together;
2) An extra piece of vinyl stitched along the thumb to
meet the stress caused by the flexing of the knuckles
when the skier grasps the ski pole;
3) An extra piece of vinyl with padding reinforcement and
and inside stitching which is securely stitched across
the middle of the glove where the knuckles bend and cause
stress;
4) Cuffs with an elastic gauntlet to hold the gloves firm
around the wrist so as to be waterproof and to keep it
securely on the hand.
It is important to recognize that these criteria are not
prerequisites mandated of all ski gloves. Rather, they provide a
guideline intended to aid in determining whether certain gloves
have been designed for use in skiing. These criteria are neither
mandatory, nor all-inclusive, and a case by case analysis will be
used by Customs in determining whether a glove's design merits
classification as a ski glove under heading 6216, HTSUSA. See
Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 082336, dated November 21, 1988,
in which Customs noted, "[t]he fact that the court found
- 3 -
certain gloves to be classifiable as other ski equipment cannot
be construed as either a limitation or as a blanket approval for
any gloves that possess such [the same] features." We further
note that even if a glove were to possess all the features
enumerated supra, it would not definitively serve to classify the
glove as a ski glove; a glove may possess all these features and
still be deemed unacceptable for use as a ski glove.
Upon examination of the submitted samples, it is apparent
that at least three of the characteristics set forth in Stonewall
have been marginally met: the gloves have a hook and clasp, there
is an extra piece of padding reinforcement where the knuckles
bend, and both gloves have cuffs with elasticized gauntlets.
All these features are rather insubstantial in nature. The hook
and clasp is of a light plastic that unhooks easily, the
reinforcement sewn to the inside of the glove is internal only
and the elasticized cuffs do not provide a waterproof barrier
sufficiently tight so as to prevent water, snow and ice from
entering the glove when skiing.
The second characteristic in Stonewall, which refers to an
extra piece of vinyl stitched along the thumb to meet the stress
caused by the flexing of the knuckles when the skier grasps the
ski pole, leaves some question as to precisely where along the
thumb the vinyl is supposed to be stitched. An examination of
both submitted samples reveals that there is an extra piece of
vinyl inserted into the palm-side of the thumb. The vinyl does
not extend to the thumb crotch (that area which covers the right
angle created by thumb and forefinger) nor along the top of the
thumb. The purpose of reinforcement is to ensure that gloves are
sufficiently strong and durable so as to withstand the rigors of
skiing. When the glove is used to grasp a ski pole, very little,
if any, of the thumb crotch comes in contact with the ski pole.
Reinforcement of the thumb crotch is therefore not necessary as
it is the fingers and the top third of the palm which usually
come into contact with a ski pole when a conventional grip is
used. Also, the thumb is only slightly bent when gripping a ski
pole. As there is little bending of the thumb knuckle, the
submitted samples need not possess vinyl reinforcement on the top
side of the thumb. Accordingly, the vinyl reinforcement which
lines only the palm-side of the thumb is adequate for use in
skiing.
Our examination of the subject merchandise indicates that
while the gloves may technically meet the guidelines set forth in
Stonewall, these gloves are nevertheless ill-suited for use in
skiing for several reasons. First, the fourchettes, sidewalls
and cuffs on these styles are constructed from acrylic knit
- 4 -
fibers to which snow tends to adhere. This fabric easily absorbs
water and allows that water to pass to the hands of the wearer.
Obviously, this is not an acceptable characteristic for a ski
glove. Second, the knit cuffs and elasticized wrists on these
gloves are not sufficiently tight to prevent snow and water from
entering the gloves. For the aforegoing reasons, it is clear
that these gloves are not practical for use in skiing.
The Stonewall Court created a rebuttable presumption that a
glove possessing all four of the enumerated characteristics has
been designed as a ski glove. Customs may consider other factors
which effectively refute this presumption. Such factors may
include whether the gloves are functionally practicable for use
in skiing, whether the gloves appear suitable for use in skiing,
and whether the gloves are marketed as ski gloves. While a
glove's appearance, and the manner in which it is marketed, are
certainly indicators of classification, it is the glove's
suitability for use in skiing that is determinative of whether
classification as a ski glove is proper. In other words, even if
the Stonewall characteristics have been met, a glove is not
classifiable as a ski glove if it is not functionally practicable
for use as such.
It is Customs' opinion that neither of the gloves in the
instant case are properly classifiable as ski gloves. The gloves
are not suitable for use in skiing primarily because they would
allow a skier's hands to get wet easily by virtue of knit
fourchettes and loose cuffs. Moreover, the gloves are advertised
in the Swaney catalog simply as "Ladies' Thinsulate Gloves", and
not as ski gloves.
HOLDING:
The submitted samples are both classifiable under subheading
6216.00.3225, HTSUSA, which provides for gloves, mittens and
mitts: impregnated, coated or covered with plastics or rubber:
other: with fourchettes... subject to man-made fiber restraints.
The applicable rate of duty is 14% ad valorem and the textile
quota category is 631.
The designated textile and apparel category may be
subdivided into parts. If so, 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 that your client check, close to the time of shipment,
the Status Report on Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels), an
internal issuance of the U.S. Customs Service, which is updated
weekly and is available at your local Customs office.
- 5 -
Due to the 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,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division