CBP Again Finds 'Adaptive Clothing' With Magnetic Closures Not Eligible for Duty-Free Subheading

CBP continues to believe that "adaptive clothing" with magnetic closures and other features don't meet the requirements for duty-free treatment under tariff subheading 9817.00.96 as articles for the handicapped, the agency said in an Oct. 29 ruling. CBP previously ruled that the "adaptive" girls' dress and jeans didn't satisfy the requirements of the subheading because the adaptations weren't significant enough, similar to another ruling on the same subject (see 1807130038). McGuireWoods lawyer John Pellegrini filed a request for reconsideration of that ruling on behalf of the importer, PVH Corporation.

Pellegrini argued that previous ruling "erroneously interpreted the first factor, i.e., the physical properties of the garment, to mean that the garments must look like they are designed for the handicapped," CBP said. That wasn't the intent of that ruling and isn't a proper interpretation of it, CBP said. "Rather, it is our finding that the use of magnetic closures and button and loop hem adjustments are in garments designed for and sold to the general public. As such, the use of these devices in a garment design is not, in our view, a significant adaptation that, by itself, easily distinguishes garments as designed for the handicapped as opposed to garments which the general public may find of use and so use."

PVH also identified several physical conditions that the garments were designed. While it's true there are degrees of disability, "in this case, we need not delve into the degree of disability which necessitates use of magnetic closures as it is apparent that the general public purchases and uses garments with magnetic closures, as well as garments with adjustable hems for length," CBP said.

The placement of the magnets in the garments also isn't indicative of significant adaptations, the agency said. For example, "openings along the outseams of pants are design features which may be used in certain pants either for fashion reasons or functional reasons, such as allowing the wearer to put the garment on or take the garment off over shoes," CBP said. "In this case, you indicate there is a functional reason for the opening, but the use of magnets for the opening is not, in our view, a significant adaptation to the garment."

Pellegrini also mentioned the cost of the adaptations, but CBP wasn't persuaded. "Certainly, this is a consideration in determining whether an adaptation is significant," the agency said. "However, it must be weighed in light of the factors. In this case, the increased cost for the production of the 'adaptive' version garments simply does not outweigh the other factors." The washing instructions that say not to iron the magnets also aren't determinative, as "many garments have special washing instruction," CBP said.