Women's knit garments for lower torso and legs; tights, heading 6115, HTSUSA, vs. trousers, heading 6104, HTSUSA.
Active· CBP ruling HQ 950798· Issued 1992-03-30
Ruling text
HQ 950798
March 30, 1992
CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 950798 jb
CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION
TARIFF NO.: 6104.62.2010; 6104.62.2030
Richard M. Wortman, Esq.
Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz & Silverman
12 East 49th Street
New York, NY 10017
RE: Women's knit garments for lower torso and legs; tights,
heading 6115, HTSUSA, vs. trousers, heading 6104, HTSUSA.
Dear Mr. Wortman:
This ruling is in response to your firm's submission of
December 11, 1991, on behalf of your client, Bodywear bi Energie,
requesting the classification of various styles of women's knit
garments for the lower torso and legs which will be imported from
Taiwan. Samples of the garments were received by this office.
FACTS:
Two samples were submitted to this office. The styles
received were 8700R and 9000R. A third style, 8800R, was also
mentioned and is claimed to be of the same type as the other
samples provided, but the sample was not made available to
Customs.
All of the garments are made of lightweight, fine knit
fabric consisting of 54 percent cotton, 36 percent polyester and
10 percent spandex. Each garment features a lined gusset in the
crotch, 4-way stretch fabric, and elasticized waist. The
garments vary in length from ankle to bike length and vary in the
finishing of the leg bottoms. All have elasticized cuffs and one
style (9000R) features a stirrup. It is claimed the garments
were designed for use during exercise.
ISSUE:
Are the garments at issue, Styles 8700R, 8800R and 9000R,
properly classifiable as tights of heading 6115, HTSUSA, or as
trousers or shorts (depending on the garment length) of heading
6104, HTSUSA?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Customs has received several submissions regarding the issue
involved in this case. In responding herein, we will attempt to
address the various arguments which you have presented and which
have been presented to us by others on the classification of
these garments.
Classification of goods under the HTSUSA is governed by the
General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's). GRI 1 provides that
"classification shall be determined according to the terms of the
headings and any relative section or chapter notes, provided such
headings or notes do not otherwise require, according to [the
remaining GRI's taken in order]".
In HRL 088454 of October 11, 1991, Customs ruled that
certain garments known as leggings are classifiable as pants and
not as tights. Care was taken to point out that while Customs
believes the majority of garments commercially known as leggings
are classifiable as pants, not all leggings will necessarily be
so classified. This caveat was given due to the popularity of
the term leggings and the liberal use of that term in the fashion
industry and by retailers in describing a wide range of form-
fitting knit garments for the lower torso and legs.
In that ruling, Customs examined the meaning of the term
tights for tariff purposes in great length and concluded that
tights are garments which are partially underwear and partially
outerwear, partially intended to be exposed and partially
intended to be covered. See, Children's Hose Inc., v. United
States, 55 Cust. Ct. 6, C.D. 2547 (1965). Based on the various
definitions which were reviewed, and applying the doctrine of
"noscitur a sociis", Customs decided that tights are a form of
hosiery.
If the tights are a form of hosiery, it becomes necessary to
determine if the merchandise at issue are commonly and
commercially recognized as hosiery. In an effort to properly
define hosiery, Customs has consulted lexicographic sources and
sought information from the hosiery industry. Various sources
define hosiery, in pertinent part, as follows:
1.a. Stockings and socks: HOSE. b. Chiefly Brit.
Stockings, socks, and underclothing. 2. The business
of a hosier. Webster's II New Riverside University
Dictionary (1984)
1. A collective term for knitted or woven hose, especially
women's stockings. * * * 2. A term used in Great
Britain to indicate any knitted article. Fairchild's
Dictionary of Textiles (1970)
Knit or woven coverings for the feet and legs designed to be
worn inside shoes, particularly women's stockings and
tights; also socks for men, women, and children. The New
Encyclopedia Britannica Vol. 5, at 147 (1975) (found at
beginning of discussion of hosiery)
Hose is defined as:
A leg covering, in modern use covering also the foot, but
formerly sometimes reaching only to the ankle; a stocking or
stockings; Close-fitting covering for the legs and waist of
the general nature of tights, as formerly worn, often
fastened to the doublet by ribbons or strings called points;
later, breeches reaching only to the knee. Webster's New
International Dictionary, Unabridged (2nd Ed., 1939)
A cloth leg covering that reaches down to the ankle and
sometimes covers the foot; stocking, sock (a pair of-)- usu.
used in pl.; A close-fitting garment similar to tights that
covers the body from the waist to and sometimes including
the feet and is usu. attached to a doublet by points.
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged
(1986)
1. Stockings, or covering for lower leg and foot, usually
knit or woven. Formerly not made to cover the foot. 2.
Tights, or hose reaching to the waist, formerly fastened to
doublet with points. Mary Brooks Picken, The Fashion
Dictionary at 195 (1973)
The above definitions are helpful, but somewhat imprecise.
References to tights in the definitions do not clarify the issue
for Customs as the meaning of tights is also at issue.
Additionally, the definition above of hosiery as "a close-fitting
garment that covers the body from the waist to and sometimes
including the feet" could arguably describe certain types of
trousers. (See definitions of trousers below).
The term "hosiery" is a broad one and encompasses a wide
variety of products with common characteristics. To obtain a
determination of the common characteristics of articles regarded
as hosiery, Customs consulted the hosiery industry for
clarification regarding the commercial understanding of
"hosiery". It is a well-established tenet of customs law that
tariff terms are construed in accordance with their common and
commercial meanings and that the common meaning of a tariff term
is a question of law. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. United
States, 7 CIT 178, 182, 585 F. Supp. 649 (1984), aff'd, 753 F.2d
1061 (Fed. Cir. 1985). However, whenever the common meaning is
somewhat indefinite, "it is proper to consider the interpretation
commonly placed upon it in the particular industry involved."
United States v. Colonial Commerce Co., Ltd., et al., 44 CCPA 18,
C.A.D 629 (1956).
The information Customs has received from sources in the
hosiery industry, such as the National Association of Hosiery
Manufacturers (NAHM), indicates that the industry views
manufactured, as opposed to hand knit, hosiery as articles
produced on hosiery machines. These machines are circular
knitting machines with small diameter heads which produce
seamless, tubular fabric which is furnished to make stockings,
pantyhose, tights, socks, etc. Garments such as those at issue
herein, i.e., garments which are clearly produced from a cut-
and-sew process, are not viewed by the NAHM as articles of the
hosiery industry but as articles of the apparel industry.
Based on the foregoing information, Customs does not view
the merchandise at issue as hosiery. As heading 6115, HTSUSA, is
limited by its terms to articles of hosiery, these garments
cannot be classified as tights of that heading.
Since the submitted samples are not classifiable within
heading 6115, HTSUSA, the other heading which merits
consideration is heading 6104, HTSUSA, which provides for
trousers or shorts (depending on the length).
In HQ 089852, dated February 19, 1992, Customs ruled that
various styles of women's knit garments for the lower torso and
legs were classified as trousers and not tights. In that ruling
particular emphasis was placed on the fact that, regardless that
the garments were designed and marketed as exercise wear, this
did not alter or change their classification as trousers.
Trousers is defined by various sources as follows:
An outer garment of men or boys, extending from the waist to
the knee or, oftener and almost always with men, to the
ankle, and covering the leg separately. Orig. they were of
the nature of long hose or tight drawers and were worn esp.
by sailors and soldiers. Webster's New International
Dictionary, Unabridged (2nd Ed., 1939)
A usually loose-fitting outer garment for the lower part of
the body, having individual leg portions that reach
typically to the ankle but sometimes to any of various other
points from the upper leg down, worn esp. by men and boys.
The Random House Dictionary of the English Language (1983)
An outer garment extending from the waist to the ankle or
sometimes only to or just below the knee, covering each leg
separately, made close-fitting or loose-fitting in
accordance with the fashion of different periods, and worn
typically by men and boys. Webster's Third New
International Dictionary, Unabridged (1986) [Emphasis added]
Outer garment extending from the waist to below the knee,
covering each leg separately. Worn my men and boys.
Formerly very tight, similar to long hose. Mary Brooks
Picken, The Fashion Dictionary at 390 (1973)
The above cited definitions of trousers indicate that they
are garments which cover the lower torso from the waist to the
ankle or, sometimes, simply to the knee, and cover each leg
separately. At least two definitions above illustrate that
trousers may be close-fitting and form hugging depending on the
fashion.
The Explanatory Notes (EN) to the HTSUSA, while not legally
binding, constitute the official interpretation at the
international level. In the absence of clear and unambiguous
statutory language to the contrary, it has been Customs practice
to follow such terms when interpreting the HTSUSA.
Trousers are defined in the EN to the Harmonized System as:
garments which envelop each leg separately, covering the
knees and usually reaching down to or below the ankles;
these garments usually stop at the waist; the presence of
braces does not cause these garments to lose the essential
character of trousers.
It is clear from the foregoing that the merchandise at issue
falls within the general definition of trousers.
In deciding if the subject garments are within the eo nomine
classification for trousers, Customs may consider the use of the
merchandise. United States v. Quon Quon Co., 46 CCPA 70, 73,
C.A.D. 699 (1959). Customs interprets the use of the
merchandise to include both the manner as well as the reasons for
which it is worn.
Customs acknowledges that in this case, the garments are
designed and manufactured for exercise use. The presence of the
lined gusset (to wick away moisture during exercise), 4-way
stretch fabric designed to recover from stretching during
athletic wear and the use of a high percentage of spandex in a
lightweight knit fabric support such a conclusion.
As stressed in HQ 089852 regarding similar merchandise:
We reject the contention that because the garments are
designed for use during exercise, dance or other athletic
activities that somehow makes them "more than" or "other
than" pants. Sweat pants and sweat shirts are garments worn
especially during exercise, but that does not make them
"more than" or "other than" pants or shirts. Garments such
as jogging shorts with liners for support, bike shorts with
padding in the crotch and liners for support, bike shorts
with padding in the crotch and sun dresses with bust support
sewn in, clearly possess features which eliminate the need
to wear certain traditional undergarments. These features
are not features which generally come to mind when one
considers the general class of "shorts" or "dresses".
However, the presence of such feature is insufficient to
remove these garments from the general class to which they
belong, it simply identifies the garments as particular
types of shorts or dresses. Heading 6104, HTSUSA, is not
limited by the language of the heading and therefore
includes all forms of women's knit pants or trousers. See,
Nootka Packing Co. et al. v. United States, 22 CCPA 464,
T.D. 47464 (1935).
Customs also recognizes the fact that the garments are
marketed through bodywear and exercise departments of major
retailers. In Mast Industries v. United States, 9 CIT 549, 552
(1985), aff'd, 786 F. 2d 1144 (1986), the court in determining
that the garments at issue therein, were nightwear, found that
the merchandise was designed, manufactured, marketed and used as
nightwear. In this case, Customs does not dispute that these
garments are designed, manufactured, marketed and used as
exercise wear. Customs does have problems accepting that the
garments are designed, manufactured, marketed and used as tights,
or that because the garments are used as exercise wear this makes
them classifiable as other than trousers. We believe the
garments have dual uses, i.e., in the gym or on the street.
In this case, the principal use of this merchandise, whether
it is for exercise or for fashion, does not affect its commercial
identity. To classify one garment as trousers because it is
principally worn for fashion and a virtually identical garment as
other than trousers because it is principally worn for exercise
would lead to inconsistent classification decisions on
essentially identical merchandise.
The submitted merchandise is marketed by utilizing hangtags
which state, inter alia, "BODYWEAR FOR BETTER MOVEMENT" and the
rear of the tag states, inter alia, "This tight has been
specially made with Spandex to produce a comfortable fit which
molds to and stretches with the body..." Customs believes that
such marketing material does not change the fact that, regardless
of use, the garments are pants and are considered such in the
marketplace. The fact that the rear of the tag refers to the
merchandise as a "tight" is no more convincing, as it is a
misnomer in classification for the reasons already discussed
above.
We have examined advertising material for garments much
like those at issue herein. For example, similar merchandise
marketed by Marx, Marika, Danskin and Jacques Moret. Customs has
found several advertisements for garments by these companies in
which the merchandise is identified as bike shorts, capri pants,
ankle-length pants, knee pants and pedal pushers. These goods
have been identified as such in advertisements for such retailers
as J.C. Penny, Oshman's, Spiegel and Sears. Advertisements for
local retailers have appeared in newspapers such as the L.A.
Times and the Washington Post identifying these garments in the
same manner.
Garments of the type at issue herein are often advertised
either before, after, or alongside advertisements for tights.
But, they are not advertised as tights or to be worn necessarily
in the same manner as tights. Additionally, these garments are
not displayed in the manner of tights, folded and packaged, but
in the manner of trousers, individually hung or hangers. These
garments are separately identified by the fashion industry and
this is evident by available advertising material and the manner
in which the garments are displayed in the stores.
As stated earlier, Customs does not regard these garments
in the hosiery category of tights. On the contrary, these
garments fall within an emerging class of merchandise known
commercially as "leggings" and worn, in Customs view, principally
as trousers (or shorts, depending on the length), by women and
girls. This decision is based upon, not only the manner in which
the garments are worn, but also the overall appearance of the
garments and the manner in which they are displayed and
advertised in department stores and specialty stores around the
country.
General Rule of Interpretation 3(a) states that the heading
which provides the most specific description is favored over
headings providing a more general description. The garments at
issue are properly classified in heading 6104, HTSUSA, as
trousers or shorts (depending on the length of the garment) and
not as tights of heading 6115, HTSUSA.
HOLDING:
Styles 8800R and 9000R are classifiable as women's cotton
knit pants in subheading 6104.62.2010, HTSUSA, textile category
348, dutiable at 16.7 percent ad valorem. Style 8700R is
classifiable as women's cotton knit shorts in subheading
6104.62.2030, HTSUSA, textile category 348, dutiable at 16.7
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 negotiations and
changes, to obtain the most current information available, we
suggest 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 the local Customs office.
Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation
(the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the
restraint (quota/visa) categories, your client should contact the
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
Source: rulings.cbp.gov — ruling 950798, retrieved 2026-10-12T05:26:00Z, republished verbatim. This digest is informational; only CBP issues binding rulings.