CIT Finds Arm-Sleeves Classifiable in Duty-Free Provision for Goods Benefiting Handicapped
Compression arm-sleeves and gauntlets imported by Sigvaris qualify for special duty-free tariff provisions for articles designed for use by the handicapped, but the company’s imported compression hosiery does not, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued May 17 (here). The arm-sleeves and gauntlets are meant for use by people with upper-limb lymphedema, which is a physical handicap because it limits a person’s ability to care for themselves or perform manual tasks. The hosiery, on the other hand, is meant for people suffering from the early stages of chronic venous disease, which may cause discomfort but does not limit the person’s life activities, CIT said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
CBP had originally classified the arm-sleeves in subheading 6307.90.38 as “other made up articles,” dutiable at 7%, and the gauntlets in subheading 6116.93.88 as gloves, dutiable at 18.6%. The agency told CIT that the hosiery should be classified in subheading 6115.10.40 as “other graduated compression hosiery: of synthetic fibers,” dutiable at 14.6%. Sigvaris said all of the merchandise should instead be classified in the duty-free subheading 9817.00.96, which covers “articles specially designed or adapted for the use or benefit of the blind or other physically or mentally handicapped persons.”
According to CIT, the “central issue” in the case was whether the “compression products meet the requirements for duty free treatment” under an international agreement, the Nairobi Protocol, as implemented in the U.S. by subheading 9817.00.96,” CIT said. A subchapter note to chapter 98 says that the term “‘physically or mentally handicapped persons’ includes any person suffering from a permanent or chronic physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities, such as caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, or working.”
For classification in the duty free subheading, products “must be made with the specific purpose and intent to be used by or benefit handicapped persons rather than the general public,” CIT said. “The impairment must be permanent as opposed to transient, and chronic as opposed to acute. The article cannot be designed to impart a cosmetic benefit to those who are not substantially disabled. The subheading does not cover therapeutic articles, which have been defined as ‘having healing or curative powers.’ Nor does the provision cover diagnostic articles, which have been defined as articles that ‘assist a health professional to detect the signs and symptoms of a condition or disease,'” the court said.
Sigvaris’ compression hosiery does not qualify, CIT said. The early stages of chronic venous disease cause varicose veins, and sometimes tired, achy legs with some discomfort, but it does not prevent people from walking, standing or working, it said. The hosiery is sold over the counter, with no prescription required, and is not sold under Sigvaris’ higher-compression “Medical” line. Experts cited by Sigvaris said the hosiery compresses only slightly more than regular socks, and targets consumers “‘who have a profession or live a lifestyle that results in tired, achy, heavy feeling in their legs’ and ‘people who are sitting for prolonged periods of time,’ such as people who take long flights in an airplane or drive long distances.’”
But CIT overruled CBP’s classification of the arm-sleeves and gauntlets, finding them classifiable in the duty free provision as products specifically designed to benefit handicapped people. The arm-sleeves and gauntlets are meant to treat upper-limb lymphedema, which can result from lymph node removal required by mastectomies for treatment of breast cancer. The symptom, a pooling of fluid in the person’s arm, “may render the affected arm unusable because of significant swelling and substantially limits a person’s ability to care for one’s self,” CIT said. “The court does not give credible weight to the Government’s assertion that a person with one arm is able to perform life’s major activities without substantial limitation.” Nor are arm-sleeves and gauntlets commonly used by regular consumers unaffected by the handicap, it said.
(Sigvaris v. U.S., Slip Op. 17-60, CIT # 11-00532, dated 05/17/17, Judge Choe-Groves)
(Attorneys: John Peterson for plaintiff Sigvaris, Inc.; Alexander Vanderweide for defendant U.S. government)