Judgment summary
Mr Philip Baker appealed against an assessment by the Treasury of the Isle of Man to customs duty at 12% and import VAT at 20% on a signed Tottenham Hotspur football shirt imported from the United States. The Treasury had classified the shirt as a men's cotton shirt under code 6205 3000 00 and valued it by reference to the price Mr Baker paid for it (1).
Mr Baker argued that the shirt should instead be classified as a collection or collector's piece of historical interest under commodity code 9705, attracting a reduced effective rate of import VAT, or alternatively that it should be valued as an ordinary replica shirt rather than at the price he paid (2).
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the shirt was not an item of historical interest and that the correct customs value was the price Mr Baker paid for it (3).
Background
Mr Baker bought a signed Tottenham Hotspur football shirt from a third party based in the United States and imported it into the Isle of Man (6).
The shirt was a 2024/2025 season replica shirt, signed by the whole squad and manager following Tottenham Hotspur's 2025 UEFA cup win. Its value arose significantly from the signatures, and it was acquired as memorabilia rather than for ordinary use as clothing (7).
The shirt was not framed at the time of import, although Mr Baker intended to frame and display it (8). There was no dispute between the parties as to the underlying facts (5).
Core dispute
The first issue was whether the signed shirt should be classified under commodity code 9705, covering collections and collector's pieces of historical interest among other categories, which would attract the reduced effective import VAT rate under section 21(4) and (5) Value Added Tax Act 1996, rather than being classified as a men's cotton shirt under code 6205 3000 00 (1, 2, 9, 10).
The second issue, arising if the shirt was classified as clothing, was whether it should be valued for customs duty and import VAT purposes by reference to the price Mr Baker actually paid for it, as the Treasury contended under the Customs (Import Duty) Regulations 2019, or instead valued as an ordinary unsigned replica shirt, as Mr Baker contended (2, 27).
Court findings
The Tribunal applied the principles in Erika Daiber (case 200/84) and JD Classics Holdings Ltd v HMRC ([2010] UKFTT 259), noting that the test for a collector's piece of historical interest is objective and requires more than rarity, value or collectability; the item must mark or illustrate a significant step in human achievement (11 to 14, 20 to 21).
The Tribunal accepted that the shirt had characteristics of a collector's piece, being acquired as memorabilia, the subject of a specialist transaction, and more valuable than an ordinary shirt because of the signatures (15, 16). It also accepted that sporting achievement is capable in principle of amounting to human achievement within the Erika Daiber test (19).
However, the Tribunal found that the shirt's significance derived principally from its association with a sporting success and its resulting appeal to supporters and collectors, and that this did not establish the degree of historical significance required by heading 9705 (23, 24). It concluded that the shirt was not a collector's piece of historical interest and did not fall within section 21(5) Value Added Tax Act 1996 or customs classification 9705 (26).
On valuation, the Tribunal held that the transaction value should be used under the Customs (Import Duty) Regulations 2019 (27, 28). It reasoned that the signatures formed part of the imported article and were the reason the shirt commanded a higher market price, so the relevant question was the value of the signed shirt actually imported, not an unsigned equivalent (29 to 31). The Tribunal drew an analogy with a branded designer handbag, where the branding contributes to market value, to support this conclusion (32).
Outcome
The appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal held that the signed shirt was not an item of historical interest within customs classification 9705 or section 21(5) Value Added Tax Act 1996, and that the correct customs value was the price Mr Baker paid for the shirt, in accordance with the Treasury's valuation methodology (3, 26, 33).
Major issues / areas of contention
- Whether a signed Tottenham Hotspur football shirt qualifies as a collection or collector's piece of historical interest under customs classification 9705 and section 21(5) Value Added Tax Act 1996.
- Whether sporting achievement is capable of constituting historical significance for the purposes of the Erika Daiber test.
- Whether, if classified as clothing rather than a collector's piece, the shirt should be valued by reference to the transaction value paid by the importer or as an ordinary unsigned replica shirt under the Customs (Import Duty) Regulations 2019.