COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

12 Months Ended

Jan. 31, 2022

Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

NOTE 10 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

License Agreements

The Company has entered into license agreements that provide for royalty payments based on net sales of licensed products. The Company incurred royalty expense (included in cost of goods sold) of $145.1 million, $116.8 million and $178.8 million for the years ended January 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Contractual advertising expense, which is included in selling, general and administrative expenses and is normally based on a percentage of net sales associated with certain license agreements, was $41.2 million, $29.5 million and $48.3 million for the years ended January 31, 2022,

2021 and 2020, respectively. Based on minimum net sales requirements, future minimum royalty and advertising payments required under these agreements are:

Year Ending January 31,	Amount
	(In thousands)
2023		118,000
2024		91,167
2025		33,345
2026		26,888
2027		—
Thereafter		—
	$	269,400

Legal Proceedings

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is subject to periodic claims, investigations and lawsuits. Although the Company cannot predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of claims, investigations and lawsuits, asserted against the Company, it does not believe that any currently pending legal proceeding or proceedings to which it is a party could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operations.

Canadian Customs Duty Examination

In October 2017, the Canada Border Service Agency (“CBSA”) issued a final audit report to G-III Apparel Canada ULC (“G-III Canada”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. The report challenged the valuation used by G-III Canada for certain goods imported into Canada. The period covered by the examination is February 1, 2014 through October 27, 2017, the date of the final report. The CBSA has requested G-III Canada to reassess its customs entries for that period using the price paid or payable by the Canadian retail customers for certain imported goods rather than the price paid by G-III Canada to the vendor. The CBSA has also requested that G-III Canada change the valuation method used to pay duties with respect to goods imported in the future.

In March 2018, G-III Canada provided a bond to guarantee payment to the CBSA for additional duties payable as a result of the reassessment required by the final audit report. The Company secured a bond in the amount of CAD$26.9 million ($20.9 million) representing customs duty and interest through December 31, 2017 that is claimed to be owed to the CBSA. In March 2018, the Company amended the duties filed for the month of January 2018 under the new valuation method. This amount was paid to the CBSA. Beginning February 1, 2018, the Company began paying duties based on the new valuation method. There were no amounts paid and deferred during the year ended January 31, 2022 related to the higher dutiable values, however, the Company paid interest in the amount of CAD$1.0 million ($0.8 million) on the additional duties for the period January 15, 2018 through November 25, 2020, the date of the CBSA’s final decision as discussed below. Cumulative amounts paid and deferred through January 31, 2022, related to the higher dutiable values, were CAD$14.7 million ($11.6 million).

Effective June 1, 2019, G-III commenced paying based on the dutiable value of G-III Canada’s imports based on the pre-audit levels. G-III continued to defer the additional duty paid through the month of May 2019 pending the final outcome of the appeal.

The CBSA has issued its final decision denying the appeal filed by G-III Canada with the President’s Office of the CBSA. G-III Canada has filed a Notice of Appeal with the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) further appealing the CBSA decision. A hearing on the appeal was held on December 7, 2021.

G-III Canada, based on the advice of counsel, believes it has positions that support its valuations for duty as declared and therefore its ability to receive a refund of amounts claimed to be owed to the CBSA on appeal and intends to vigorously contest the findings of the CBSA.