U.S. Polo Assn. is on most Indian high streets, and the name belongs to the governing body of a sport almost nobody here plays. Arvind Fashions sells it under licence, and says so in a filing.
The more useful thing is the price. We read 224 listings across three shops on one day in September, and this brand behaved quite differently from the one its own parent sells beside it.
U.S. Polo Assn. is a licensed brand here. Arvind Fashions Limited’s 2020 rights-issue Letter of Offer names it, with Arrow and Tommy Hilfiger, as licensed, and Flying Machine as its own — and no Arvind filing names the licensor. On 6 September 2026, 195 of 224 listings sold below MRP, 27.8% below in aggregate, and the brand’s own shop was the dearest of the three channels.
Snapshot
- Whose brand it is
- The official brand of the United States Polo Association, the non-profit governing body for polo in the United States, founded 1890
- Sold in India by
- Arvind Fashions Limited, CIN L52399GJ2016PLC085595, through Arvind Lifestyle Brands Limited
- Owned or licensed
- Licensed, stated brand by brand in Arvind’s 2020 Letter of Offer
- Licensor named in a filing
- None
- India launch
- 2009, per Arvind’s own brand page
- Stores
- More than 400 brand stores, over 2,000 shop-in-shops, per joint announcements of August 2023 and March 2024
- Prices
- MRPs ₹349 to ₹4,999; core shirts charged ₹1,100 to ₹2,000
- Checked
- 6 September 2026
Who owns U.S. Polo Assn.
Arvind Fashions Limited’s Letter of Offer for its 2020 rights issue, filed with the market regulator, separates its brands in one sentence.
“U.S. Polo Assn.”, “Arrow” and “Tommy Hilfiger” are licensed brands operating under licensing agreements, while Flying Machine is our owned/self-created brand.
That settles the category and not the counterparty. No Arvind filing we read names who licenses the brand to it — not the Letter of Offer, not the Information Memorandum filed on the demerger, not the Integrated Annual Report for 2025-26, which names no licensor for any brand in its portfolio table.
Three things sit around that gap and are worth keeping apart. U.S. Polo Assn. is the official brand of the United States Polo Association, founded 1890. A joint announcement on USPA Global Licensing’s newsroom of 24 August 2023, with Arvind Fashions’ managing director and chief executive quoted in it, describes USPA Global Licensing as “the company that manages and oversees the U.S. Polo Assn. brand”. And uspoloassn.in’s own About Us page says Arvind Fashions “licenses several brands like U.S. Polo Assn., Sephora, Aéropostale, The Children’s Place, Ed Hardy among others”. None of the three is a filing naming a licensor, and this page does not turn them into one.
The shape of the deal is not public either. The Letter of Offer says the international brands “are not owned and are sold pursuant to long term agreements with brand owners”, carrying a minimum sales commitment, a minimum royalty or a minimum advertising spend, terminable on a failure to meet the sales minimum. No term, expiry, exclusivity or royalty rate is given, for this brand or any other.
Several names on an Indian menswear floor sound foreign and reached the shop by different routes, indistinguishable from the shopfront. This is the rented one, stated in a filing. Louis Philippe is a British-created mark an Indian company bought outright in 2000; Flying Machine, from this same parent, is the brand that same sentence calls owned.
The parent publishes one brand-level figure: a “₹2500+ crores” milestone in net sales value for U.S. Polo Assn., in its Integrated Annual Report for 2025-26. Net sales value is a different measure from the ₹5,266 crore of group revenue reported that year, and the two do not divide into one another.
What U.S. Polo Assn. costs in India
We read 224 listings on 6 September 2026 in one session, so the three channels compare on the same day: 126 on Tata CLiQ, 62 on Myntra, 36 on the brand’s own shop. Across all of them ₹4,65,027 of MRP was charged out at ₹3,35,662 — 27.8% below MRP, with 195 listings below MRP and 29 at it.
| Channel | Listings read | Below MRP, in aggregate | At full MRP |
|---|---|---|---|
| Myntra | 62 | 36.7% | 0 |
| Tata CLiQ | 126 | 28.8% | 12 |
| uspoloassn.in, the brand’s own shop | 36 | 16.9% | 17 |
| All three | 224 | 27.8% | 29 |
The brand’s own shop is the dearest place to buy it, by a distance. Sixteen of its twenty shirt listings sat at full MRP, ₹2,499 to ₹3,999, while its jeans on the same site ran 30% to 39% below. Myntra was cheapest, its fourteen shirt listings a median 47% below MRP. The two shelves are not like for like — Myntra’s leans to loungewear and innerwear — but the shirts compare directly, and they are not close.
- MRP on the tag
- ₹2,199
- Charged on Myntra
- ₹1,165
- Gap
- 47% below MRP
- Checked on
- 6 September 2026
What holds its price is newness. On Tata CLiQ the full-MRP listings cluster in the newest polyester polo and sports range and the newest Denim Co. trousers, ₹1,699 to ₹3,299, where the same categories a couple of seasons back sat 45% to 60% below MRP. The brand’s own shop also ran a banner for an extra 10% off styles up to 40% off, so these figures come before that.
Now the part worth sitting with. Arrow comes from the same parent, is licensed by the same sentence in the same filing, and was read the same day: 86 of its 87 listings discounted, 43.1% below MRP in aggregate, its own shop the cheapest of its three channels. U.S. Polo Assn. ran 27.8% below with its own shop dearest. Two brands, one owner, one day, fifteen percentage points apart — the markdown is set brand by brand, not by the company or the category.
It is not a rule of Indian retail either. On the same day Westside sold at MRP: ten marketplace listings at no discount, eleven of its own pages with selling price equal to MRP, 267 catalogue records with nothing struck through. The markdown is a decision somebody makes, and the MRP on a U.S. Polo Assn. tag is a reference number rather than a price many people pay.
What the label says
Under the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 — notified as G.S.R. 202(E) on 7 March 2011 — a pre-packed garment declares the maximum retail price inclusive of all taxes, a manufacturer, packer or importer with an address, and for an imported package the country of origin. That block names who is legally answerable for the goods, not who sewed the garment.
We read 203 of these declarations on 6 September 2026. On origin, 195 said India, seven said Bangladesh and one field was empty — so for most of what this brand sells here there is no import duty in the price at all. The Bangladesh styles are kidswear, girls’ denim and three adult shirts and tees, each naming Arvind Lifestyle Brands Limited as importer of record.
The declared makers are many and mostly not Arvind: a group entity on 50 of the 203, a third-party firm on 151, at least 44 distinct outside firms in all. The variation sits inside each shop rather than between them — Tata CLiQ alone names 26 third-party manufacturers, Myntra 18. Woven shirts come from the Bengaluru belt, knitwear from Tiruppur and Erode.
Two facts belong side by side. Arvind Limited is a separate listed company and holds no stake in Arvind Fashions Limited. Arvind Limited is the declared manufacturer on two U.S. Polo Assn. listings — a Myntra lounge-pants style and a pair of jeans on the brand’s own site.
One thing you can check yourself: the brand’s own shop names “Marketed by: Arvind Lifestyle Brands Ltd” on all fifteen declarations we read there, which no marketplace does.
Composition is published on 84 of the 96 shirt and T-shirt listings we checked on Tata CLiQ, the twelve blanks all kidswear. Fabric weight is published nowhere — no GSM figure on any of the 224 listings — so two shirts cannot be compared on cloth weight before buying.
Reputation and the record
The advertising council’s published outcomes carry nothing against U.S. Polo Assn., searched under that name and under “U.S. Polo”, “Polo Assn” and “USPA”, and nothing against Arvind Fashions or Arvind Lifestyle. Across the apparel businesses of four listed Indian groups only two matters appear at all, both Not Upheld. The council is a self-regulatory industry body rather than a statutory regulator, and its file is built around measurable claims, which apparel advertising makes very few of. The empty file describes the category more than it praises any label in it.
One matter reached India directly and was settled. Ralph Lauren Corporation brought proceedings against Arvind Lifestyle Brands and the United States Polo Association in a United States District Court in 2013, over what was reported as disclaimers to be printed on U.S. Polo Assn. products sold in India. A settlement was announced on 30 and 31 March 2015 at US$3.2 million payable by Arvind Lifestyle Brands, and Arvind told the exchanges it had “agreed to enter into an amicable settlement without admission of liability of any party”. No court decided the point, and by the parties’ own words nobody admitted anything. The figure and the quotation come from press reports of that exchange filing, which we have not read.
The mark dispute between these two names has otherwise been fought in American courts, where the outcomes divide by market rather than settling anything overall.
- 2006, jury, S.D.N.Y.Three variations held not to infringe in apparel, leather goods and watches
- 2008, Second CircuitAffirmed; the analysis is market-specific, not uniform
- 2011, S.D.N.Y.Dismissal and a permanent injunction on men’s fragrance
- 11 February 2013, Second CircuitAffirmed the dismissal and the injunction
The same courts allowed the mark on shirts and barred it on scent: authorisation in one industry did not carry into another. None of it touches an Indian shirt, and no Indian judgment between these two parties turned up in the court records we searched.
Who U.S. Polo Assn. is actually for
Someone who wants a polo or a shirt at ₹1,000 to ₹2,000, mostly India-declared, composition printed, the answerable Indian company named on the pack, and one of 400-plus stores nearby to try the fit in. It works less well if you want the tag to mean something: the MRP is a reference number across most of the range, and the name is rented on terms nobody outside the deal has seen.
Buying it in India
Turn the pack over
MRP inclusive of taxes, country of origin, and a manufacturer, packer or importer with a full address. That line usually names an Indian contract maker rather than Arvind.
Do not buy shirts on the brand’s own site by reflex
On 6 September 2026, 16 of its 20 shirt listings there were at full MRP while Myntra’s shirts ran a median 47% below MRP.
Expect the new range at full price
The newest polyester polos, sports tees and Denim Co. trousers sat at MRP. Equivalents from a couple of seasons back sat 45% to 60% below it.
Common questions
Is U.S. Polo Assn. an American brand or an Indian one?
The name belongs to the United States Polo Association, the non-profit governing body for polo in the United States, founded 1890. In India it is sold under licence by Arvind Fashions Limited, a listed Indian company, and 195 of the 203 declarations we read say the goods are made in India.
Who does Arvind licence the brand from?
No Arvind filing we read names a licensor, so this page names none. Separately on the record, a joint announcement of 24 August 2023 describes USPA Global Licensing as the company that manages and oversees the brand worldwide.
Is it related to Ralph Lauren’s Polo?
They are different brands and have litigated in American courts, where a jury and the appeal court allowed the double-horsemen mark on apparel, leather goods and watches and the same courts barred it on men’s fragrance. An India-facing case brought in 2013 was settled and announced on 30 and 31 March 2015 at US$3.2 million, expressly without admission of liability by any party.
Why is it nearly always discounted?
On 6 September 2026, 195 of 224 listings were below MRP, 27.8% below in aggregate, with no sale event running. It is a choice rather than a rule: Westside sold at MRP on every listing we checked the same day, and Arrow, from the same parent, ran 43.1% below MRP. No listing publishes a GSM figure either.
How we research and verify brand audits: our methodology.
References
- Arvind Fashions Limited, Letter of Offer, 2020 — the licensed-brand sentence and the agreement terms
- Arvind Fashions Limited, Information Memorandum, NSE — the licence to operate brands in India
- Arvind Fashions Limited, Integrated Annual Report 2025-26 — net sales value milestone, group revenue, no licensor named
- USPA Global Licensing and Arvind, joint announcement, 24 August 2023 — the description of USPA Global Licensing, store counts, 1890
- USPA Global Licensing and Arvind, joint announcement, 14 March 2024 — store counts
- Arvind Fashions, U.S. Polo Assn. brand page — the 2009 India launch
- U.S. Polo Assn. India, About Us — the “licenses several brands” wording
- Business Today, 30 March 2015 — the settlement figure and the no-admission wording
- FashionUnited India, 31 March 2015 — the 2013 suit and the Indian disclaimers
- United States Polo Ass’n v. PRL USA Holdings, Inc. — the 2006 jury verdict and the 2008 affirmance
- Finnegan, Incontestable, June 2013 — the 2011 fragrance injunction and the 2013 affirmance
- Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 — the declaration requirements
- Tata CLiQ, 126 listings, 6 September 2026 — prices and declarations
- Myntra, 62 listings, 6 September 2026 — prices and declarations
- U.S. Polo Assn. India online shop, 36 listings, 6 September 2026 — prices and declarations
On what a buyer can act on, this is a sound Indian shirt. The goods are India-declared on 195 of 203 listings, composition is printed on most adult styles, the answerable Indian company is named on the pack, and ₹1,100 to ₹2,000 buys decent cotton from a shop you can walk into.
Two things deserve scepticism. The tag: 195 of 224 listings sat below MRP with no sale on, and the brand’s own shop — where a shopper would expect the best price — was the dearest of the three. And the name: it is rented, on a licence whose term, expiry and exclusivity nobody outside the deal has seen, and whose licensor no Arvind filing names.
Buy it on Myntra when the shirt is 47% off, buy it in the store when you need the fit, and read the MRP and the American name as decoration rather than information.
