Hello Everyone! I wanted to write today about the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which goes into effect February 10th. When I first heard about this, I only saw it being discussed as it relates to hand-made toys and cloth diapers, so I did not look into it and frankly didn’t think it applied to me so I didn’t take the time to understand it. I figured if it did apply to me and my Story Time Felts business, we’d be able to get around it somehow since our product does not contain toxic materials, so I wasn’t worried.
This weekend I finally read the Act after one of my team members asked a question about it at our annual Virtual Rally. I was completely taken aback when I finally realized the ridiculousness of this law. Not only will it incur exorbitant costs to every small business, materials supplier, crafter and reseller of any product that comes into contact with kids under 12, but it will have a trickle down (and up) effect on the economies of our own communities, states and nation. This law affects toy stores, children’s clothing stores, art supplies, educational items, hand crafters, music producers, bookstores, libraries, children’s bedding and children’s dinnerware, and on and on and on. Anything that comes into contact with kids under 12 will be regulated.
This all started because of the outrage at lead contaminants in children’s toys, most of which came into media attention Christmas time 2007, and dealt with toys made overseas, primarily in China. If you recall, I had been listed on a Toys Made in America site and received some public media attention from Dr. Laura’s radio show because of it. That movement, to buy American, bound us together as a nation for the sake of our children and American-owned businesses. I was proud to be involved and appreciated, and proud of the American-made product I represent. But now, due to miscalculations and lack of forethought of our government, many businesses will be forced to close due to the outrageous requirements of this legislation.
Just to give you an idea of what is involved, every company that makes a toy that is used with children under the age of 12, whether they contain lead or phthalates, or not, will need to have each and every product, and each and every component of each and every product, and each and every batch of those products, tested by a 3rd party testing company, at an average cost of $300-$500 per item tested. This will result in hundreds of thousands of dollars for some companies that may not even be bringing in enough profit to cover that expense. When it come to small businesses or hand made items, it will clearly be cost-prohibitive to comply. Those that do will be passing the cost of such testing on to the consumer and prices for children’s products will skyrocket.
I have already seen “clearance sale” websites of some small businesses liquidating their inventory and shutting down. All inventory anyone has as of February 10th will be considered contraband and incur high fines if sold, exported or even donated. This means as of February 10th companies will need to actually destroy perfectly good inventory due to the retroactive nature of this law! They cannot send it overseas, they cannot donate it to schools or children’s centers, they cannot distribute it in any way.
This is clearly outrageous and something needs to be done. Some amendments are in the works, such as allowing natural fiber items to be exempt but many more amendments are still needed in order to make this law both beneficial to the safety of children AND to America as a struggling nation.
What can you do? Start by educating yourself. I sincerely regret not paying much attention to this when it first came out to me in November, but it is not too late to spread the word. Please pass this information on to everyone - not just those directly affected in the children’s market, but everyone! Then please sign the petitions online as well as send a message to your Senators and Congressmen and Congresswomen, and submit a comment to the CPSIA website. Below are links to help you accomplish this, as well as a sample letter to send to the CPSIA regarding inventory on shelves, that also gives you some language you can use when contacting others about the issue in general. Please pass it on! Thank you!
Until next time,
Karen
NEW: Congress staffers met with CPSC reps today and clarified some things 1-16-09
ALSO: Comittee on Energy and Commerce letter to CPSC urging swift action 1-16-09
–> NEW: Forbes.com article on why above letter will not prevent disaster 1-22-09
The actual law, HR 4040 from the 110th Congressional record (if link doesn’t work, go to thomas.loc.gov search for H.R. 4040 ENR in 110th Congress)
Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act PDF Download from CPSC
Information about the Act from the Consumer Product Safety Commission
Updates:
- CPSC Regarding Books PDF download Falvey to Adler (still must test for lead content)
- CPSC Regarding Resale/Thrift Stores PDF download Falvey to Adler (still liable if they accidentally sell items with lead content)
- CPSC Regarding Existing Inventory (prior inventory is banned hazardous substance)
- GCC Certificate Guidelines and FAQ from CPSC
- CPSC Regarding Retroactive Application (inventory) PDF Download Falvey to Nord (lead-containing items cannot be sold past Feb 10)
Learning Resources - Addressing the school supplies market and more.
Fashion Incubator’s report on why exempting Small Businesses would be counter-productive 1-20-09
Letter from Toy Industry Association to toy manufacturers about the TIA’s efforts
American Library Association reaction to possible children’s book banning
NEW: CPSIA, Continued - Post at Overlawyered 1-19-08
Podcast from The Takeaway - Interview with rep from CPSC and a Thrift Shop owner
NEW: Forbes Magazine Article 1-16-09
NEW: CNN Money Article 1-15-09
NEW: Wall Street Journal 1/14/09 Pelosi’s Toy Story
Prior Toy Recall History from CPSC
Christian Science Monitor Article
NEW: LA Times Article (clothing industry) 1-16-09
Vote on Change.org to Send a Message to President Obama
Reform CPSIA HR 4040 Class Action Lawsuit
XRF Testing Services for CPSIA Compliance from thesmartmama.com - $5/product or $100/hour (Good only through August ‘09)
Some examples of her results/general findings
CPSIA Central (Ning Forum Group)
Startup Nation: Will CPSIA Affect You?
ABC Affiliate in Houston interviews hand-made clothing store owner. Visit her website here.
Example of a Vendor Out of Business: Homeschool Supplies
NEW: Example of Vendor Affected: Craftsbury Kids News Interview 1-20-09
CPSIA and Clothing Retailers/Department Stores, from Fashion Incubator
Sample letter to send government officials (from Handmade Toy Alliance)
NEW: Tips on contacting your elected officials by phone, mail, email
NEW: Baltimore NBC Affiliate Video Interview with CPSC Spokesperson Vallese 1-14-09 (mostly about thrift shops. She appears to be confused and is misleading, suggests store owners “look at it” to tell if something has lead etc. and implies there will be little enforcement except most dangerous products)
NEW: Boulder, CO NBC Affiliate video on CPSIA featuring auntieemdiapers.com cloth diaper company 1-14-09
Sample Letter to send Consumer Product Safety Commission (from Learning Resources):
Ms. Cheryl A. Falvey
General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
4330 East-West Highway
Bethesda, Maryland 20814
Re: Opposition to September 12, 2008 Opinion Regarding Retroactive Effect of CPSIA
Dear Ms. Falvey,
I am writing to express my strong objections to the Advisory Opinion of the Office of the General Counsel of the CPSC dated September 12, 2008 (“Falvey Opinion”) in which you hold that the new safety standards of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (“CPSIA”) apply retroactively to existing inventory. We do not believe the law calls for retroactive application of the new safety standards and demand your immediate revocation of the Falvey Opinion.
Our company is in the business of reselling children’s products to consumers and to schools. We have an exemplary safety record, and only do business with suppliers who share our concern for the safety of children. Unfortunately these days, we not only have to endure the uncertainty of declining revenues and profits from a weakening economy but also the constant attack of activists seeking to give our industry a bad name. The Falvey Opinion now extends the “safety taint” to our existing inventory, which threatens to create a financial disaster for our business and for our employees, suppliers and customers. While we know our existing inventory is safe and appropriate to sell, we do not know if it will be financeable after February 10, the effective date of the Falvey Opinion. We acquired or produced this inventory in full compliance with law. The retroactive effect of the CPSIA was never debated publicly nor disclosed to the nation’s business community for debate. The injustice of the Falvey Opinion raises significant issues of due process and the true intent of the CPSIA.
The CPSIA presents very troubling issues for all businesses in our industry. While well-intentioned, the CPSIA went too far in correcting gaps in safety, turning a reasonable concern over safety procedures into a fear of everything. The wide array of children’s products regulated by the CPSIA means that the vast sums expended to test for total lead and phthalates threatens to wipe out many of our industry’s leading companies. The indiscriminate requirement to provide lot traceability on all children’s products is an unjustifiable waste of our nation’s limited supply of business capital. Even the new total lead standards (applicable to children up to 12 years of age) are overreaching, going well beyond the necessary – protecting children who mouth children’s products. No child over three years of age mouths a lamp or tennis ball or the soles of their shoes. Protecting the public against imaginary harms wastes big bucks – money that just isn’t there, even in good times. We are in favor of better safety standards but do not feel they should be designed to threaten the viability of our industry. These terrible burdens need to be relaxed to make it possible to conduct a safe, appropriate and healthy business supplying children’s products.
It could not have been Congress’ intent to destroy all businesses associated with children’s products. In an already struggling economy, none of us can bear the cost and consequences of the forced sale or write-off of existing inventory. Businesses need time to adjust to the new standards and cannot absorb a hit to the balance sheet from a sudden loss of inventory. I urge you to think in practical terms and to revoke the Falvey Opinion.
Thank you for considering my views on this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
—
Thank you for reading! Now please take action. If you have an additional link or information to share, please leave a comment, I would love to have as many resources as possible!
Until next time...
Thanks for posting about CPSIA and helping raise awareness! May I invite your readers to participate in the mail-in CPSIA protest?
http://organicbabyfarm.blogspot.com/2009/01/join-cpsia-mail-in-protest.html
Government has always allowed time to make these changes - auto manufacturers, factories. Why would we be hit so instantly?
Good question. Some say it was a last ditch bill before the election, but who knows. The problem is most small businesses were not (and some are still not) aware of it and now for most it will be nearly impossibly to comply by the deadline if something doesn’t change. It’s maddening that even products which are completely non-toxic and would never “become” toxic, are being punished as well. And in the mean time, the Chinese toys who have always had testing (but largely unenforced) will get off scott free until that’s all we are left with.
I wonder if this can be avoided with some products simply by labeling the item 13 and older? I know this does not help with products geared toward 12 and under. I mean who’s to decide if something is for a 12 year old vs. a 13 year old?
I have heard of some manufacturers trying to get around this by labeling obviously kids or baby products as not suitable for under 12 but that isn’t ethical. If someone’s product is truly intended for teen/adult use only but there could be some confusion I would probably label it as such, but I don’t know if that would clear them unless the product could in no way be proven to be generally a children’s product.
People say this law won’t be enforced, even the CPSC said there are only 100 investigators in the entire USA, implying it won’t be enforced, but most people want to comply with laws and don’t want to risk the up to $100,000 fines. Sadly some are clearing out inventory or shutting down instead of taking the risk.
For me I am having initial component testing done and hoping something moves on this before the deadline. So far the felt boards and other felt sets have cleared, we are just waiting on results from storage bags/totes. If we have to test each component and finished product each batch that is made, that is going to be a big problem tho since we produce things in small or individual batches. Really hoping they change it to require component testing at the raw materials manufacturer level only - then as long as we create products with certified materials we’d be OK. That is the only thing that makes sense to me!
Karen
All good sdes, materials on topics selected. Well done.
Could you recommend any specific resources, books, or other blogs on this topic?
Share voi cac mem list email cuc dinh - 20 trieu dia chi, free hoan toan. Gio day, ban ko can phai mua list email dat do nua.
Cac email trong list deu da duoc kiem tra, phan nhom, va deu dam bao chat luong tot. List moi duoc cap nhat hang ngay.
Day la cong cu rat hieu qua de ban quang ba thuong hieu cho doanh nghiep toi hang trieu khach hang moi.
Download tai: http://lienkettoancau.com/email
Rat la hay!
Leadco Lawyers Vietnam
http://leadcolawyers.com
Leadco Vietnam Legal Counsellors (Leadco) is a Hanoi-based law firm established in 1992. It was one of the first domestic law firms to be founded after the implementation of the Doi Moi (renovation) economic reform policies of 1986. Today, Leadco is known as a full-service business law firm providing a wide variety of legal services for both individuals and organizations in Vietnam and abroad.
In Vietnam, Leadco ranks among the top domestic law firms with a long standing tradition and commitment to excellence. Leadco is the first choice for many leading companies, foreign law firms and organizations doing business in Vietnam.
Unlike more conventional law firms, we operate as a business, which allows us the flexibility to adapt to the realities of our clients. The key to our success is the ability to think, and act like our clients and be true partner to them. Our client approach is one of our unique selling features.
The firm is committed to providing effective and efficient legal services with the highest standards of professionalism and integrity for our clients. Leadco is one of the most internationally experienced domestic law firms with a strong reputation in the private and public sector.
The Leadco client list includes organizations involved in every major industrial sector: Banking, Insurance, Mining and Materials, Oil & Gas, Automotive, Electronics, Apparel and Textiles, Food and Beverage, Construction, Real Estate, Infrastructure, Information Technology, Telecommunications, Media, Transportation, Logistics, Hospitality and Entertainment.
Contact: Pacific Place, Suite 404, 83B Ly Thuong Kiet Street, Hoan Kiem District, Hanoi, Vietnam
T: +844.3942.5633, F: +844.3942.5632, E: info@leadcolawyers.com