Yup, i'm "praticing" out the new pricing for my store for post Feb. 10th. Join in the fun-you'll be surprised how many convos you'll get from people who have yet to hear about this law!
Yes, you're right, that is primarily for thrift stores. But the same would apply to store owners in that they are not the ones required to test the items. That falls on whomever they are getting the goods from, I would think. Only if the source didn't provide the documentation, then the store owner would probably have to do it or not be able to sell the item. But isn't it innaccurate to say that store owners are required to do the testing, which implies in all cases?
Oh my god! prices are going to rocket on all childrens items. Doe sthat include sellers that sell into the country but their businesses are based outside the US? Whilst in theory i agree with keeping children safe from harmful chemicals, the cost of bringing up children is expensive enough as it is.
artistscs28 says: Ozarknana, I just noticed your listing says "Feb 10, 2008", instead of "2009". Just a reminder for everyone doing this to check and make sure the YEAR is correct so buyers understand this is an URGENT, NOW kind of issue. =) _________________________________________________________
....thanks for catching that, I'll be writing 2008 well into the New Year, it always seems to take me 6 months to get it right!
** Lillies2009, yes, even those outside the U.S. would have to comply to sell here in the U.S., this law is an "equal opportunity" law!
No the store owners do not have to test , but they have the liability to insure that whatever they sell does meet the requirements, so they would ask for a general certificate from their suppliers of children's products.
Yes, that was my mistake, faye. But I think the point still stands that store owners are not the ones responsible for the testing. That is up to the source from which they get their merchandise, in this case you the manufacturer. So for a person who is both the manufacturer and the store owner, I think it may be confusing. They are not responsible for the testing as the store owner (which the listings are saying) but as the manufacturer. Does that make sense?
But when you are referring to used clothing,toys then the manufacter date is unknown, so they have allowed the thrift stores at this time to use their best judgement. In time, as clothing/toys circulate thru the system, then in theory, then everything should be after the dates of the law, and in theory already tested and compliant. But then again, they have incremental levels of lead ppm, so it could take a long time.
lillies2009 says: Oh my god! prices are going to rocket on all childrens items. Doe sthat include sellers that sell into the country but their businesses are based outside the US? Whilst in theory i agree with keeping children safe from harmful chemicals, the cost of bringing up children is expensive enough as it is. ----
What I think is most ironic is that this is really targeted at mass produced labels and brands. But they are the ones that will ultimately benefit from it, since they can afford the testing. Because they mass produce they only have to test one item out of the thousands that are produced, so that cost will be easily absorbed. Meanwhile they will be eliminating a lot of competition who do not have large runs or produce one of a kind items such as handmakers here.
And guess which country is going to provide some of the "third party testing" that is required? You bettcha, China!! The lab will need to be "certified" but what does that really mean.....
hellome says: Yes, that was my mistake, faye. But I think the point still stands that store owners are not the ones responsible for the testing. That is up to the source from which they get their merchandise, in this case you the manufacturer. So for a person who is both the manufacturer and the store owner, I think it may be confusing. They are not responsible for the testing as the store owner (which the listings are saying) but as the manufacturer. Does that make sense?
******** hellome, are you referring to an etsy store? That is not a real store, especially since under etsy TOS we can't sell someone else's items that they made, so in that sense we are not store owners, we are only the manufacturers.
I'm not referring to used store owners specifically, faye. I mean all store owners. They are not the ones responsible for the testing, unless they buy untested goods. Which they are probably not going to be willing to do, for obvious reasons. The manufacturer, on the other hand, is not required to do the testing either. But for obvious reasons will probably have to if they want to sell anything. Or the importer who wants to bring items into the country.
If you use any type of plastic coated material in you clothing, it has to be tested for phthalates, which is used to make plastics more pliable. Right?
Examples could be the non-skid fabrics or paints used on the bottoms of slippers, footy pajamas, oilcloth used for bibs, any kind of waterproofed fabrics used for books or toys, etc.
baparsell says: If you use any type of plastic coated material in you clothing, it has to be tested for phthalates, which is used to make plastics more pliable. Right?
Examples could be the non-skid fabrics or paints used on the bottoms of slippers, footy pajamas, oilcloth used for bibs, any kind of waterproofed fabrics used for books or toys, etc.
The manufacturer, on the other hand, is not required to do the testing either.
***** The manufacturer is the one to test before they can sell it to anyone. So if you are selling wholesale to a store then you have to test, and the store can ask you for your certificate. If the store does not ask and sell uncompliant products then they and the manufacturer are libel, under the law. So while as a store owner one does not have to test, they do need to sell only tested products.
Exactly. But I thought I read that the manufacturer is not required to test per se. I think this is because the law was originally for imported items. So it was up to whoever was going to be importing the item i.e. the parent company, the wholesaler, etc. Unfortunately when this is applied to US makers, there is usually no parent company or importer involved. And since the stores aren't going to or can't accept untested merchandise, it falls to the US manufacturer to do it.
FayeMaloneDesigns says: Clothing does not have to be tested for phathlates, only for lead. Only toys, and items for children 3 and under that are intended for sleep, feeding, teething, etc.
Correct! Only TOYS & CARE ITEMS for kids under 3 are to be tested for phthalates, so, you can remove the $350 per componant fee!
In other words, say I am a US toy label/company but I have my toys manufactured in China. I don't own the factory I just have them make the items. The US can't tell the factory they have to do the testing, since we can't regulate what other countries do. But they can tell me, the company who is importing or distributing them.
Hellome! Right, the Chinese manufacturer is off the hook, (after all we are so in debt to China, if we made them libel for testing they could call in their notes) so we let them send us deadly product, AND we can't send it back to them UNLESS they agree to take it back. And in the case of supplies like fabric, thread and such, they don't have to test, since they are not specifically marketing it to 12 and under...
