• January Turning Challenge: Thin-Stemmed Something! (click here for details)
  • Conversations are now Direct Messages (click here for details)
  • Congratulations to Gabriel Hoff for "Spalted Beech Round Bottom Box" being selected as Turning of the Week for January 6, 2024 (click here for details)
  • Welcome new registering member. Your username must be your real First and Last name (for example: John Doe). "Screen names" and "handles" are not allowed and your registration will be deleted if you don't use your real name. Also, do not use all caps nor all lower case.

Handmade Toy Sales - New Legislation

Ed Davidson

Ed Davidson

Joined
Jun 16, 2004
Messages
1,254
Likes
1,360
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
There is a new law going into effect next February in the USA called the “Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA)â€. This law requires international and domestic manufactures of all items intended to be used by children 12 years old and younger (toys, clothing, furniture, etc…) to submit every batch of manufactured product to testing by a third-party agency. The testing is intended to certify on a manufactured batch basis that these children’s items are free of hazardous materials and meet US Consumer Product Safety Commission standards. Here is a link to the Congressional Act: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsia.pdf.

The Handmade Toy Alliance sees significant problems with this act, as written, and is calling on Congress to amend the Act so that small USA, Canadian and European businesses and hobbyist are exempted from the financially onerous third-party testing provisions.

If you make toys or other items intended for children’s use, you should dial into the HTA’s site to read more about this legislation, the potential impact on your business or hobby income, and the proposed amendments to this Act.

Here are some links to recently published news articles on the subject...good, but scary reading:
- The federal government is here to help you
- Small toy stores fear new U.S. regulations
- New toy safety law no fun for retailers
- Legislating Montana Small Businesses Out of Business
 
Last edited:
Another example of good intentions gone horribly wrong once the bureaucrats get involved. I wonder if you could get around it by putting a sticker on everything that says "Not for use by anyone under 12?".

It's like when they decided to make the ports safer in South Florida. They were concerned that terrorists were sneaking into the country on small boats. It used to be that when you returned to South Florida from the Islands on a pleasure boat that you could just call customs to report your arrival (there are no customs offices at the inlets / ports.)

Some bureaucrat decided it was too hard to tell who was a terrorist over the phone. So they implemented regulations that required everyone arriving on a small boat to drive to the local airport and check in with customs.

Sadly, I just see it continuing to get worse with little chance of it ever getting better.

Ed
 
Hmmmm,

Ed do you believe a Terorist arriving on a small boat would
drive to the airport???????

I suspect he would get lost.
 
Charlie, remember that someone in public office added the drive to an airport clause. A clear indication that many voters are not smarter than politicians.
 
Stupid yes, worth worrying about no.

As with all inherently poorly thought out legislation the real test comes down to enforcement. The US does not enforce the laws currently on the books. This will be no different. Please make all the toys you want. I have a hard time believing the local police are going to be knocking on anybody's door for making tops.
 
I suspect that enforcement will be carried out by retailers...who will refuse to sell children's items that are not test certified in accordance with this new law.

80% plus of my yo-yos are wholesaled to retailers and sold through consignment. Already getting feedback that unless something changes, my retailers will not be buying any more yo-yos without testing and labeling.

And, to make things worse, it's my understanding that there will be no grace period for existing stock...any inventory that has not been tested and labeled when the law goes into effect will be considered toxic waist and must be removed from store shelves.
 
Brujo said:
As with all inherently poorly thought out legislation the real test comes down to enforcement. The US does not enforce the laws currently on the books. This will be no different. Please make all the toys you want. I have a hard time believing the local police are going to be knocking on anybody's door for making tops.
Click to expand...



At one time, I made quite a few little toy cars and trucks from hardwoods. I don't do this much anymore, but would like to keep the option open......if I can!

I'm tempted to say the same thing, make all you want......but thought twice!

Now, it seems to me, if you should sell toys without compliance to the new law.....you might set yourself up for litigation. In this day of frivolous law suits, I can certainly see some opportunist serve you with a law suit......simply because he sees a possibility of taking everything you own. Some judges would allow it.....I'm afraid so. I don't think much can be done, if you give your tops and toys away, but once you sell them, that's a different matter entirely. (Any thoughts on that?)

Too bad. This is just one more example of law that shouldn't have been.......or, at least take into account the circumstances of the small time hobbyist who wishes to sell a few Christmas toys......not just the full blown commercial enterprise.

otis of cologne
 

Attachments

  • Pick-up truck (2).jpg
    Pick-up truck (2).jpg
    86.7 KB · Views: 20
With all the hoopla, the real danger is the parent who doesn't clean the toy. Waiting while the daughter had a blood draw the other day, watching the granddaughter play in the kiddie corner. She's grown enough now to keep the toy out of her mouth, but the alcohol wipes came out directly we got into the car. You could see the crust around the handling points on the toys.

I won't sell toys for kids or to kids. Guess I'd better put up one of those "We Card" posters, eh?

Anyone notice that the warnings take up more pages than the instructions nowadays? Idiots that we are, they include everything the lawyers can come up with.
 
I used to make and sell wooden toys at craft fairs...several decades ago. At the time, I contacted my insurance company and they wanted nothing to do with it. They had one of those "exclusions" about home businesses, and verbally they also cautioned me about the serious risk of litigation...which would also NOT be covered by my liability rider. So I stopped.

Since then, a lot of homeowners policies have started including clauses that permit some protections for "home based businesses", but are pretty limited and aren't useful for anything other than token sales.

All that being said, this new law just adds fuel to the insurance company position. Unless you go through the testing/certification hoops, and probably pay a goodly amount for a special insurance rider, your insurance company won't want anything to do with you. And if you proceed anyway, then the standard "we don't insure anything you do that is illegal" clauses come into play.

I guess we could call our creations "art work", and include cautions that while they look like toys, they really aren't intended to be played with, but instead are supposed to sit on a shelf and look pretty.
 
I was thinking last night that what we all really needed to do was to make a simple toy and send it to our congressman asking them to be very careful with this legislation since it hurts us little guys. Obviously complaining here won't do much good, we have to reach the source of the problem.
However after reading Dicks response I can see that it really doesn't matter. we would get screwed by either lawyers, insurance agents, or politicians no matter which way we go.
I'm just going to put a sign in my booth that says "every thing in this booth has the potential to kill you if used incorrectly including the salespeople". Do you think that would cover me. 🙂
 
john lucas said:
I was thinking last night that what we all really needed to do was to make a simple toy and send it to our congressman asking them to be very careful with this legislation since it hurts us little guys. Obviously complaining here won't do much good, we have to reach the source of the problem.
However after reading Dicks response I can see that it really doesn't matter. we would get screwed by either lawyers, insurance agents, or politicians no matter which way we go.
I'm just going to put a sign in my booth that says "every thing in this booth has the potential to kill you if used incorrectly including the salespeople". Do you think that would cover me. 🙂
Click to expand...

Actually, what we all need to do is read the actual law as it is written, something I failed do, until a sympathetic soul sent me a copy. I am reproducing it here for the edification of all. Please note the bolded sections everyone. I think we call all breathe easier, at least for now, and Ed, you don't have to worry about being at the end of your rope - or string - or whatever. 😀

SEC. 102. MANDATORY THIRD PARTY TESTING FOR CERTAIN CHILDREN’S
PRODUCTS.
(a) MANDATORY AND THIRD PARTY TESTING.—
(1) GENERAL CONFORMITY CERTIFICATION.—
(A) AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (1) of section 14(a) (15
U.S.C. 2063(a)) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(1) GENERAL CONFORMITY CERTIFICATION.—Except as provided
in paragraphs (2) and (3), every manufacturer of a product
which is subject to a consumer product safety rule under this
Act or similar rule, ban, standard, or regulation under any
other Act enforced by the Commission and which is imported
for consumption or warehousing or distributed in commerce
(and the private labeler of such product if such product bears
a private label) shall issue a certificate which—
‘‘(A) shall certify, based on a test of each product or
______________________________________________________________________

‘‘(2) THIRD PARTY TESTING REQUIREMENT.—Effective on the
dates provided in paragraph (3), before importing for consumption
or warehousing or distributing in commerce any children’s
product that is subject to a children’s product safety rule
 
The "distributing in commerce" line is what will hit the domestic producers, I would think. I don't have the full legislation here in Canada, so I have not seen the definition of the term. Here, it would cover sale, barter or any exchange for compensation.
 
Gosh, you mean I actually have to read and understand something before I get all uptight and blow off about it. That just takes all the fun out of it. 😀

Greg
 
Interstate Commerce

Grant Wilkinson said:
The "distributing in commerce" line is what will hit the domestic producers, I would think. I don't have the full legislation here in Canada, so I have not seen the definition of the term. Here, it would cover sale, barter or any exchange for compensation.
Click to expand...

Distributing in commerce, must also cross a State Line, Correct?

John 🙂
 
not for use under 12

Ed_McDonnell said:
Another example of good intentions gone horribly wrong once the bureaucrats get involved. I wonder if you could get around it by putting a sticker on everything that says "Not for use by anyone under 12?".
getting better.

Ed
Click to expand...

Ed-I bought a few of Nick Cooks baby rattle blanks. Do you think this disclaimer would work????😀
Gretch
 
Anybody else ever catch flak for selling "Kit" products versus pure "Art?" Couple of the places I've been don't even like pens, much less stoppers.

Not that stoppers aren't a great item, Ruth. Especially yours. Now when I find a place where they don't drink wine with twist tops ....
 
MM The one show that I used to do and have been a juror for it also, says The work must be handmade of original design. They do not allow kits or items purchased for sale. however they have never said anything to the woodturners about pens. We have had a few battles over photography when it started going digital. I'm not on the committee anymore. As a photographer I know the image is created in your mind and then you use whatever tools you have to create the image. Apparently there is a distinction over making a print by hand vs doing it on the computer. The funny part is the guy yelling the loudest against digital makes all of his prints using a machine. That's no different than digital prints in my humble brain.
Didn't mean to hijack this thread it's just something I have to deal with as an artist and photographer. Fortunately I don't sell my photos in the art world, I prefer to do wood for that.
 
The new laws don’t scare me. It’s the lawyers that want to sue me because some parent watched their kid use a wooden top for a chew toy and then want everything I own because the kid got a splinter in their lip. The scariest part is the courts would hang me out to dry. Remember the hot coffee at McDonalds. They sure make hard to be nice to someone. So much for making sure kids have a toy for Christmas.:mad::mad::mad:
 
Not so much here, but this thing has gotten totally out of control on several other boards having to do with crafters and the like. I use a site called Event Lister and they've got a storm going on and someone just posted this:

"I spoke directly with the CPSC at length on 12/31. It is not just importers, it is everyone who deals in ANY children\\\'s products. Crafters/artisans ARE considered manufacturers. \r\n\r\nThere is a ballot vote being held on 1/5 to discuss natural materials such a wood, cotton, etc. for exemption. But only items that contain NO other materials would be exempt. So if you attach anything, paint the item, etc. it must be tested."

Before that, I posted the link to the act and told folks to read the thing before going off the deep end and another posted:

"I have read it 3 damn times... its full of leaglize forward and backwardisms... nothing reads cut and dry...it is annoying...\r\n\r\nand Mary the way many understnad it if you buy it then alter it in any way then you have to test it... which is total BS\r\n\r\nI dont make alot of the same thing ... I buy alot retail then change it up/alter it/or just put 2 or more different pieces together... why the hell should I have to then test it..."

The AP article makes sense, but I doubt there's much of that out in the big wide world of crafters.
 
waltben said:
"I spoke directly with the CPSC at length on 12/31.
Click to expand...

Who did he talk to in a government office on New Year's Eve........the janitor?

Ha!

otis of cologne
 
Just got back a snide remark how I must think he's wasting his time talking to his congressman (no, no, no I won't go there!). It amazes me how many folks will get all in a lather when they don't have a clue what something actually says . . . but then we did just finish a Presidential campaign, didn't we?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top