GPSR Compliance

[bojangled]

This is as clear as mud to me. Been to the gov. advice website and various others.
How does a 1972 poster fit in to this process?

It's not an exempt category. 

Advise buyers this item is for viewing only ? 

My initial reaction, sadly, to to switch EU and NI off. 
Jo

[retroelectro-vintage]

Thanks- thought as much- Looks like I'll be turning off EU and NI then.

[dwtrading2015]

Another reason I think this will be suspended last minute is the number of outstanding questions not being addressed.  There is obviously copious amounts of confusion and even CS acknowledge this.  Yet there is no effort in peak selling period only weeks before the implementation to give clear advice and guidance.

Now eBay is hot on all the item specific stuff so these changes do play to their agenda with the forcing of manufacturer info to be added.  But, as discovered with item specifics, a lot of the time even that detail is not available, especially for widgets and parts chucked out of a factory in bulk to be branded (or not) down the line elsewhere.

I also think the lack of public debate does indicate some brinkmanship underway behind the scenes with the EU holding out trying to force implementation whilst retailers, importers and exporters are warning clearly that vast amounts of trade are going to be withdrawn if there isn't serious change.  It is the way of the EU to believe they are right and everything else is a conspiracy to undermine the great EU endeavour until the whatever scheme is being forced on people blows up in their face (literally in the Balkans and now Ukraine).  Forced introduction of EVs is another case in point.

With so many businesses ready to simply delete exports and imports to the EU, this one I think is too big for them to try and face off and belligerently just stand their ground.  In the meantime, with bulk edit, I can delete the EU with a single press of a button.  Something I am aware many people in the EU are increasingly conscious of on many different levels.  This new scheme is a wake up call for them, the world does not revolve around the EU.

So a sporting bet, I bet 5 groats that the GPSR scheme will be suspended on the 8th December 2024.

[kaz-sandvika]

Yes it would makes sense and I agree.

[derventio]

Well I rang ebay regarding their update: 

'In general, used items are in scope of the GPSR. However, Article 51 of the GPSR states that EU nations shouldn’t ‘impede’ the sale of any product that was first supplied for distribution, consumption, or use on the EU market before 13 December 2024, provided that product is covered by and complies with the General Product Safety Directive (2001/95/EG). As with many new laws, there are differing interpretations of the GPSR. To our understanding, Article 51 can mean that you don’t need, for example, to add the additional information required by the GPSR to listings for consumer products that were placed on the EU or Northern Ireland market before 13 December 2024, and that are covered by and fully comply with the General Product Safety Directive.

For example, if you’re selling a used item that complies with the directive and was placed on the EU or Northern Ireland market before 13 December 2024, you won’t need to provide GPSR-related information in the listing (for example, manufacturer information).'

Ebay advised me to do it anyway 'just to be sure' as they cant give any further advice until AFTER December 13th!. QED. 1) They dont know and 2) sellers cant trust that the ebay algorithm wont start hiding listings that dont comply with GPSR. The whole thing is a complete cluster which leads me to the unfortunate conclusion that it WILL go ahead on December 13th regardless of how badly it has all be put together...I mean look at Brexit!.

[ojewellery]

The GPSR page has been updated to say 'If you don't comply with the GPSR, your listings may not be visible to buyers in the EU and Northern Ireland'

Having gone over and over this, I'm leaving the bulk edited statement available to the EU prior to Dec 13th 2024 and initially do nothing whilst the dust settles.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sellercentre/global-sales/general-product-safety-regulation

[555njp]

I think we already established that eBay could be held accountable for any non-compliant listings, which in turn could lead to fines and possibly even site closure.
So, in order to avoid problems, eBay has to be able to automatically hide anything that will get them in trouble.

We know full well they already have software to restrict or stop visibility (no sales views for days, then suddenly a glut just from one region of the country).
My guess is they will simply block anything that appears to be missing information from appearing anywhere except GB and RoW.

But:

How then do they deal with businesses now operating on private accounts if technically (although I’m not convinced) private sellers are exempt? That loop hole needs closing so I suspect all accounts will need compliance.

And, what about ensuring the other requirements of GPSR such as sending original operating instructions in several languages as these won’t always be found digitally?

Still too many open questions with this mess.

[ojewellery]

@555njp I agree that there is still lots of ambiguity in how the enforcement of the law will evolve.  I've stepped back from the thread, but not the issue, for a while to firm up my own thoughts.  As many others I've spoken to people at eBay.

Business is full of risks.  We all gamble and have faith on a daily basis.  

My own risk assessment for this, led me to feel the biggest risk to my business isn't some EU enforcer turning up on my micro business' door step, a big fine or international sanctions.  I'm way too smaller fish for them to be interested.  When it came down to what really concerned me it was eBay sanctions on my business.  The fabled switch being flipped, listings disappearing on mass or one of those no return to selling emails that we sometimes hear of.  I'm now confident that this wont happen in my low risk product area and sanctions wont happen for low risk products without some form of other notice and chance to take action. 

If I were selling CE marked goods, due to other legislation and domestic rule changes, I'd take a different stance.

I have had a big moral issue with turning NI off - and first decided not to do this, then remembered what happed with the German packaging act and how taking action and paying the 35 Euros for a Licenzero packaging licence generated a few thousand extra revenue because so many people just turned off.  My German sales saw quite a spike (across platforms).

I'm sure more information will come out over the next year.  For now I'm consciously not doing anything in a rush.  I will continue to scope out EU appointed people.  I'm sure with supply/ demand economic options will start to materialise.

[555njp]

Makes good sense.

I too am more than a little annoyed about the NI issue. Where were our Trade and Industry people when that was being debated?

Fair enough UK came out of the EU, so they can do what they like, but NI is still part of the UK so it should have been exempt with the same rules prohibiting cross-boarder shipment to the EU as the rest of the UK.

[fatbobfan]

Just putting current information/customer experience out there in a long thread

First compliance request as a seller of toys, in May this year and still getting them, latest 3 days ago.

I am unable to supply GPSR docs, have told CS this and will be removing inventory for the deadline but the 'System' or 'Bots' seems happy to continue to remove inventory and loose 1. me the customer 2. Ebay UK the potential revenue,

With the addition of continuing to let a  Private Seller, sell exactly the same item, despite Private Sellers not being allowed to sell this inventory under the new Ebikes and Baby Toy policy. 

Grrrrrrr

[ojewellery]

The toy compliance, whilst all legislation gets pulled under the vague wording of GPSR, is probably more to do with the announcement on who can sell toys on eBay post 31st October and meeting UK and NI compliance not directly a result of GPSR.

I came across a really good clear feature on Hobbycraft, of all places, that explains current UK and NI compliance if you google hobbycraft and cp-toy-safety-declaration it should come up for you.

I wonder if as a supplier using a version of the declarations of conformity would suffice to be allowed to continue selling - but that's a conversation between you and the eBay compliance people.

As for sellers on private accounts, I went way down that rabbit hole late last week.  I'm not sure I've pulled myself fully back from it - the one thing I do know is its out of my control, short of discussing with eBay at relevant opportunities, so need to focus on what I can control!

[dwtrading2015]

"I think we already established that eBay could be held accountable for any non-compliant listings,"

Nope, it was established eBay has to give the opportunity for people to comply (such as defined fields for manufacturer as if it was a mandatory item specific), not actually responsible for failure to comply of the listing since eBay are not the seller.  They also have to supply one comprehensive link to allow access to discover any product recalls.

[fatbobfan]

I get you but its so damned frustrating,

The never ending lip service that amounts to ......

Even worse this year imo

[555njp]

---

@dwtrading2015 wrote:

"I think we already established that eBay could be held accountable for any non-compliant listings,"

Nope, it was established eBay has to give the opportunity for people to comply (such as defined fields for manufacturer as if it was a mandatory item specific), not actually responsible for failure to comply of the listing since eBay are not the seller.  They also have to supply one comprehensive link to allow access to discover any product recalls.

---

Oh, interesting. Not how I understand it. Pretty sure as eBay are making the items visible, it’s them that can be held responsible should they not be?

Can’t see the EU going after individual listers (I.e should a “private account” that’s really a business sell a non-conforming product) as they won’t have the contact info for the seller.
I think you’ll find they’ll confront eBay which is why eBay will block anything that doesn’t conform……but happy to be corrected 🙂

[davrman]

GPSR was just discussed briefly in the PM programme on BBC Radio 4:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0025cnb

It starts at around 22.5 minutes in. Nothing very revealing, but the first time I've heard it mentioned on mainstream media.

[555njp]

Thanks, interesting. I still think the government has underestimated the impact though.
As they say, anyone selling via an online platform now needs to pay for a “responsible person” service, so from Dec 13th, it won’t be worth a lot of micro-businesses bothering (and I’m in that camp).
So what they need to review is how much are EU & NI exports from these micro businesses worth now? Then roughly what percentage will just stop selling? That’ll give a real impact to GB trade.

[dwtrading2015]

This was fleshed out in earlier posts and the wording was very clear, eBay is not responsible for compliance, only for providing the means to comply and removing those listings deemed not to comply as an EU enforcement police.  The seller is responsible for any actual errant sale within the EU.  The platform is not the seller.  This is exactly the same as CN22 declarations.  In theory you can put anything on the declaration and the package will pass through.  IF, however, your package is pulled out for inspection - a percentage always are - and you are caught with a false declaration then the package will be rejected.  Now the EU has found a way to fine you directly.  Loads of money, ker ching!

This scheme allows the EU to fine you directly if you get a package through in to the EU that doesn't tick off whatever list exists at the time.  eBay is being used to police this in the sense of being firstly forced to provide the ability to supply all the required details, like for CN22, with some pressure to force removal of items that don't comply.  The way round this is to pay some stranger in the EU hundreds of EUs a year.

It's a con which will have no benefit to any consumer, is a protection racket where you pay the EU mob protection money, creates a physical trade barrier as opposed to high tariff tactic, a cheap tactic to project EU authoritarian externally, and a sop to the socialist controlled internal market philosophy.

It is practically unenforceable, and like most of the EU interference in markets will be open to wide spread corruption, will lean heavily on countries flying the wrong political colour, will be a random selection on getting caught and cost 10, 20, 30 times to administer than gained through internal market protectionism.

It will back fire (all ready is) on a monumental scale as thousands of traders simply click once and delete Europe as a market.  In the same way the attempt to manage and force the EV market, this is going to cause a major collapse in many supply chains.  Managing markets and trade barriers have only one single guaranteed result, failure.

[555njp]

Yes I 100% agree and thanks for clarification.
The thread’s so long now I’d forgotten, missed (or both) what has been said higher up!

I did look at Etsy yesterday and where eBay are saying non-compliant listings will be hidden, Etsy are taking a slightly harder line and have stated:

“If a product is subject to GPSR, but does not meet its requirements, the product may be considered a “dangerous product.” This can lead to EU authorities taking corrective action, including imposing fines, banning, or removing the product from the market.
Should Etsy receive a notification from an authority that your product is non-compliant, we will take appropriate action, which may include removing your listing and/or suspending your account.”

They appear to expect notification to come to them via the EU authorities of any deviant listings and will then take corrective action themselves. Which does imply the EU will initially go to the platform rather than individuals? but I 100% take your point that ultimate responsibility for compliance lies with the seller.

[baby_buzz_direct]

---

@dwtrading2015 wrote:

This was fleshed out in earlier posts and the wording was very clear, eBay is not responsible for compliance, only for providing the means to comply and removing those listings deemed not to comply as an EU enforcement police.  The seller is responsible for any actual errant sale within the EU.  The platform is not the seller.  This is exactly the same as CN22 declarations.  In theory you can put anything on the declaration and the package will pass through.  IF, however, your package is pulled out for inspection - a percentage always are - and you are caught with a false declaration then the package will be rejected. 

---

If the value of the order is less than 150 Euros (for France even for any value in case of orders from online marketplaces) shipments will be under IOSS terms and it will be Ebay's details on the CN22. They will be the importer of record and should be legally responsible for the import.

[ekomseryt]

That was an interesting listen for several reasons.  Firstly, the BBC was so uninformed about the subject, they couldn't even be consistent with the acronym; next, the government's mandarins (who gave a response to the BBC) clearly think it is such a minimal change that they haven't even briefed the government about it; and most importantly, the introduction to the piece included the statement that this applies only to goods MANUFACTURED in the UK.  So what does this tell us?

Well, firstly, the media is not going to react at all until the wheel falls off after 13th December, if indeed the wheel falls off; and, if it does all go pear-shaped, the government is going to be caught with its pants down - how unusual.

But more importantly, if the regs are simply for goods manufactured in the UK - which if you think about it logically is exactly how the EU would target punishment rule changes - then, taking into account the 'available in the EU before 13th December' wording in the regs, that would confirm that any export of a product not manufactured in the UK, or manufactured in the UK and demonstrably available in and to the EU prior to 13th December, would not be affected.

However, any product manufactured in the UK, but NOT demonstrably available in and to the EU prior to 13th December, will immediately come under scrutiny after that date, which would back-up my previous observations that new listings for new products after 13th December will be frought with issues.

[cooksongold]

Note the availability rules you refer to aren't correct if the product is in the UK.

The rules are 'placed on the market' but they apply at individual product level - not just a product type.

ie if you had a Nintendo Switch after 13th December you were selling - it doesn't matter that the Nintendo Switch was first available in 2017 - that particular Nintendo Switch you have still isn't available in the Union.

And in terms of placing on the market - if you are outside the EU, essentially the items don't enter the Union until the end user has purchased them (in most cases).