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

[ekomseryt]

Seriously??? 

And even if you were right, you are extending the reach of EU's 'Big Brother' beyond common sense.  In any case, even if you are right, that doesn't take into account the first hurdle your regulation falls over - if that Nintendo Switch was first supplied in the UK in 2017, it was already in the EU - because at that time so were we!!

[cooksongold]

But a Nintendo Switch you buy TODAY is what it appies to.

Again, it is at INDIVIDUAL UNIT level - not product type level.

So if its a second hand nintendo switch that was first sold in 2017 then you may have an arguement, but if you buy a new Nintendo Switch from a wholesaler in the UK to sell on - it won't be considered placed on the market into the EU until the point you sold it to an EU customer.

[jeznorthbay]

This is where it gets complicated though because the term 'product' is mention in the EU documents & that is usually defined not as an individual unit but a product design. Put another way, if it was, as you say each unit, then a business selling thousands of the same item each month would need to have a specific new set of compliance documents and processed followed for each individual unit in each batch & that isn't what the legislation requires. It mentions, for example, batch numbers, which does seem to indicate also that its about a 'product' design rather than individual units.

As for 'placed on the market' then, using your example of the Nintendo unit, it's only the manufacturer that is required to supply the information not the seller & that would be Nintendo. The confusion about second party sellers & platforms such as Ebay currently hasn't been clarified by Ebay, the UK Gov or indeed the EU. It appears, looking at the legislation with as un-frustrated eyes as possible, it has been drafted with large companies in mind & the ways it applied to private sellers or very small businesses hasn't been taken into account.

[cooksongold]

I was only really using Nintendo Switch as a means of explaining in something I could understand - not necessarily taking into account the supply chain complexities of such a product.

That being said - when it comes to the meaning of placed on the market - you also need to refer to the EU Blue Guide

[jeznorthbay]

Which section of that 150 page document do you mean?

As with quite a lot about these new rules the wording isn't clear & I'm not sure guessing what it means is useful. A new design of a mass produced item is 'placed on the market' when it is launched for example. If, as you seem to say, the legislation is for each item / unit 'placed on the market' it would be unworkable even for the largest businesses. Likewise with second hand items some of the required documentation isn't available, hence why, as far as I can tell, the rules apply to the manufacturer not the seller. Having said that it is unclear at this point.

[cooksongold]

2.3  Placing on the Market

[ekomseryt]

I'm afraid you are confusing yourself - which is very easy to do in the information desert created by eBay.   

If you are selling serial-numbered complex products that need to be registered for warranty/may be subject to recall, then what you are saying applies - but as jez465 has already said, that would be the manufacturer's responsibility to keep records not the retailer's.    Hence why you would need to add manufacturer and responsible person info, so that the likes of eBay have a slope-shoulder reference point for safety issues.  If it's a straightforward product, then barcode level is the placement criteria.  And as I have previously pointed-out, you already have proof of placement in the listing date.

Consequently, eBay's lawyers, it would be very helpful if you could extract a digit and publish clarification of this - it's not as if you haven't had two years to do so!  Then perhaps your customers (yes, believe it or not, we poor seller souls out here are YOUR customers eBay) may be able to stop worrying about this.

[dwtrading2015]

Ya!  The recent posts rather persuade me this is such a mess (subsidiarity anyone?) that my  bet it will be suspended for more amendment/consultation on 8th December looks more certain.

Failing that, 11.30pm 13th December, bulk edit, one click and bye bye Europe.

[dwtrading2015]

...and bear in mind, this is being forced planet wide.  It isn't just the UK.  The NI thing is the Brexit revenge bit still trying to annexe the province to hand over to the Republic but that is another story.

When tens of thousands of businesses and millions of consumers suddenly find all the imports the relied on simply vanishing then the scheme will be stopped.  As the start date approaches and many are already deleting the EU from shipping lists, the awakening is already starting.

[trafton.-47]

Books most certainly are required to comply with GPSR - and the publishing industry is only just finding out (with 2 weeks to go!), thanks to a complete failure of leadership and guidance by book trade bodies like the PA and BA. For the purposes of GPSR, the publisher, not the printer, is counted as the 'manufacturer', as it's the publisher who commissions the 'manufacture' of the book. All publishers selling into the EU and NI will require an EU-based agent - in EU-speak, a Responsible Person or Authorised Representative. There are companies claiming to offer this service and they charge an annual fee based on the number of product categories. So far as I understand it, 'Books' is a single category, so you only pay one fee per year no matter how many titles or copies you sell. The fee seems to be around £300-400, according to those who've contacted these agents. However, if you're also selling, say, notebooks (stationery), mugs and photos, each will be in a separate product category, so you'll be paying over £1,000/year in fees.

The crucial thing is to (i) obtain an RP/AR and then mark the product your selling by means of a label or on the packaging with the following info:

• The manufacturer’s [= publisher's/seller's] registered trade name, postal address and email address
• The product ‘model’ and/or variant, ie (a) the book title; (b) ISBN and SKU; (c) manufacturing date and ‘batch number’ (probably the reprint number and date); (d) manufacturing location (the printer’s name and address).

Most of that will already be on the imprint page of a book, so perhaps the only thing you'll need to add - probably as a sticker - is the RP/AR's name, address and web/email address. NB: this must also be included on your own website.

It is of course a protectionist racket by the EU to stifle what it sees as competition and reduce imports. It will serve to prevent the free flow of information and ideas between peoples and cultures. But that seems to be the way the world is going at the moment.

[trafton.-47]

I agree.

The effect will be even more wide-ranging than you suggest. In the GPSR discussions here and elsewhere, there's a clear trend for small businesses of all kinds to simply say it's too much trouble and they'll no longer serve customers in Europe. Many 'producers' (in GPSR lingo) using Amazon and ebay are one-person businesses, and just don't have the resources to deal with massive, timewasting, costly bureaucracy of this kind.

By penalising non-EU book publishers and others in the culture sector, the EU is cutting itself off from non-European art, literature, music and so much more. It's preventing the free flow of ideas between peoples - one of those high-minded ideals the EU was meant to cherish, protect and encourage. Book publishers* are particularly badly hit because from next year we will also have to comply with the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which requires the 'operator' (EUDR's equivalent of 'manufacturer') to input on a complex form called Traces the exact geolocation of the tree that was cut down to make the paper pulp that was used to make the book. (* EUDR affects any product, including food, oils etc made from timber or for which timber had to be cut in order to create the end product.)

Revenge never makes good business sense nor political sense.

[trafton.-47]

I think there's some confusion over the EU's use of the word 'manufacturer'. The word is defined as anyone who causes a product to be created ('manufactured'). So, for example, a book publisher is the 'manufacturer' for the purposes of GPSR, not the printer. If it's your logo on the Chinese-made jumper or doll or guitar, then you're the manufacturer and you're the one who has to comply, eg by conducting a risk assessment on the product, keeping records of that RA for 10 years, labelling the product and/or packaging with name, date, model number/edition, (actual) manufacturer's location and, most importantly, the name, address, website and email address of your agent (the EU-based Responsible Person/Authorised Representative). The RP/RA's details must be on your website as well as on the product and you must satisy it that you have conducted the safety risk assessment.

[dwtrading2015]

" Traces the exact geolocation of the tree that was cut down to make the paper pulp that was used to make the book."

Never!

Never in a million years is that going to work.  That is as likely as saying which mine a lump of aggregate came from or which cloud the water coming out the tap fell from.

EU is on a policy of self destruction and taking a lot of the rest of us down with them.  Perhaps we need to actually implement Brexit now and get as far as possible away from them.

[trafton.-47]

It is crazy, I agree, but the geolocation bit of EUDR is actually the easy part, as that info already exists. The forestry company passes it on to the paper mill, which passes it on to the printer, who passes it on (if asked) to the publisher. Almost all print in the UK these days is on Forest Stewardship Council approved paper, so we do have a tried and tested system in place - the UK is actually ahead of the EU in that. When you see the FSC triangle logo in a book or brochure, that's what it is - the chain of custody.

The hard part is all the form-filling that goes along with it. Anyone selling/exporting a wood-based product into the EU from Dec 2025  will have to spend an hour or two a day filling in forms on the Traces system, even if it's for just one copy of a 50p booklet. Each sale of each individual product will require this admin. I work for, and am myself, a small publisher, and we simply don't have the resources to deal with this sort of bureaucracy. I don't know whether it applies to secondhand books and other goods as well.

I'm all for efforts to prevent harmful deforestation, but EUDR, like GPSR, is a massive wrecking ball to crack a small nut. Paper and cardboard is made from trees grown for the purpose, mostly in Scandinavia; if they weren't needed for paper, they wouldn't be planted in the first place. Just like GPSR, the EUDR will stifle trade, cause lasting damage to small businesses either side of the Channel and cost millions to administer. They should (but won't) scrap it and with the money saved send some people out to Brazil to tackle the ranchers who actually do cause environmental destruction.

As GPSR applies equally to the USA, I imagine that, when he finds out, Trump will hit back with regs and tariffs of his own against the EU. From here on it's going to be a nonstop round of trade wars that will make all of us poorer. I suspect that common sense will dawn only after I am long gone!

[baby_buzz_direct]

---

@dwtrading2015 wrote:

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.

---

Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. After all, EU sellers have to comply with the GPSR as well. They can't even afford to just disable visibility of their listings for the EU if they consider it too much work to add all the GPSR details to their listings as it would put them out of business. The only advantage they have is that they don't have to appoint an authorised representative but can use the details of the manufacturer/importer.

[trafton.-47]

To my mind, the authorised representative requirement is precisely the 'con' dwtraining2015 complains about. It's fine for big companies for whom several hundred or a few thousand pounds a year is chicken-feed, but absolutely not for sole traders and individual businesses. It's not too onerous, perhaps, if you're only selling a single product categiory, but many people on ebay and Amazon will be selling across multiple categories and will face a charge for each one. And to what practical end? So far as I can tell, the AR does nothing more than allow the seller to put the AR's name and address on a label annd webpage. It is, quite genuinely, money for old rope. 

Like EUDR, GPSR has been designed for big companies with multi-million-euro turnovers and big compliance teams selling equipment and materials that potentially could pose safety hazards to EU consumers. And I don't have any problem with that: whether I'm in the UK or the EU, as a consumer I want to know that my kettle is safe, the lawnmower won't blow up, the shampoo won't cause my hair to fall out (OK, too late for that assurance in my case!). The absurdity, the unfairness and the unintended consequences (stifling free flow of information, damage to small businesses, reduction of consumer choice, consolidation of conglomerates' economic power etc) come when the same law is applied to individuals and small companies for whom the admin overload and a 500-1,000+ euro a year 'service charge' make the difference between viability and unviability. And applying exactly the same safety requirements to a secondhand book as to a combine harvester is patently ridiculous.

Is GPSR a tactic intended to achieve the same protectionist aims as tariffs? I don't know, not being able to see (thank God!) into the minds of Brussels bureaucrats. But intended or not, it will have the same effect.

[baby_buzz_direct]

Whether the GPSR will be an efficient measure to improve the safety of products on the market is a different question (for which we will probably only know the answer a few years down the line), but it certainly does not make any sense to assume it is just a protectionist racket. For that they could have invented simpler measures.

And what I take from this thread is that the biggest problem sellers have is the additional work of adding all the GPSR details to the listing, not the cost for authorised representative (responsible person). The latter can be arranged already for around £200 per year regardless of the number of products (you may have got an email as well already from a certain company in Estonia offering this service)

[ett1954]

@trafton.-47 - you have posted some interesting and useful information and comments over the last few threads; credit for that.  It does however only have relevance for current or recently published books, magazines etc.

Most of my material is between 50 and 100 years old.  The publishers have long since ceased to exist or have amalgamated several times over with very few traceable to existing publishers.  As for tracing the source of wood pulp for a 1937 issue of Flight magazine - whoever thought that up was certainly smoking something.  It is beyond farcical.

Unfortunately I do have previous experience of working with EU legislation and as with many of these  schemes it is market protection dressed up as consumer protection - something more subtle than tariffs but with the same effects.  Some member states will try and ignore it, others will have ensured they have legal loopholes built in; and policing will be half-hearted within the union by certain member states.

It will be unviable for me to carry on selling into the EU, EEA and NI after December 13th so a significant part of my business will go, particularly from eBay.  Mission accomplished by the EU in my case however I do think this will backfire on the EU market in many categories. Chinese businesses will comply as their industries are state subsidised and they will only be too eager to take up the loss of trade from elsewhere; and even from within the EU itself.

[ekomseryt]

It doesn't matter what the EU is, or does.  It doesn't matter if their regs are good or bad or a con, or are going to affect their economies.  It doesn't matter that our civil servants screwed-up with Brexit.  All that matters is are our listings going to be viewable on eBay after 13th December?  And, if so, to what extent?  The answers to that lie nowhere else than with this website.   So it's about time they gave the detailed guidance they should have been giving months, nay years, ago.

We have two arms to our business.  We sell scale models for collectors and we publish books.   We therefore have two questions:

We have been selling collector's scale models for more than 40 years; we are not a manufacturer, we are a retailer.  We have never, in all that time, had a safety issue with any product we have chosen to stock/sell.  All of our current stock is out of production, but complies with previous safety requirements as they applied at the time of manufacture, and the individual packaging is covered in advisory information - ie it is marked as an adult product and as not suitable for under-14 -compliance logos, contact information, etc, plus the products have been available world wide prior to 13th December 2024 (and for clarity, "world wide" still includes the EU even if it does behave as if on another planet).  The individual product itself does not operate, therefore it does not have an operation manual.  It does not have a serial number, or a warranty, therefore it is not individually recorded by its manufacturer.  It simply either just sits on a shelf and enables its owner to gaze at it admiringly, or stays in its box in a loft while it appreciates in value.   So, eBay, what tickboxes in our listings do you want us to fill-in to comply with GPSR?

We have been in publishing since 1967.  We have evolved our practices over that time and understand all of the current legal requirements for printing, publishing and distributing a book, and comply with all the latest regulations.  We only use recycled paper, and the imprint page of each book provides all necessary information covering all of the above.  Books are not dangerous items of themselves unless, perhaps, one is thrown at you - which could not be described as 'normal usage' for such a product.    Hence, in all that time, we have never had to put a safety warning on our products, but I guess if we did have to it would be along the lines of 'this is a heavy item, try to avoid putting it on a high shelf, but if you do have to do that, be careful not to let it fall on your head as you lift it down.'  So, eBay, what tickboxes in our listings do you want us to fill-in to comply with GPSR?

Everybody please note: these are the pressing issues for the use of our supplier, eBay's, website for our business.  Many of you have given similar representations to that supplier through this forum.  Others have provided peripheral points of view which are perfectly valid but, unfortunately, have made this thread difficult to read - which is a great excuse for the supplier to plead non-understanding of issues raised, were they so to plead.   But they haven't even done that.

Because the one common ground to all of this, after nearly 700 postings and counting,  is the tumbleweed reaction from our supplier - you know the one, but if you don't it's the one that takes a financial cut from every transaction you push through their site.

So, eBay - what exactly (if anything) are you going to do to us on December 13th 2024 for not complying with your requirements that you have, apparently, imposed on us but never fully explained? 

Because the clock's ticking, as are we - your clients - out here!

[jeznorthbay]

Ebay staff don't read this forum as a rule, though there are examples of them getting involved. I get that its frustrating to read opinions rather than clear facts (& I especially think the anti-EU comments & calls for even more brexit are unhelpful at best & a significant misunderstanding of why UK sellers are in this position, which is because of brexit & the previous governments refusal to discuss any trade arrangements with the EU) but the problem is the UK government & indeed the various platforms haven't given clear guidance, as there are several areas of the regulations that can be interpreted in various ways.