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

[dwtrading2015]

Inflammatory?   If the EU insisted the arrangement was two-way, in the interests of 'elf and safety, then referring to just one side of the arrangement as protectionist might qualify the raising of a disapproving eyebrow.

But as always in these matters, ask - 'who benefits'?  Does the UK based eBayer selling to EU destinations?  Is there not yet another hoop to jump through in competition with somebody selling the same item within the EU?  And of course this is true for sellers in US, Africa, Australasia.  In the definition below the use of taxes is cited rather than 'administrative inconvenience and additional local representative costs'.  But I think the wider sense of the use of 'protectionist' is valid.

 

 

 

 

protectionist

/prəˈtɛkʃənɪst/

Economics

noun

noun: protectionist; plural noun: protectionists

1. an advocate of the policy of shielding a country's domestic industries from foreign competition by taxing imports.

   "barriers erected by the agricultural protectionists"

    

   adjective

   adjective: protectionist

   1. relating to the theory or practice of shielding a country's domestic industries from foreign competition by taxing imports.

      "protectionist measures against foreign imports"

[4_bathrooms]

---

@baby_buzz_direct wrote:

---

@4_bathrooms wrote:

---

An EU/NI-established retailer selling items that are not required to meet harmonised EU legislation (like CE marking) is not required to supply the details of an "EU established responsible person" because they will be deemed to be performing that role

---

That is not correct. The role of the 'responsible person' in the EU can only be performed by the manufacturer (if located in the EU) or the importer (if located outside the EU) not the retailer (unless they are also the importer/manufacturer). 

---

Having bounced around the definitions used and referenced in Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 you are correct; if the EU-established retailer is neither the manufacturer nor the importer they will be required to provide the details of an EU-established responsible person. However, even if they're purchasing their stock from a distributor someone in their existing supply chain is already assuming the role and responsibilities of the responsible person; the EU-established retailer just needs to supply the RP's details and any documents the RP is responsible for. This is also where Article 51 benefits EU-established sellers of used goods or stock that was otherwise physically located in the EU prior to December 13th.  

The situation is different for a non-EU/NI established retailer who is selling goods that do not have a current manufacturer established in the EU/NI - they will need find a way of having an EU-established RP employed in order to sell their items to the EU. If the actual manufacturer isn't interested in employing an RP and the retailer isn't interested in self-branding and employing an RP themself their goods will simply not be able to be sold to the EU. 

---

[jeznorthbay]

'The EU has cut itself off from the world...' well, for a start that comment does show that you have an EU negative viewpoint, given that the EU has more trade deals with more countries than any other individual country or trading block in the world.

I have no idea how to even begin replying to your comment about being out of the EU making it easier to trade as it is so blatantly incorrect. I work across various industries, mostly connected to the creative industries, but taking in everything from broadcasting to product development etc & the amount of additional red tape & cost has been clear.

You'd have to name any company that decided to have its head office in the UK rather than the EU as the data shows that almost 500 companies left in the year after brexit & more since. Likewise official data shows exports to the UK down significantly since brexit.

These new GSPR rules are frustrating but seeing them as proof of some scheme by the EU to restrict business isn't useful. Every country has such legislation & has to negotiate with the other countries it has trade deals with. The previous UK government refused to do that so we don't have any special agreements to mitigate or adjust them. 

[baby_buzz_direct]

---

@4_bathrooms wrote:

---

The situation is different for a non-EU/NI established retailer who is selling goods that do not have a current manufacturer established in the EU/NI - they will need find a way of having an EU-established RP employed in order to sell their items to the EU. If the actual manufacturer isn't interested in employing an RP and the retailer isn't interested in self-branding and employing an RP themself their goods will simply not be able to be sold to the EU. 

---

---

Whether EU or non-EU,  there is usually no way that the retailer could provide all the details required by the responsible person for the products e.g. the test certificates etc. This can only be done by the manufacturer or importer. They would have to get an EU-established RP and deal with all the issues. They just have to forward the details requested by Ebay to the retailer.

[phauto-parts]

Lets for a moment put aside whether we like or dislike the regulations, the EU or the sunlit uplands of Brexit as it really is not helpful in this thread and is seriously diluting any actually useful information that is available here. For those of us actually trying to comply, we need as much information as we can get without wading through endless opinion pieces.

If you have decided to simply turn off EU and NI in your postage policy then great if that works for you. 

Now, back on topic...

I have what might be vaguely useful information, and the TLDR of it is that eBay still don't know how it will be enforced.

I had a seller 1:1 Clinic call on Tuesday which was actually pretty worthwhile. The chap was helpful, seemed to know a fair bit and seemed to accept the flaws in eBays systems and was giving good advice on how to work with or around them.

He also acknowledged that GPSR was something that kept coming up and they didn't have enough knowledge of. I explained that the 'add as much information as you can, cross your fingers and hope for the best' answer wasn't a good one when we'd have to spend hours updating these listings and it might be for nothing. I gave him an example listing (this one in case anyone is interested https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/364363012417 ) which is a new part I sell, made by an EU manufacturer but doesn't come with any safety information, documentation or user guides as they are just two plastic panels and quite inert 'spare part' type objects that are not going to do any harm by themselves.

I asked if having the manufacturer, the part number and the manufacturer information was going to be enough to stop this from being hidden. He didn't know and said he would go and find out as much as he could and email me back.

I just got that email back and here it is:

I am just following up with you on the GSPR query you had during the week on our Seller Clinic call.

I have received the below information back internally:

• Items MAY be hidden from sale within the EU if product safety information is not provided.
• Sellers should provide any product safety information they have for their products and we are unable to advised what information is specifically required at the listing level as we are not experts in their legal requirements or products.
• Categories that are excluded are enclosed for you to review.

Here is the link again for information on GPSR to review: https://www.ebay.co.uk/sellercentre/global-sales/general-product-safety-regulation

I hope this helps.

---

 I think we can conclude that at the moment, eBay doesn't really know what is expected either and are fumbling in the dark on this as much as we are. Maybe not an impressive position for an entity as large as eBay to be in so close to the deadline, but at least it is some confirmation of what we all thought.

[4_bathrooms]

---

@baby_buzz_direct wrote:

---

@4_bathrooms wrote:

---

The situation is different for a non-EU/NI established retailer who is selling goods that do not have a current manufacturer established in the EU/NI - they will need find a way of having an EU-established RP employed in order to sell their items to the EU. If the actual manufacturer isn't interested in employing an RP and the retailer isn't interested in self-branding and employing an RP themself their goods will simply not be able to be sold to the EU. 

---

---

Whether EU or non-EU,  there is usually no way that the retailer could provide all the details required by the responsible person for the products e.g. the test certificates etc. 

---

Is that category-specific? I don't see an option for supplying "test certificates" in my "Product documents" section:

The first three options relate to documents required under harmonised EU legislation. All three would be supplied with the product (where such a document would be required). Also, a retailer would already need to be able to produce one of these documents if requested by a market surveillance authority.

[jeznorthbay]

I'll explain why I think somewhere in all this something isn't being communicated well, understood or advised on by the UK government;

In most towns & cities in the EU, unlike in the UK, there is, for example, a decent second-hand / antiquarian book shop. There is no way the regulation, as currently being interpreted, would work on even that one example &, again unlike in the UK, the booksellers of every EU country would be out on the streets protesting. 

[trafton.-47]

I'd love to know what certificate of analysis or conformity etc should be provided for a book. Or a secondhand postcard. 

If you can't provide a safety data sheet, toubleshooting guide, user guide or the like for an old magazine or photograph, does that mean you'll be barred from selling it?

It's clear that GPSR is not fit for the purpose of selling a vast array of perfectly harmless, everyday items. Treating simple, safe objects like mugs, magazines, rings, rulers, notebooks etc in the same way as powerful chemicals, drugs, electrical goods and motorised equipment is at the root of most of the absurdities the 700+ comments here have identified. That's what happens when you have rules made without being subject to review and revision by any kind of second chamber. That's not a political statement; it's simply the root cause of the EU's poorly drafted legislation. In short: it hasn't been thought through.

It would be interesting to hear the views of businesses - importers, retailers, distributors, end-user customers etc - in the EU. Are they aware of and happy with the (probably unintended) consequences of GPSR? Are they content that from 13 December they'll no longer be able to buy a vast range of goods - especially craft items, collectibles etc - from individual makers and SMEs in the USA, UK, Australia, Africa and Asia? Are they OK with the prospect of being perhaps being unable to buy books by their favourite authors, music by their favourite artistes, or their specialist hobby magazines?

It would be really interesting to get the European view on these issues.

[trafton.-47]

Well, yes, you're probably right. We are a very tolerant, laidback-to-the-point-of-being-comatose people in the UK. Mostly, that's good: we generally don't burn cities down but simply tut while waiting at the bus stop. But there are times - and this may be one of them - when a bit more resistance and rebellion or just noise would serve us better.

For the British approach to manning the barricades I commend to you 'The Revolution Starts at Closing Time' by Serious Drinking. (Spoiler alert: the revolution doesn't happen, cos it's a bit cold and everyone decides to go home and watch telly instead.)

[dwtrading2015]

I avoided the word 'totalitarian' so far because any level of criticism of the grand EU project or pointing out real world truths always results in trolling.  But it is a case in point, and a typical case in point, that this grand idea is forced on people top down.  I know people in Europe and they talk of their manufacturing suffering severe supply chain issues, increasing raw material shortages, and all sorts of problems relating to importing thanks to trade blocking and numerous deals (as mentioned in the above thread) which are designed to favour the EU and backfire when the other side pulls back exports or limits various thresholds.

GPSR, like numerous EU schemes, is specifically designed to make importing into the EU more difficult and remove competition in the internal market.  Many are blind to it with rose tinted glasses.  On this latest attempt of manipulating free trade to be biased in favour of the EU the unintended consequences may well be significant and this time much more visible.

Now people like us could chose to simply ignore the scheme, like with Germany's LUCID plastic scheme with little or no consequences since it is largely unenforceable.  However, a big difference here is that the EU is expecting the platforms to do the policing and enforcement as extensions of the EU state.  It appears for the moment that eBay at least is going to comply and do the EU's bidding and remove listings without the opportunity to appeal.  I think technically eBay does not have the jurisdiction to enforce border controls and this may end up being challenged in a court somewhere, UK or EU.  Who will bring the challenge?   eBay on behalf of it's sellers, sellers against eBay, EU importers inside the EU against eBay or constitutional groups objecting to the EU extending it's reach to force businesses outside the EU to enforce EU laws.

There have been problems like this before and they seem to be getting worse which is why the EU is being isolated further and further in global markets.  This latest trade blocking will have a much more visible impact but I don't expect the EU to move on it quickly if the decide to go ahead on the 13th despite the consequences.  The current feedback and initial effects of people withdrawing sales may result in a pause, I'm betting a few groats on that. 

The critical question is how far online platforms will submit to EU diktat, or whether they withdraw the enforcement as it isn't their obligation and tell Europe to police it's own borders itself.  Maybe the people in the EU will decide enough is enough and revolt.  Who knows which straw will be the last one.

[jeznorthbay]

You really need to stop this paranoid, baseless anti-EU rhetoric. The EU is not being isolated. It is still the largest trading block in the world, with the most trade deals. Safety regulation, however problematic, is not an attempt to manipulate free trade as it applies to manufacturers inside the EU also. Apart from that every country has its own rules when it comes to imports & the UK will be implementing its own version of these GPSR rules soon. 

Being critical of the rules is one thing, but throwing around conspiracy theories that cannot be backed up by any proof isn't useful. 

[dwtrading2015]

I avoided the word 'intolerant' so far too! 

Nothing anti-EU, merely the situation as it exists in the real world which people are trying to understand and deal with right now.  The GPSR is not needed to the extent it is and it should not be the place of online platforms such as eBay to enforce it.

Instead of eBay trying to interpret what the rules are and how to enforce them on behalf of the EU, perhaps eBay should be representing sellers and lodging objections and legally isolating themselves from having to implement such widespread enforcement.  It is becoming apparent in this thread that different platforms are approaching the scheme in different ways.

I can well appreciate for the EU flag wavers the prospect of so many people simply disconnecting the EU in one mouse click isn't quite the vote of confidence they seek in the EU project, but this is the real world and as it stands eBay sellers here are risking listings being deleted if they continue to sell to the EU without filing in new information which doesn't exist.  We all have experience of the great eBay super computer and how accurately it can be when slashing listings and accounts, so many will not risk it continuing to list without being able to supply new information or pay the 'EU representatives' fee.

That is the real world, that is what people are facing right now, I hope it is suspended at the last minuet to allow better clarity for online platforms like eBay.  If any region, country or trading block implements a set of regulations, people are not obliged to continue trading with those regulations, they also have the option to simply withdraw.  That is what many people are planning on doing. It is time for some to accept that is what is going to happen, one click of the mouse.

[baby_buzz_direct]

---

@4_bathrooms wrote:

---

@baby_buzz_direct wrote:

---

@4_bathrooms wrote:

---

The situation is different for a non-EU/NI established retailer who is selling goods that do not have a current manufacturer established in the EU/NI - they will need find a way of having an EU-established RP employed in order to sell their items to the EU. If the actual manufacturer isn't interested in employing an RP and the retailer isn't interested in self-branding and employing an RP themself their goods will simply not be able to be sold to the EU. 

---

---

Whether EU or non-EU,  there is usually no way that the retailer could provide all the details required by the responsible person for the products e.g. the test certificates etc. 

---

Is that category-specific? I don't see an option for supplying "test certificates" in my "Product documents" section:

---

No, Ebay would not request this, it is the 'Responsible Person' who will be asking this from you if you sign up with them. They tell you then they want

• A list of commodity codes (HS codes) of all products you sell in the EU.
• A technical file. This is a detailed description of the make-up and materials used for the production of the goods you sell. We need this for every single product that you sell.
• Any additional technical information and documentation that is available on your products. We need this for every product you sell. E.g.: EU declaration of conformity, if an EU directive applies (if known), declaration of performance, test lab reports etc.
• Digital images of the products you sell in the EU. We would need these for each product. All areas of the product should be visible, so please take the images from at least two different angles.
• A list of all manufacturers (by product(s) or products groups), including their own supply chain (e.g.: for supplies of raw materials, part components, chemicals, outsourced manufacturing processes etc.). Best ask your manufacturers for their suppliers and provide us with their replies.

But much of this information would not be accessible to most retailers. Manufacturers/importers will keep this under wraps for reasons of confidentiality. It is therefore them who have to employ the EU responsible person, not the retailer. You just have to ask your supplier for their EU responsible person details and they should give it to you. Of course, for retailers selling used items fthat would not be possible, so they may have to try to find a responsible person that is not asking for all this information. I think this Estonian company that has been emailing many sellers on Ebay here already (EU Compliance Partner) handle this less strictly (and their fees are quite low as well).

[a45heaven]

How come members here are being abandoned by ebay?

Or have ebay got connections to a 'responsible person' who will be charging for  a service in this matter?

The other  main platform i use have shown their concerns over this procedure and committed to help / do most of the work FOR their sellers. 

Do you think these folks deserve support for their outlook?

Here’s the plan: XXXXXXX is working tirelessly with our partners in the  industry to collect as much GSPR-required information as we can, then add it to the item profiles so you do not have to update your workflows and supporting software tools.

Here’s how you can help: Our request to you is to help augment the item information when it’s missing, which will be more likely with smaller, independent Items. We will inform you on how to help as we work out the details.

What’s next: Right now, we are working on importing the necessary details to save you valuable time and help ensure that your inventory remains available to members around the world.

Our goal is to support your business. Stay tuned for more info in the coming weeks!

[jonatjonatjonat]

I think its Discogs for anyone else wondering who the mystery platform was.

And there I would assume its far easier to work out manufacturers and potentially responsible people - because that will be logged somewhere for records?

[a45heaven]

And there I would assume its far easier to work out manufacturers and potentially responsible people - because that will be logged somewhere for records?

For some items yes, for other esoteric items definitely no.

The other platform has far less limited resources to embark on this crusade to help their members, nor have they levied a 'Regulatory Fee' for the past months, which may or may not be to cover costs as this. 

Possibly ebay could have helped members more rather than inflict a vanity 'Picture Feedback' Scheme, and a heavily flawed unnecessary 'Messages' process.

Which type of items have ebay helped members with, rather than drafting confusing documentation?

[4_bathrooms]

---

@jeznorthbay wrote:

In most towns & cities in the EU, unlike in the UK, there is, for example, a decent second-hand / antiquarian book shop. There is no way the regulation, as currently being interpreted, would work on even that one example 

---

An important part of the regulation (Article 51) is concerned with when the product was/is physically placed on the EU market. Anything that is currently physically located in the EU/EEA or Northern Ireland (i.e. before 13th December) is exempt from the regulation.

[jeznorthbay]

Not sure what your point is as such shops buy & place on the market items constantly. My point is that, as we're not being given any concise guidance from official sources, it could be that some aspects of the regulations is not being taken into account. 

[4_bathrooms]

---

@trafton.-47 wrote:

I'd love to know what certificate of analysis or conformity etc should be provided for a book. Or a secondhand postcard. 

---

Nobody can provide one because Declarations of Conformity, Analyses of Conformity etc. only apply to products that are subject to harmonised EU legislation (such as products requiring a CE mark). Harmonised legislation is actually not what the General Product Safety Regulation is concerned with although if a product is subject to harmonised legislation the DoC, AoC etc. is required to prove conformity.

The GPSR applies to every product made available to consumers in the EU/EEA and NI (whether the product is intended for use by consumers or not) unless the product is specifically exempted in the GPSR, Annex IX or was physically located in the EU prior to 13th December. 

[jonatjonatjonat]

But the vast majority of goods on discogs (you can say the name) would I assume be records, or tapes or CDs - with known publishers.

Just looking at the new Cure record. Discogs log where it was pressed, the labels, the publishers. Now, what needs to be logged for a record for GPSR I don't know - but it seems CDs, Vinyl, Tapes etc - you can apply the same info from the same data points across the entire database. And they even say in their help - they might not have this information on say independent releases - so do help if you can. Its a community effort on discogs thats taken place over many years.

ebay is a bit more of a broad church. Which category of goods should ebay start with?