February 24, 2025

Request for Comments to Assist in Reviewing and Identifying Unfair Trade Practices and Initiating All Necessary Actions to Investigate Harm From Non-Reciprocal Trade Arrangements

This document and comments section was posted on 2/24/25. It is focused on seeking reason to impose tariffs not really arguments as to why tariff's should not be imposed on a certain segment of consumer goods but I suppose this is a chance to voice your opinion in writing directly with the USTR about tariff's related to specific countries like China. One commenter from the bicycle business brought up de minimis reform which would seem to be an appropriate comment for this request. Specifically the request seeks: "...comments from the public, on a country-by-country basis, to assist the U.S. Trade Representative in reviewing and identifying any unfair trade practices by other countries, and in initiating all necessary actions to investigate the harm to the United States from any non-reciprocal trade arrangements. This information will assist the U.S. Trade Representative in recommending appropriate actions to remedy such practices and reporting to the President proposed remedies in pursuit of reciprocal trade relations. For additional information, please see USTR’s Federal Register notice."


Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228 © Copyright 1996-2020 Conditions of Use

December 9, 2024

Bisphenol S (BPS) part of polyethersulfone (PES) plastic has been banned under California Proposition 65 effective December 2024

Bisphenol S (BPS) (CAS Number: 80-09-1) is part of polyethersulfone (PES) plastic, which is used to make hard plastic items such as, food utensils and bottles,and also used in synthetic fibers for clothing and other textiles such as, sportswear, socks and raingear. It's also used in epoxy glues and as a corrosion inhibitor, and it also may be in Shipping labels. BPS may also be used to make colors last longer in some fabrics. Consumer products marketed as “BPA-free” might contain BPS. It is a common replacement for bisphenol A (BPA) in polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins.

Effective December 29, 2024 companies that well products with ANY levels of BPS must now provide wa proposition 65 warning as required by the current regulations. For more guidance on those please contact our office (www.swhlaw.com). OEHHA (the CA office that controls props 65 chemicals list and warnings requirements) has not yet established a “safe harbor level” for BPS. A safe harbor level is a threshold below which a business is exempt from Proposition 65 warning requirements. So as such testing is not going to suffice. Only a warning will work unless there is no detectable amount of BPS in the product which may be an nearly impossible threshold to meet.

We strongly suggest that brands look very closely at all their products for traces of BPS and the contact their suppliers for more details on whether any traces of BPS might be present in their products and to come with a legally sufficient warning strategy for all sales channels.

Effective December 29, 2023, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has added bisphenol S (BPS) to the Proposition 65 list as a reproductive toxicant (female reproductive endpoint). This listing was done via the “State’s Qualified Experts” mechanism, based on the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee’s (DARTIC) determination that this chemical was clearly shown to cause female reproductive toxicity.

The warning requirement for significant exposures to BPS will take effect on December 29, 2024.

Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228 © Copyright 1996-2020 Conditions of Use

December 2, 2024

CPSC final vote on electronic certificates of compliance / conformity likely on December 18 2024

UPDATE 12/18/24 As predicted the CPSC commissioners voted to enact the proposed regulation (below) regarding certificates of compliance and/or conformity (aka General Certificate of Conformity and Children's Product Certificate). This applies to importers of complete bikes, bicycle and other off road helmets and class 1-3 ebikes along with any product intended for children under 13.

The one big change that was made is that rather than 12 months before the rule becomes effective its now 18 months (which the industry will need for sure)  The 18 month countdown starts from the day the proposed rule appears in the Federal register (we assume within a week of 12/18/24). Therefore I expect that the rule will come into force about June 2026. CPSC's new eFiling program will apply to all imported consumer products subject to a mandatory safety standard, as set forth in the rule, including de minimis shipments. Of course as pointed out below there is no CPSC rule re UL testing etc for batteries on ebikes at this point (A de minimis shipment is a shipment below $800 that meets the requirements for the administrative exemption under the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1321). De minimis shipments are limited to an aggregate value less than $800 per day by a single importer.) A 24-month effective date will apply to consumer products imported into a Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) and subsequently entered for consumption or warehousing.

PRIOR POST:

Further to my last post here in Feb 2024 the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in a notice issued today has finally reviewed all 47 comments made last December (2023) regarding its Supplemental Notice of Proposed rule making issued December 8 2023. I was one of the commenters and my two suggestions were agreed to by the CPSC. 

First the CPSC agreed that there was no merit in their argument that all bicycle components (like stems or wheels) enumerated in 16 CFR 1512 (the old bike standard for human powered bikes and under 20 mph e bikes) required separate (or any) certificates of compliance for adult (intended for use by children over 12) components as 16 CFR 1512 was a complete bike standard and there was no way to use the standard to independently test component parts in cases where those exact or similar components were to be sold separately. This is because the 16 CFR 1512 standard only contemplates testing those components in the standard for the specific bike they are to be part of. This seemed like common sense but had to be pointed out to the Commission (as apparently the newbies at the CPSC got a bit over zealous). So that's good news. (see pages 26-26)

Also the Commission agreed to extending the effective (compliance date) from 3 months after passage (which is what they wanted in December 2023) to a minimum of 12 months after passage. Its will be 24 months for those who import from a "Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ)" (see page 15).

For just a copy of the proposed law itself without all the comments see this document.

The next step after the December 4 2024 meeting at CPSC is to have the CPSC commission members vote on the proposal on December 18 2024. I suspect it will pass "as is" and will go into effect for most importing bike companies / brands in December 2025 or January 2026. But there is A LOT of work to be done before December 2025 for companies selling complete (adult) bikes, and especially children's bikes (and components for children's bikes). Importers of components for bikes and ebikes are, for now, somewhat off the hook under this current proposal. (Provided there is no CPSC standard that pertains to the component)

A point to note here is that because there is no CPSC standard on ebike batteries at this point this certificates of conformity / compliance issue really does not affect that entire issue (which is also related to the de minimis rule).  There is still federal legislation pending on the de minimis issue and the e bike battery issue.

Finally there is the issue of what the Trump administration is going to do with the CPSC, if anything. We of course will have to wait and see on that. But it appears that this new regulation will get passed before Trump takes office and the question of course is will the Trump Administration allow the rule to go into force in December 2025 or will it be delayed again. Just as a reminder the electronic certificates of compliance / conformity law (Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act; "CPSIA") was passed by Congress in 2008 (and signed by George Bush) and it has taken the CPSC 16 years to get around to finally coming up with a regulation to finally put that section of CPSIA into full effect.

Law Offices of Steven W. Hansen | www.swhlaw.com | 562 866 6228 © Copyright 1996-2020 Conditions of Use