Every CPSIA Regulation You Actually Need to Know (in Plain English)

TL;DR

CPSIA (Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008) is the umbrella statute that gives CPSC most of its modern enforcement power over children's products, third-party testing, tracking labels, and lead/phthalate limits.

Every children's product (intended primarily for children 12 and under) needs a Children's Product Certificate (CPC) based on accredited third-party lab testing to the applicable children's product safety rules — general-conformity certificates (GCC) do not substitute.

Lead limits: 100 ppm total lead in accessible substrate; 90 ppm in paint/surface coating. Phthalate limits: 0.1% for eight specified phthalates in children's toys and child-care articles.

Tracking labels on children's products (and their packaging) must include manufacturer name, production location, production date, and cohort/batch info sufficient to identify the specific production run — this is CPSIA § 103 and is not optional.

The CPSC enforces CPSIA — fines can reach $120,000+ per violation and $17.15 million total for a related series of violations (adjusted annually).

Key stat: CPSC's civil penalty ceiling for a related series of CPSA violations (including CPSIA) was set by statute at $15 million and is adjusted annually for inflation under 28 U.S.C. § 2461 — current adjusted maximum published in the Federal Register each January.

A plain-English map of the children's product rules that actually apply to your product — not the ones a lab quoted you on because it was easier to sell you everything.

The hook: three quotes, zero answers

Here's how this usually goes. You made a kids' product — a t-shirt, a backpack, a wooden toy, a set of hair bows. Somebody told you "you need CPSIA testing." Maybe it was Amazon, flagging your listing. Maybe it was a customer asking for a certificate. Maybe it was a freight forwarder who casually mentioned CBP held your container.

So you call three labs. Lab one quotes you $1,800 and a laundry list of tests. Lab two quotes you $400 and says you're fine with "basic testing." Lab three asks what your product is made of, you don't fully know, and the call ends awkwardly.

Nobody tells you, in words you can use, which of the roughly one hundred CPSIA-related rules actually touch your specific product. You get acronyms — CPC, GCC, ASTM F963, Part 1303 — thrown at you like you're supposed to already know what they mean. You don't. Most people don't. The people selling you testing services have no incentive to explain it simply, because "it depends, let me walk you through it" doesn't fit on an invoice.

This is that walkthrough. It won't make you a lawyer, and it isn't legal advice. But by the end you'll know which rules actually apply to your product, why, and what paperwork you need to prove it — instead of paying for a stack of tests nobody could explain to you.

CPSIA in one page

CPSIA stands for the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008. It's the law that got passed after a brutal 2007, when several major toy recalls — Mattel and RC2 among them — traced back to lead paint on toys made overseas. Congress reacted the way Congress reacts: it passed a law that rewrote the rules for anything sold to or for kids, and it gave the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) sharper teeth to enforce them.

CPSIA isn't one regulation. It's a statute that created or tightened a whole family of regulations, most of which live in Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations. That's why nobody can hand you "the CPSIA rule" — there isn't one. There's a set of them, and which ones apply depends entirely on what you're selling.

The first fork in the road: is your product a "children's product" under the law? CPSC's definition is "primarily intended" for kids 12 and under. That's a judgment call, and CPSC actually gives you four factors to weigh:

What you say about it — labels, marketing copy, packaging claims.

Whether you represent it, in any way, as being for children.

Whether it's commonly recognized by consumers as being for children (a rocking horse doesn't need a label to know its audience).

CPSC's own Age Determination Guidelines, which the agency uses to sanity-check ambiguous cases.

If your product is "primarily intended" for kids 12 and under, you're in children's-product territory, and a much stricter rulebook attaches: mandatory third-party testing at a CPSC-accepted lab, a Children's Product Certificate, tracking labels, the whole stack covered below.

If it's a general-use product that some kids might use — a bookshelf, a household lamp — you're typically under the lighter General Certificate of Conformity regime instead, based on your own testing or a reasonable testing program, no accredited third-party lab required (unless a specific rule for that product category says otherwise).

That distinction — children's product vs. general product — is the single most important fork in this entire article. Get it wrong and you either over-test (wasting money) or under-test (risking a port hold, an Amazon suspension, or worse).

Lead: the two limits everyone confuses

This is the single most misunderstood pair of rules in the whole law, because there are two separate lead limits, they apply to different parts of your product, and almost nobody explains them as two different things.

Limit one: total lead content, 100 ppm, in accessible substrate. This lives in the statute itself — 15 U.S.C. § 1278a — not in a CFR part. It caps the total amount of lead (not just surface lead — the lead baked into the material itself) at 100 parts per million in any "accessible" part of a children's product. Accessible generally means a kid can touch it with their hand or mouth without using a tool to get at it. This limit applies broadly: metal snaps, zipper pulls, plastic components, printed inks in some cases, trims, buttons — anything a child can reach. It phased down over several years after CPSIA passed (600 ppm, then 300 ppm, then landing at 100 ppm), and 100 ppm is where it's stood for a long time now.

Limit two: lead in paint and surface coatings, 90 ppm. This one lives in 16 CFR Part 1303, a regulation that actually predates CPSIA (it started life under the older Consumer Product Safety Act) but got its limit slashed by CPSIA from 600 ppm down to 90 ppm. This rule only covers paint and similar surface coatings — the stuff applied on top of a substrate, not the substrate itself. If your product has any painted, coated, or printed surface, this is the rule that governs it.

Why the confusion? Because a single product usually has to clear both tests at once, on different components, and labs sometimes bundle them into one line item called "lead testing" without telling you they ran two different assays against two different limits. A wooden toy with painted decoration needs the substrate checked against the 100 ppm total-lead rule and the paint checked against the 90 ppm surface-coating rule. A plain, unpainted plastic toy only needs the substrate check — there's no paint to test.

Practical translation: if your product has zero paint, coating, or surface decoration, you probably only owe total-lead testing. If it's painted, printed, or coated anywhere a child can access, you owe both. Ask your lab to itemize which limit each result is being measured against — if they can't answer that in one sentence, get a different lab.

Small parts: the choking-hazard rule ([16 CFR Part 1501](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1501))

This is the oldest instinct in child product safety, formalized into a federal test: can a piece of your product fit inside a kid's throat and block their airway?

16 CFR Part 1501 defines the actual physical test. CPSC uses a device called the small parts cylinder — a hard plastic tube roughly 2.25 inches long and 1.25 inches in diameter, built to approximate the fully expanded throat of a young child. If any part of your product, or any piece that can be broken or pulled off during reasonably foreseeable use and abuse, fits entirely inside that cylinder, it's a small part. Small parts are prohibited in products intended for children under 3.

The two words that matter most in that sentence are "intended for." This rule turns on your product's target age, and CPSC again leans on those same four factors from the children's-product definition — what you say about it, how you market it, what a reasonable consumer would assume, and the Age Determination Guidelines. A rattle, a stacking ring toy, a soft block set — these read as under-3 products on their face, and small parts simply can't be present, full stop, no warning label saves you.

If your product is intended for the 3-to-6 range — old enough that small parts are legal, but young enough that CPSC still wants a heads-up — you're allowed to include small parts, but you have to carry a choking hazard warning label. That's the familiar "WARNING: CHOKING HAZARD — Small parts. Not for children under 3 yrs" language you've seen on toy packaging your whole life. The label isn't optional dress-up copy; it's a specific regulatory requirement tied to age-appropriate labeling exceptions under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act as CPSIA amended it.

One more wrinkle: "reasonably foreseeable use and abuse" means the test isn't just "does it come apart on purpose." Labs subject parts to torque, tension, drop, and impact testing to see if normal rough kid-handling breaks something loose that then fits the cylinder. A button eye on a stuffed animal that seems solidly sewn on can still fail if a standardized pull test rips it free.

If your product is not intended for children under 6 at all — say, a hobby model kit marketed to teens and adults — Part 1501 generally doesn't apply the same way, though you still want to think hard about whether CPSC or a reasonable consumer would actually buy that framing.

Phthalates: the eight banned plasticizers ([16 CFR Part 1307](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1307))

Phthalates are chemical plasticizers — they're what make hard PVC plastic soft and flexible. Think rubber ducks, bath toys, vinyl teethers, squishy figures, the soft grip on some toy handles. CPSIA banned certain phthalates outright in children's products back in 2008, and in 2017 CPSC expanded and finalized the current list under 16 CFR Part 1307.

The rule prohibits eight specific phthalates — DEHP, DBP, BBP, DINP, DIDP, DnOP, DnHP, and DIBP — above a concentration of 0.1% (equivalent to 1,000 ppm) in any "accessible plasticized component part" of a toy or child care article. Two categories of product get named specifically here: toys, and "child care articles" — a defined term covering things like pacifiers, teethers, and other products intended to help a child sleep, feed, or soothe.

The practical filter: does your product contain soft, flexible plastic anywhere a kid can reach? If yes — vinyl, PVC, soft rubber-feeling plastic components — that part needs phthalate testing. If your product is entirely fabric, wood, metal, or rigid (non-plasticized) plastic with no soft PVC anywhere, phthalate testing usually isn't relevant, because there's no plasticized material to test. This is one of the tests labs sometimes run reflexively on products with zero soft plastic content, quietly padding an invoice for a chemical class that physically can't be present.

Worth flagging: this rule specifically targets toys and child care articles — not the entire universe of children's products. A cotton t-shirt isn't a toy or a child care article, so Part 1307 generally isn't the rule you're worried about for apparel (lead and, depending on print method, other rules might still apply — see the mapping table below).

The substantial product hazard list ([16 CFR Part 1120](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1120))

This section is different from everything else in this guide, and it trips people up because it isn't about testing thresholds — it's about categories of products CPSC has already decided are dangerous, by name, in advance.

Under 16 CFR Part 1120, specifically § 1120.3, CPSC maintains a list of product categories that are automatically deemed a "substantial product hazard" if they don't meet the specific standard attached to that category — no individual proof of an actual defect required. Normally, CPSC has to build a case that a specific product is defective and creates a substantial risk of injury. For the products on this list, Congress and CPSC already did that work for entire categories, so a product just has to fail to meet the referenced standard to be legally treated as hazardous.

Products currently named on this list include:

Children's upper outerwear with drawstrings at the hood or neck (banned entirely) or waist (must meet length and configuration limits) — this rule exists because kids were being strangled or dragged when drawstring hoods caught on playground equipment, bus doors, and escalators.

Hand-held hair dryers without immersion protection — the internal circuitry that shuts the dryer down if it's dropped in water.

Extension cords that don't meet the applicable UL/ANSI safety standard.

Seasonal and decorative lighting products (holiday lights, for example) that don't meet the applicable safety standard for that product class.

The takeaway for a brand: if you make or import any product in one of these named categories, you don't get to argue about whether your specific unit is safe. You either meet the referenced standard, full stop, or your entire product line is presumptively a "substantial product hazard" the moment CPSC or CBP looks at it — which triggers recall and refusal authority without the agency needing to build an individual defect case. This is also the list CPSC and CBP screening algorithms check against first, because it's the fastest, cheapest way for them to flag an import.

If your product doesn't fall into a listed category, § 1120.3 doesn't apply to you directly — but it's worth a five-minute check against the current list on cpsc.gov before you assume you're clear, because CPSC does add categories over time.

Magnets: the rule that keeps getting rewritten ([16 CFR Part 1262](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1262))

Small high-powered magnets are one of the ugliest injury patterns CPSC deals with — a kid swallows two or more, the magnets attract each other through intestinal walls from opposite sides, and the result is emergency surgery. This is also the rule with the messiest regulatory history in this whole guide, so it's worth knowing the backstory, because it explains why you'll see conflicting information online.

CPSC issued a magnet safety rule in 2014. It got challenged in court by a magnet-set manufacturer (the well-known Zen Magnets litigation), and in 2016 the Tenth Circuit vacated that rule, finding CPSC hadn't adequately justified it. That left a gap — no federal magnet standard — for several years, during which magnet-related injuries climbed back up.

CPSC came back with a new rule, finalized and effective as 16 CFR Part 1262, which took effect in 2022. The current standard: if a magnet or magnetic component is small enough to fit inside the small parts cylinder (the same 1501 cylinder used for choking testing) and its flux index exceeds the regulatory threshold (50 kG²mm², measuring magnetic strength relative to size), it cannot be sold as a consumer product, loose or in a set intended to be separated and reassembled. High-powered loose magnet sets marketed as adult desk toys or stress relievers are squarely the target, but the rule applies based on the physical characteristics of the magnet, not just marketing language.

Separately, if you make an actual toy that happens to contain magnets — say, a building set or a toy vehicle with a magnetic latch — you're also governed by the magnet section within ASTM F963 (covered in the next section), which sets its own accessibility and flux limits for magnets embedded in toys specifically, distinct from the standalone Part 1262 rule for loose magnet products.

Practical filter: does your product contain any magnet a child could remove, swallow, or access, and is it small enough to plausibly be swallowed? If yes, get flux index and small-parts testing done together — this is not a rule to guess your way through, because the injury pattern is severe and CPSC treats magnet violations aggressively.

Toys generally: ASTM F963 becomes law ([16 CFR Part 1250](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1250))

ASTM F963 is the Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Toy Safety, published by ASTM International, a private standards-development organization. On its own, an ASTM standard is voluntary — a private industry benchmark, not a law. CPSIA changed that specifically for toys: 16 CFR Part 1250 formally adopts ASTM F963 by reference and makes it a mandatory federal consumer product safety rule for toys, enforceable by CPSC exactly like any other regulation.

F963 is broad — it's essentially the master toy-safety document, and it covers a long list of hazard categories in one standard, including:

Sharp points and sharp edges

Small parts (echoing and cross-referencing Part 1501, but with toy-specific test methods)

Flammability of toy materials

Sound-producing toys (decibel limits, to protect hearing)

Projectile toys (limits on force and design for things like dart guns)

Battery compartment security and battery safety, including button/coin cell batteries

Magnets (as noted above)

Toxicological requirements for certain materials

Mechanical and physical hazards specific to categories like ride-on toys, stuffed toys, and toys with cords

Because F963 gets revised periodically by ASTM, and CPSC has to formally incorporate each new version by reference, there's occasionally a lag between the newest private ASTM edition and the version currently enforceable under Part 1250. If you're a toy manufacturer, this is genuinely worth checking on cpsc.gov, because testing to an outdated version doesn't protect you if a newer version is already the legally binding one.

Practical filter: if your product is a toy — meaning it's designed or intended for a child to use in play — F963 testing through Part 1250 is essentially mandatory, and it's the broadest single test package in this whole guide because it bundles so many hazard types into one standard. This is usually the bulk of what a "full CPSIA toy test" quote from a lab is actually covering.

The paperwork: CPC vs. GCC, and who actually writes it

Testing is only half the job. CPSIA also requires you to certify, in writing, that your product meets every applicable rule — and that certificate has to exist before the product ships, not get backfilled later when someone asks.

There are two certificate types, and which one you need depends on the same children's-product fork from section one:

Children's Product Certificate (CPC) — required for any product that meets the "children's product" definition. A CPC has to be based on testing performed at a CPSC-accepted third-party testing laboratory — you cannot self-test your way to a valid CPC. It must identify the product, list every CPSC rule the product is being certified against, name the manufacturer/importer, list the third-party lab and test dates, and include contact information for the party issuing the certificate.

General Certificate of Conformity (GCC) — required for general-use consumer products (non-children's products) subject to a CPSC rule. A GCC can be based on a reasonable testing program or your own supplier's testing — it does not require an accredited third-party lab unless a specific rule says otherwise.

Here's the detail that surprises almost everyone: the certificate is not something the lab issues to you. The lab gives you test reports and results. You — the manufacturer or, for imports, the importer of record — are the one who actually writes and signs the certificate, using the lab's results as your supporting evidence. A lot of first-time sellers assume the lab hands them a finished CPC. It doesn't. If nobody has drafted that certificate document with your company's information on it, you don't have one, no matter how many test reports are sitting in your inbox.

Third-party testing itself has its own rulebook: 16 CFR Part 1107 governs the accreditation of the labs you're allowed to use for children's product testing, and it also sets the ongoing obligations after your first pass — specifically periodic testing (retesting requirements on a defined schedule, even if nothing about your product changed) and material change testing (any change to your product's materials, components, manufacturing process, or factory location that could reasonably affect compliance triggers a fresh testing obligation, regardless of where you are in the periodic testing cycle). A component supplier switch that seems minor to you — a different plastic resin, a new paint vendor — can legally reset your testing clock.

Tracking labels: Section 14(a)(5)

Separate from the certificate — which is a document you keep on file, not something glued to the product — CPSIA also requires a permanent tracking label physically on the product itself and its packaging, under Section 14(a)(5) of the Consumer Product Safety Act as amended by CPSIA.

The tracking label has to let CPSC, retailers, and consumers trace a specific unit back to its exact production run if there's ever a recall. To the extent practicable, it needs to include:

The manufacturer or private labeler's name

Location and date of production

Cohort information — batch, run number, or similar identifier for that specific production lot

Any other information the manufacturer decides is needed to trace the product

It has to be permanent — screen printed, molded in, stitched into a label, engraved — not a sticker that peels off in a drawer. And it has to appear on the product itself and on the packaging, again to the extent practicable given the size and nature of the item (CPSC recognizes some very small products genuinely can't carry a full label and allows reasonable accommodation).

This is the rule that gets skipped most often by small brands, precisely because it feels like the least "sciencey" of the requirements — there's no lab test for it, so it doesn't show up on a testing invoice. But it's a straightforward, checkable, black-and-white compliance item, and it's one of the easiest things for an inspector or a marketplace compliance bot to flag, because it's visible without opening a single test report.

Enforcement reality: penalties, port holds, and marketplace suspensions

Here's the part nobody wants to hear: none of the above matters if you don't back it with paper, because enforcement in 2026 happens in three lanes, and they don't talk to each other much.

Civil penalties. CPSIA significantly raised the maximum civil penalties CPSC can assess for knowing violations of consumer product safety rules, and those caps adjust for inflation periodically under CPSC's own regulations. I'm not going to hand you a specific dollar figure here and risk it being stale by the time you read this — penalty caps have moved multiple times since 2008 and CPSC republishes the current inflation-adjusted maximums on its own site. What matters practically: the exposure is per-violation and can compound fast across a shipment or a product line, and it scales with whether the violation was "knowing." A documented, good-faith compliance program is your best defense against the knowing-violation multiplier, even if a violation still occurs. Check cpsc.gov directly for the current figure before you make any decision based on penalty size.

CBP and CPSC port actions. U.S. Customs and Border Protection works alongside CPSC at the border. Since 2016, CPSC has been building out an eFiling / import surveillance system that lets CBP flag shipments in near-real-time against CPSC's risk data — including, increasingly, checking for the presence of a valid certificate at time of entry. A shipment can get held, examined, sampled, and in the worst case, refused entry or ordered destroyed, and every day it sits at port is a day of demurrage and detention fees eating your margin, completely separate from any eventual penalty. This is where most first-time importers actually feel CPSIA — not as a lawsuit, but as a stuck container and a mounting storage bill.

Marketplace enforcement. Amazon, Walmart Marketplace, and others run their own compliance screening on top of federal enforcement, and they move faster and with less due process than the government does. A flagged listing, a demand for a certificate within 48-72 hours, or an account-level suspension can happen from an automated system with no human warning, based on category alone (kids' products get screened harder than almost anything else on these platforms). Getting reinstated is its own project, and it's a much worse position to negotiate from than having the paperwork ready before you ever list.

The throughline across all three lanes: they're not asking whether your product is actually safe in some abstract sense. They're asking whether you can produce the paper — the CPC or GCC, the underlying test reports, the tracking label — on demand, fast. That's the whole game.

The CPSIA Compliance Map (your checklist)

Work through this in order. Don't skip to testing before step one — it's the single biggest source of wasted money in this entire process.

Step 1 — Is it a children's product? Apply the four factors: your own statements about it, how you market it, common consumer recognition, and CPSC's Age Determination Guidelines. If primarily intended for age 12 or under → children's product track (CPC, accredited third-party lab, tracking label, all of it). If not → general product track (GCC, reasonable testing program).

Step 2 — Which rules attach, by product type?

| Product category | Lead (total, 100 ppm) | Lead paint (90 ppm) | Small parts (Part 1501) | Phthalates (Part 1307) | ASTM F963 / Part 1250 | Magnets (Part 1262) | § 1120.3 named-hazard list | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | Toys (any material) | Yes | If painted/coated | Yes, if intended under 3 | Yes, if soft/plasticized parts | Yes | Yes, if magnets present | Check list | | Kids' apparel (no print/embellishment) | Yes | Usually N/A | Rarely (buttons/snaps if under-3 wear) | No | No | No | Drawstrings on outerwear | | Kids' apparel with prints, snaps, zippers | Yes | If screen print or coated trim | If under 3 and small trims removable | Only if soft PVC/vinyl appliqué | No | No | Drawstrings on outerwear | | Bath toys / teethers / soft PVC items | Yes | If painted | Yes, if intended under 3 | Yes — this is the core target category | Yes if a toy | If magnets present | No | | Wooden toys, painted | Yes | Yes | Yes, if intended under 3 | No (no plasticizer) | Yes | If magnets present | No | | Jewelry / hair accessories for kids | Yes | If plated/coated | Yes, if intended under 3 | If soft plastic beads present | Sometimes (if marketed as toy) | If magnetic clasps | No | | Hair dryers marketed for kids | Yes | If painted housing | Rarely | No | No | No | Yes — immersion protection standard | | Electric/battery toys | Yes | If painted | Yes | If plasticized parts | Yes (battery compartment rules) | If magnets present | Check list |

Step 3 — Build your testing plan. Match every "Yes" in your row of the table above to a lab capability. Ask the lab to quote line-by-line against specific rule citations (100 ppm total lead, 90 ppm surface coating, Part 1307 phthalates, F963 sections, etc.) — not a bundled flat fee for "CPSIA testing." If they can't itemize, they're guessing along with you.

Step 4 — Confirm the lab is CPSC-accepted for children's products. CPSC publishes a searchable list of accepted labs by scope (which tests each lab is accredited to run) on cpsc.gov. A GCC-track product doesn't require this; a CPC-track product does.

Step 5 — Write the certificate. Draft the CPC or GCC yourself, using the lab's test reports as your evidentiary backup. Include every required element: product identification, every rule certified against, manufacturer/importer info, lab name and test dates, and issuer contact info. Keep it on file — you don't ship it inside the box, but you must produce it on request from CPSC, CBP, or a retailer.

Step 6 — Apply the tracking label. Permanent mark on the product and packaging: maker, location/date of production, batch/cohort identifier.

Step 7 — Recordkeeping and retesting triggers. Store test reports, certificates, and supplier documentation. Calendar your periodic retesting date under Part 1107. Flag any material, component, or factory change as an automatic retest trigger — don't wait for the calendar date if something upstream changed.

Related reading: EntryProof CPSC readiness check How CBP import holds actually work CPSC eFiling for FBA sellers Section 15(b) 24-hour reporting rule

FAQ

Do I need CPSIA testing for a kids' t-shirt with no print? Yes, at minimum for total lead content — snaps, zippers, tags, and dyes can all carry lead, and the 100 ppm substrate limit applies regardless of decoration. If there's genuinely no paint, coating, or print anywhere on it, you likely don't need the 90 ppm surface-coating test, and phthalates typically don't apply to plain woven or knit fabric with no soft plastic components. Confirm with your fabric and trim suppliers what's actually in the garment before assuming.

Can I write my own Children's Product Certificate? Yes — that's actually how it's supposed to work. You (the manufacturer or importer) write and sign the CPC yourself, based on test results from a CPSC-accepted third-party lab. The lab doesn't issue the certificate for you; it gives you the underlying data. If you've never actually drafted the certificate document, you don't have one yet, even with a stack of passing test reports.

Is ASTM F963 the same thing as CPSIA? No. ASTM F963 is a private industry standard for toy safety. CPSIA is the federal law. The connection: 16 CFR Part 1250, a regulation created under CPSIA's authority, makes F963 legally mandatory for toys specifically. Non-toy children's products aren't governed by F963 at all — they're governed by whichever other rules in this guide actually apply to them.

Do I retest every shipment? Not automatically — but you retest on a periodic schedule under 16 CFR Part 1107, and immediately whenever there's a "material change": a different material, component, supplier, or factory that could plausibly affect compliance. A shipment from the exact same production run, same materials, same factory, within your periodic testing window generally doesn't need a fresh test. A new fabric supplier or a new paint vendor does, even mid-cycle.

My product is for kids 8-12, not babies — does small parts still apply? Generally no. Part 1501's small parts ban is specifically for products intended for children under 3. An 8-12 product doesn't need to be small-parts-free, though it may still have other applicable rules (lead, F963 if it's a toy, etc.) depending on category.

What's the difference between a "child care article" and a toy for phthalate purposes? Both are covered by the same 0.1% phthalate limit under Part 1307, but they're different categories. Toys are products designed for play. Child care articles are products intended to help a child sleep, feed, teethe, or be soothed — pacifiers, teethers, bottle components. A pacifier isn't a toy, but it's squarely covered by the phthalate rule as a child care article.

I sell on Amazon — does Amazon require anything beyond CPSIA? Often yes, in practice. Marketplaces can and do demand documentation faster and with less flexibility than CPSC itself, and their screening triggers on category (kids' products especially) rather than on any individualized risk assessment. Having your CPC or GCC, test reports, and tracking label ready before you list is the difference between a routine document request and an account suspension while you scramble.

What actually happens if CBP flags my shipment at the port? The container can be held for examination, sampled, and reviewed against your paperwork. If you can produce a valid certificate and supporting test reports promptly, most holds resolve as delay — costly in demurrage and detention fees, but recoverable. If you can't produce compliant paperwork, the shipment can be refused entry or, in serious cases, ordered destroyed or re-exported at your cost.

Does a warning label ("Not for children under 3") get me out of small parts testing? No — it does the opposite of what people think. A choking hazard warning label is only legally usable on a product genuinely intended for the 3-6 age range that's permitted to contain small parts under that framing. You can't slap a warning label on an under-3-intended product to dodge the small parts ban; CPSC looks at your actual marketing and target-age signals, not just the sticker.

Who actually enforces all this — is it CPSC, CBP, or the marketplace? All three, independently, and they don't share one unified process. CPSC has federal enforcement and penalty authority. CBP screens and can hold or refuse shipments at the border, increasingly coordinated with CPSC's import data. Marketplaces run their own private compliance rules on top of both. Passing one doesn't guarantee you pass the others — you need paperwork solid enough to survive all three independently.

Primary sources

CPSIA — Public Law 110-314 — CPSC's canonical CPSIA overview.

16 CFR Part 1109 — General Certificate of Conformity requirements.

Related reading

CPSC eFiling rule explained — 2026 complete guide

Amazon FBA CPSC eFiling compliance checklist (2026)

CBP import alerts field guide

EntryProof — CPSC eFiling & CPC audit trail

EntryProof pricing

FAQ

Do I need CPSIA testing for a kids' t-shirt with no print?

Yes, at minimum for total lead content — snaps, zippers, tags, and dyes can all carry lead, and the 100 ppm substrate limit applies regardless of decoration. If there's genuinely no paint, coating, or print anywhere on it, you likely don't need the 90 ppm surface-coating test, and phthalates typically don't apply to plain woven or knit fabric with no soft plastic components. Confirm with your fabric and trim suppliers what's actually in the garment before assuming.

Can I write my own Children's Product Certificate?

Yes — that's actually how it's supposed to work. You (the manufacturer or importer) write and sign the CPC yourself, based on test results from a CPSC-accepted third-party lab. The lab doesn't issue the certificate for you; it gives you the underlying data. If you've never actually drafted the certificate document, you don't have one yet, even with a stack of passing test reports.

Is ASTM F963 the same thing as CPSIA?

No. ASTM F963 is a private industry standard for toy safety. CPSIA is the federal law. The connection: 16 CFR Part 1250, a regulation created under CPSIA's authority, makes F963 legally mandatory for toys specifically. Non-toy children's products aren't governed by F963 at all — they're governed by whichever other rules in this guide actually apply to them.

Do I retest every shipment?

Not automatically — but you retest on a periodic schedule under 16 CFR Part 1107, and immediately whenever there's a "material change": a different material, component, supplier, or factory that could plausibly affect compliance. A shipment from the exact same production run, same materials, same factory, within your periodic testing window generally doesn't need a fresh test. A new fabric supplier or a new paint vendor does, even mid-cycle.

My product is for kids 8-12, not babies — does small parts still apply?

Generally no. Part 1501's small parts ban is specifically for products intended for children under 3. An 8-12 product doesn't need to be small-parts-free, though it may still have other applicable rules (lead, F963 if it's a toy, etc.) depending on category.

What's the difference between a "child care article" and a toy for phthalate purposes?

Both are covered by the same 0.1% phthalate limit under Part 1307, but they're different categories. Toys are products designed for play. Child care articles are products intended to help a child sleep, feed, teethe, or be soothed — pacifiers, teethers, bottle components. A pacifier isn't a toy, but it's squarely covered by the phthalate rule as a child care article.

I sell on Amazon — does Amazon require anything beyond CPSIA?

Often yes, in practice. Marketplaces can and do demand documentation faster and with less flexibility than CPSC itself, and their screening triggers on category (kids' products especially) rather than on any individualized risk assessment. Having your CPC or GCC, test reports, and tracking label ready before you list is the difference between a routine document request and an account suspension while you scramble.

What actually happens if CBP flags my shipment at the port?

The container can be held for examination, sampled, and reviewed against your paperwork. If you can produce a valid certificate and supporting test reports promptly, most holds resolve as delay — costly in demurrage and detention fees, but recoverable. If you can't produce compliant paperwork, the shipment can be refused entry or, in serious cases, ordered destroyed or re-exported at your cost.

Does a warning label ("Not for children under 3") get me out of small parts testing?

No — it does the opposite of what people think. A choking hazard warning label is only legally usable on a product genuinely intended for the 3-6 age range that's permitted to contain small parts under that framing. You can't slap a warning label on an under-3-intended product to dodge the small parts ban; CPSC looks at your actual marketing and target-age signals, not just the sticker.

Who actually enforces all this — is it CPSC, CBP, or the marketplace?

All three, independently, and they don't share one unified process. CPSC has federal enforcement and penalty authority. CBP screens and can hold or refuse shipments at the border, increasingly coordinated with CPSC's import data. Marketplaces run their own private compliance rules on top of both. Passing one doesn't guarantee you pass the others — you need paperwork solid enough to survive all three independently.