Sarah?s Silks makes toys and costumes exclusively from silk and wood, yet the Forestville company must test for dangerous levels of lead and plastic under a new federal law.
That?s because consumer product regulators aim to restore confidence in toy safety following a wave of recalls a year ago and scrutiny over banned materials linked to toys made in China.
Small toy manufacturers and national trade federations support the intent, but oppose measures they contend endanger the industry?s small businesses. Concerns center on costly certification of product safety for companies, particularly those with handmade toys featuring natural materials that have never faced a recall.
?It?s so expensive. It?s going to really hurt, but we have to do it to keep in business,? said Sarah Lee, owner of Sarah?s Silks.
Faced with lab costs of $145,000 for testing and certifying half its catalog of 50 toys and costumes, the company will cut back on what it sells to U.S. stores. Those costs alone will eliminate more than 30 percent of Sarah?s Silks annual profits, Lee said.
The company is among more than 100 manufacturers and retailers nationwide pushing for changes in the law Congress passed in August. Companies face a Feb. 10 deadline to certify that products do not contain high levels of lead or any of six banned plastics.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission is reviewing potential exceptions including unvarnished wood and other natural materials, and electronics inside toys. But there is no proposal to exempt small companies.
?We fully recognize the challenges that face the manufacturing and retail sectors in complying with the law. But in the end, we must ensure children?s products are safe,? said Scott Wolfson, spokesman for the commission.
Concerns over toy safety were renewed in 2007 following a spate of recalls by Mattel, the world?s largest toy maker, centering on lead paints. Consumer advocates also found tainted toys not included on recall lists.
The new toy safety law is sweeping, requiring testing for dangerous lead levels and banned plastics in everything sold to children 12 and under. Going beyond toys and games, the law covers clothing, books, art supplies, backpacks and lunchboxes.
?We all assumed this toy safety law would be primarily targeted at the toys that were the problem as opposed to small European and American toy makers that have had an exemplary record all along,? said Dan Marshall, a St. Paul, Minn., toy store owner who formed the Handmade Toy Alliance to seek changes in the law. ?The law has no sense of scale. The same regulations apply to a toy maker making toys by the dozens as Mattel making toys by the hundreds of thousands. The testing costs more than what people make in selling these products in the first place.?
Primary costs to comply with the law are for testing and certification by independent labs.
Small manufacturers making toys that Marshall carries have paid from $500 to $3,800 per product. Sarah?s Silks? costs have ranged from $700 to $4,000.
?What we?re fearing is a lot of small companies will cut back on what they sell to the U.S. Some just may have to fold because they can?t meet the costs for the tests,? said Linda Kalb Hamm, owner of Early Work Toy Station in Petaluma.
She said independent toy stores are vigilant in working closely with small manufacturers to ensure toys and other products they sell are safe.
?Our vendors have been compliant. But every little company has to tell us what?s in their fabric or their paper,? Kalb Hamm said. ?Obviously we all care about toy safety and this was an important law, but the government hasn?t thought it through.?
Federal regulators will consider some changes to the testing requirements, though they will be limited, Wolfson said.
?It is a vast product safety enhancement that we want to implement in the right way to restore confidence for parents all across the country,? he said.
UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy: