[lokar]

Require the recipient affirm the package meets all legal requirements, and personally assume liability for any violation.

[mc32]

That’s unworkable: asking a recipient unfamiliar with producers to know whether producer is reputable or not in advance and if the producer is unscrupulous you expect every affected buyer to follow up or be in violation of importation laws?

[lokar]

If you are not sure, buy from within the EU from an importer who deals with this.

The old system of spot inspections worked because most import volume was from known, repeat importers.

[victorbjorklund]

So consumers should just pay for a random import company to ”pinky promise” that it is safe? It is well known that most of the crap that is CE hasn’t actually gone through a million euro testing program. It’s just a stamp. And if something happens then well that LLC goes bankrupt (but odds are low)

[lokar]

License importers? Have them audited, post a bond, etc?

[victorbjorklund]

CE is self certification for most part. It’s just the seller saying ”yea, I promise it is safe”.

Should consumers have to post a bond to receive a package from abroad?

[mc32]

I think thats asking much from people some of whom easily get scammed by phone banks in Eastern Europe, India etc. many people will not put in that effort.

[victorbjorklund]

So hold the consumer liable for laws meant to protect the consumer?

[miohtama]

Holding a consumer liable for the broken crap they order would be just, but political infeasible as long as there is someone else to blame.

[victorbjorklund]

Why even have consumer laws then if consumers are punished if their Samsung phone explodes?

[miohtama]

It depends if Samsung is imported by a consumer or a company that takes liability

[victorbjorklund]

So pretty much just pay for the stamp from a shell company that will shield the legal risk? So just more expensive for consumers and more profit for lawyers that can just set up single purpose shell companies to sign off on the import?