Français
Español
CPSC eFiling Is Live: The Seven Certificate Fields Every US-Bound Product Entry Now Carries
Compliance-desk note, FulfillDock by SBT, dated 12 October 2026. Every date and requirement below traces to the government documents linked at the end. What follows is our operational reading rather than legal advice; none of it should be read as a quotation or a service promise.
From 8 July 2026, an entry summary for a consumer product regulated by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission has to arrive with certificate data attached to it electronically. The requirement does not care how small the shipment is. A $40 parcel and a forty-foot container of the same SKU carry the same obligation, because CPSC confirmed in its own guidance that there is no Section 321, the de minimis, exemption from eFiling.
What changed on 8 July, and what did not
The rule itself is a year old. CPSC published the amendment to 16 CFR part 1110 on 8 January 2025 and set the compliance date for entries filed on or after 8 July 2026. Two dates matter to anyone with a bonded warehouse plan:
- Entries filed from 8 July 2026 onward need the certificate data transmitted with the entry.
- Goods that enter a foreign trade zone and are later entered for consumption or for warehousing fall under the requirement from 8 January 2027.
What did not change is the substance. A certificate has always had to exist for a regulated product; eFiling changes the plumbing, moving that document from a PDF in an email thread into a structured data set that a broker's system can push into the Automated Commercial Environment. In practice that turns a paperwork question into a data-quality question, and data-quality questions surface at the border rather than in an inbox.
The seven fields, and the level of the chain that has to supply each one
Under §1110.11(a), a finished-product certificate carries seven pieces of content. §1110.13(a)(1) then requires the certificate to be furnished electronically. The useful way to read those seven is by asking who actually knows the answer, because for a China-origin shipment only one of them sits in the United States.
| Required field | Who holds the source of truth | How it usually fails |
|---|---|---|
| Product identification | The factory's SKU list | A certificate written for "ceramic mug, assorted glazes" covering twelve SKUs that are not one product family |
| Citation to each applicable rule, ban, standard or regulation | Whoever classified the product, often nobody | One citation copied across a catalogue; a rule cited that the article does not meet |
| Identification of the certifier | The US importer of record, or the domestic manufacturer | A China-side entity named as certifier when the entry has a different importer |
| Contact for the person maintaining records | Whoever keeps the test reports | A generic info@ mailbox that no one owns three years later |
| Date and place of manufacture | The production line | A date added after the fact, or a trading company's address in place of the plant |
| Date and place of testing, and the production period or batch covered | The laboratory report and the batch record | A 2024 report cited for a 2026 production run |
| Identification of the third-party conformity assessment body, where third-party testing is required | The lab's CPSC acceptance status on the test date | A lab that was accepted when tested and lapsed since, or an adult-goods test reused for a children's SKU |
Children's products are the demanding half of that table. They require testing by a CPSC-accepted third-party laboratory, and the certificate that follows is a Children's Product Certificate. Everything else that is regulated gets a General Certificate of Conformity, which is a self-certification resting on a reasonable testing programme rather than an accredited lab report. Same seven fields, different evidence behind field seven.
Two ways to send it: full copy or reference
CPSC allows importers to transmit the data in two shapes. The first is the full message set: every data element travels with the entry, which suits a shipment of a handful of SKUs you do not import often. The second is reference filing, where the certificate is registered in CPSC's eFiling system ahead of time and the entry passes the identifiers, so the same registered certificate can support repeat entries without retyping the record.
The difference is invisible on a single shipment and decisive on a catalogue. A seller running four hundred live SKUs either registers certificates as they are issued, and keeps the registry clean enough that an identifier still means the document it was issued for, or ends up transmitting full message sets assembled under time pressure at the port. Reference filing rewards whoever maintains the register, and punishes whoever lets a certificate drift out of step with the goods.
Two SKUs, one carton
Consider a mixed carton from the same supplier. The first item is a silicone placemat intended for a toddler. That is a children's product: third-party testing at an accepted lab, a Children's Product Certificate, and all seven fields behind it. The second is a stainless-steel tumbler for adults. Whether it needs a certificate at all depends on whether a specific CPSC rule reaches it, not on whether it is a "consumer product", and a plain insulated tumbler may fall outside CPSC's rule set while still being regulated by another agency for food-contact use. Same carton, same broker, same entry line count, and two completely different data burdens.
This is where a seller learns that "regulated" is not a category. It is a question you answer per article: what is it made of, who is it for, does it fold, does it have a button cell, does it have a drawstring, is it for a child under twelve. Answer the question once per SKU and record the answer, and eFiling becomes mechanical. Answer it never, and the entry summary is asserting something nobody checked.
Who signs, and who waits
The certifier named on the certificate is the US-based importer or the domestic manufacturer. A factory in Dongguan cannot be the certifier for a US entry it does not own, which means the party that physically possesses most of the seven answers is not the party legally attesting to them. That gap does not disappear when the data moves from paper to ACE; it only becomes visible sooner.
On the enforcement side, CPSC states plainly that it does not intend to ask CBP to deny an entry solely because certificate data was not eFiled. Read that as a transition posture rather than as slack. A missing data set still means the entry is incomplete in the system, the broker gets a request, and the clock on your delivery starts running while someone at the factory is asked to confirm a production date. Meanwhile the attestation exposure is unchanged: whoever signed the certificate is the one answerable for fields five, six and seven.
Eight questions to settle before your next entry
- For each SKU, which CPSC rule, ban, standard or regulation applies, if any? Written down, per article.
- Is it a children's product by design and marketing, and does that change any SKU you assumed was adult-only?
- Who is the certifier on this entry, and is that the same legal entity that owns the goods at the moment of entry?
- Do the test reports match the batch now shipping, including the production dates?
- Was the laboratory CPSC-accepted on the date the test was run, rather than merely on the day the entry is filed?
- Are the citations specific to each regulated component rather than one blanket rule reference?
- Who maintains the records, at what address, and for how long after the last shipment?
- If you file by reference, does the registered identifier still describe the goods in the carton?
Two of those eight are worth asking your forwarder and your supplier in the same week, because the answers have to agree: who is the certifier, and which batch does the test report cover. Every other field on the certificate is downstream of those two.
