> Evidence from a mystery shopping exercise included in the Commission's investigation shows that a very high percentage of the selected chargers failed basic safety tests, while a high percentage of tested baby toys posed safety risks of medium to high severity, as they contain chemicals exceeding legal safety limits or pose suffocation hazards due to detachable parts.
> Under the DSA, designated Very Large Online Platforms are required to diligently assess systemic risks linked to their services and adopt corresponding mitigation measures.
Interesting that this is under the DSA, since if they're the "importer" by mailing parcels to the EU it would also be covered by long standing rules on CE marking.
It's good to know that someone's actually checking this stuff. Self-reported compliance like CE always makes me wonder if I'm a mug for trying to comply honestly with the rules when it would be easy not to.
I'd be curious to see a breakdown between the "toxic chemicals" and "suffocation hazards" categories, as my intuition says it's mostly the latter and often bunk. The other day I was watching the TV above the Walmart customer service desk that displays product recalls, and multiple recalled products were a motorized bassinet, but the wireless remote control has a battery compartment that could be opened and then the battery swallowed. To a layman or (I assume) Chinese inventor, that seems overly burdensome as I am certain that same household would have other wireless remotes.
> "suffocation hazards" categories, as my intuition says it's mostly the latter and often bunk.
Are you US-american? (Walmart is a good hint that you are.) There's some widespread misconceptions/prejudice there, e.g. the Kinder egg thing. The EU has no problem with selling those.
It's well within the realm of possibility that a parent, holding the remote, approaches the bassinet and sets the remote down in a location where it's reachable by the child. Perhaps even in the bassinet! And especially so if the wireless remote is the only way to operate the bassinet: are you going to walk across the room to turn it on?
Not to mention, new parents are often some of the most sleep deprived. The burden should be on the manufacturer to make these safe. And it's not even that hard: just use one of the clasps on the battery compartment that requires a coin or key to open rather than just your fingernails.
Probably yeah, Amazon already had long exposure to the regulations from EU and European countries, they surely have some won lessons from these years, compared to Temu which is relatively new and might still be learning how things work, apparently. Temu is what, 3-4 years old or something?
I mean the same goes for most US companies, every time they first arrive in Europe they stumble around breaking laws and what not until they get fined to act properly, happened a bunch of times before, most famous examples being Uber and AirBnb, but Amazon been in trouble for the same thing in the past too.
Isn’t Temu basically Aliexpress with some "new shiny" frontend?
Not sure there is anything one couldn’t find on Amazon the exact same wares, though with the additional margin for a USA bigtech company in the middle.
Not really, Aliexpress is from Alibaba, who has been in the exporting business for many years.
While Temu is from Pinduoduo, a competitor to Alibaba known for malicious business practices including exploiting an Android 0-day vulnerability [0].
Edit: I should add that Pinduoduo also ended up being fined over $200 million after a couple fist fight with auditing officials in China [1].
Stay safe, EU folks.
We don’t have the fakes problem but Amazon in the UK has a growing amount of stuff that is just resale of stuff from temu. I suspect if you tested the top 10 chargers on Amazon that weren’t anker, you’d find the same problems.
One of the many reasons (up to and including US foreign policy) I don't buy from Amazon any more.
I'd sooner give Argos the money, they aren't that much more expensive (if at all) for the common set of things they sell and I can walk and pick it up same day.
They broke the first rule of e-commerce - "Don't make the customer think".
I agree. They’ve also devalued prime - I used to know that prime meant next day, now it just means “free delivery” but it could be 2+ weeks depending on where it’s coming from.
argos are great. I ordered something from them for next day delivery and I had it 20 minutes later. The nearest Argos to me is about 15 minutes away so they must have been sitting waiting for orders.
I don’t know about fakes, but browsing Amazon DE feels like browsing AliExpress when looking for any technology products. Especially cables, adapters and such.
So they let sellers from china, and reseller platforms, get away with violating safety laws for 3 years (just Temu), have 50 BILLION euro in revenue (about 3-4 billion in profit for the platform itself) from those products and then charge them 200 Million for the crime?
Can European companies demand equal treatment? Wait, no, I know the answer to that.
Nobody was ever stopping individual member states from prosecuting Temu - they just don't do it because I don't know why, it's too much work? So finally after decades (because this is a decades-long issue with Aliexpress etc) they set up a EU-wide framework and once it starts acting, it's again EU's fault it took so long? They can only do what the member states delegate to them.
But it will eventually get better because in addition to DSA there are other steps; the importers have to declare a responsible person in the EU, the packages will get more expensive etc.
Yes, because it is the start of enforcement. That's how it works, not just a one-and-done slap on the wrist.
If they don't fix it, it'll eventually continue to the "20% of worldwide revenue" kind of fine everyone on HN was so afraid of when the GDPR was introduced. But that's not what it starts with.
This is a key observation and I also remember those dumb discussions. The top end of the fine scale is more or less theoretical if you demonstrate any willingness to improve. Looks like Temu has engaged in really bad practices, and they still only get what's (to them) a gentle reminder that there are rules.
So you're saying if I start a company in the EU that violates safety standards, copyright, trademarks, ... I will be allowed to profit of that for 3 years (let's pretend it's just 3 years that Chinese producers have been doing that) before facing any consequences and at that point STILL only be required to clean up my act (ie. not face any consequences for violations already done)?
I find this incredibly, incredibly hard to believe.
If you start the company in China and ship to EU. If you start it in a EU country I think local laws will stop you much faster than the EU commission. Still there are plenty of grifters that start fraudulent companies in the EU and roll assets into a new one as they bankrupt, and they can operate for decades before they eventually get stopped.
> Temu has until 28 August 2026 to submit an action plan to the Commission, as required by Article 75 of the DSA. The plan must set out measures to remedy the breach of its risk-assessment obligations. The European Board for Digital Services will have one month from receipt of the plan to issue its opinion. The Commission will then have a further month to adopt its final decision and set a reasonable period for implementation.
> Failure to comply with the non-compliance decision may lead to periodic penalty payments.
So they're just threatening a fine at this stage? It's not clear to me
Since this is under the "Next Steps" section, it's pretty clear to me that the €200M fine is a fixed one-time fine that was issued now, but further, repeated fines ("periodic") will be issued if the hazard is not removed.
No, it's a fine, but the fine doesn't absolve you from fixing it too so it stops. You have this delay to submit a plan for how and on what timeline you will fix it. If you don't do it, or take too long, we will keep fining you, increasingly.
An exemple what how in the old microsoft case they ended up puttin a daily fine for non compliance until microsoft balked back and fixed it (after they tried to act tough and pretended to ignore them).
Doesn’t Temu direct ship to the customer? What if they ship in plain unmarked packaging and keep changing the address of the sender? Is the EU customs peeps just going to start inspecting every single package from China looking for items from Temu? That sounds like a logistical nightmare. This sounds like old school thinking where you can stop whole containers full of stuff from a single supplier.
At some point it's a diplomatic incident and will affect EU-Chinese relationships. Even the Chinese government doesn't want to fuck it up for all Chinese companies just because one of them feels like the rules don't apply to them. It's not like the only goods flowing from China to the EU are cheap trash.
The best way to fight Temu would be to maintain a society where young people are not so desperate that the only comfort they can afford is to order the cheapest crap online.
The TEMU shoppers I know are all older and plenty rich and just basically don’t realize/comprehend that there is a cost to shopping low quality toxic garbage beyond what the see on their receipt. I don’t think cost of living crisis is fueling TEMU, its the desire for unbounded consumption + gamification of shopping.
> Evidence from a mystery shopping exercise included in the Commission's investigation shows that a very high percentage of the selected chargers failed basic safety tests, while a high percentage of tested baby toys posed safety risks of medium to high severity, as they contain chemicals exceeding legal safety limits or pose suffocation hazards due to detachable parts.
> Under the DSA, designated Very Large Online Platforms are required to diligently assess systemic risks linked to their services and adopt corresponding mitigation measures.
Interesting that this is under the DSA, since if they're the "importer" by mailing parcels to the EU it would also be covered by long standing rules on CE marking.
It's good to know that someone's actually checking this stuff. Self-reported compliance like CE always makes me wonder if I'm a mug for trying to comply honestly with the rules when it would be easy not to.
I'd be curious to see a breakdown between the "toxic chemicals" and "suffocation hazards" categories, as my intuition says it's mostly the latter and often bunk. The other day I was watching the TV above the Walmart customer service desk that displays product recalls, and multiple recalled products were a motorized bassinet, but the wireless remote control has a battery compartment that could be opened and then the battery swallowed. To a layman or (I assume) Chinese inventor, that seems overly burdensome as I am certain that same household would have other wireless remotes.
> "suffocation hazards" categories, as my intuition says it's mostly the latter and often bunk.
Are you US-american? (Walmart is a good hint that you are.) There's some widespread misconceptions/prejudice there, e.g. the Kinder egg thing. The EU has no problem with selling those.
Not a breakdown, but this comment reminded me of a recent play sand test by Stiftung Warentest:
They tested play sand for asbestos, and four of these positive tested play sands were ordered on Temu. The play sand is for kids!
https://www.test.de/Deko-Spiel-und-Bastelsand-Asbest-Alarm-i...
Batteries are more than a choking hazard; they can cause severe internal chemical burns, gut perforation and so on initiated by electrolysis.
I think the idea is that the baby would be in the bassinet, the parent would have the remote, not the other way around.
It's well within the realm of possibility that a parent, holding the remote, approaches the bassinet and sets the remote down in a location where it's reachable by the child. Perhaps even in the bassinet! And especially so if the wireless remote is the only way to operate the bassinet: are you going to walk across the room to turn it on?
Not to mention, new parents are often some of the most sleep deprived. The burden should be on the manufacturer to make these safe. And it's not even that hard: just use one of the clasps on the battery compartment that requires a coin or key to open rather than just your fingernails.
Is temu much worse than amazon here?
Probably yeah, Amazon already had long exposure to the regulations from EU and European countries, they surely have some won lessons from these years, compared to Temu which is relatively new and might still be learning how things work, apparently. Temu is what, 3-4 years old or something?
"compared to Temu that does not give a damn by design" would be more accurate.
I mean the same goes for most US companies, every time they first arrive in Europe they stumble around breaking laws and what not until they get fined to act properly, happened a bunch of times before, most famous examples being Uber and AirBnb, but Amazon been in trouble for the same thing in the past too.
Isn’t Temu basically Aliexpress with some "new shiny" frontend?
Not sure there is anything one couldn’t find on Amazon the exact same wares, though with the additional margin for a USA bigtech company in the middle.
Not really, Aliexpress is from Alibaba, who has been in the exporting business for many years. While Temu is from Pinduoduo, a competitor to Alibaba known for malicious business practices including exploiting an Android 0-day vulnerability [0].
[0]: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/03/andro...
Edit: I should add that Pinduoduo also ended up being fined over $200 million after a couple fist fight with auditing officials in China [1]. Stay safe, EU folks.
[1]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-11/fistfight...
Certainly in the UK, we don't have the same issues with terrible Chinese fakes that I hear about from US Amazon users.
We don’t have the fakes problem but Amazon in the UK has a growing amount of stuff that is just resale of stuff from temu. I suspect if you tested the top 10 chargers on Amazon that weren’t anker, you’d find the same problems.
One of the many reasons (up to and including US foreign policy) I don't buy from Amazon any more.
I'd sooner give Argos the money, they aren't that much more expensive (if at all) for the common set of things they sell and I can walk and pick it up same day.
They broke the first rule of e-commerce - "Don't make the customer think".
I agree. They’ve also devalued prime - I used to know that prime meant next day, now it just means “free delivery” but it could be 2+ weeks depending on where it’s coming from.
argos are great. I ordered something from them for next day delivery and I had it 20 minutes later. The nearest Argos to me is about 15 minutes away so they must have been sitting waiting for orders.
One of the best usb chargers for the money is the 40W IKEA charger. I trust their quality control.
I wasn't aware that Ikea sold a charger, so I googled it - this is the very first result: https://www.ikea.com/us/en/customer-service/product-support/...
The fact they're even doing a recall tells you they care.
When people buy from Alibaba and resell it on Amazon, they're not bothering to issue recalls.
Amazon UK these days is definitely full of Chinese reproductions and drop shipped knock offs.
Whether they're dangerous I don't know, I've not tried them.
I don’t know about fakes, but browsing Amazon DE feels like browsing AliExpress when looking for any technology products. Especially cables, adapters and such.
There's a lot of work to be done.
Yes.
Correct URL: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_...
Thank you
Actual link: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_...
So they let sellers from china, and reseller platforms, get away with violating safety laws for 3 years (just Temu), have 50 BILLION euro in revenue (about 3-4 billion in profit for the platform itself) from those products and then charge them 200 Million for the crime?
Can European companies demand equal treatment? Wait, no, I know the answer to that.
Nobody was ever stopping individual member states from prosecuting Temu - they just don't do it because I don't know why, it's too much work? So finally after decades (because this is a decades-long issue with Aliexpress etc) they set up a EU-wide framework and once it starts acting, it's again EU's fault it took so long? They can only do what the member states delegate to them.
But it will eventually get better because in addition to DSA there are other steps; the importers have to declare a responsible person in the EU, the packages will get more expensive etc.
Yes, because it is the start of enforcement. That's how it works, not just a one-and-done slap on the wrist.
If they don't fix it, it'll eventually continue to the "20% of worldwide revenue" kind of fine everyone on HN was so afraid of when the GDPR was introduced. But that's not what it starts with.
This is a key observation and I also remember those dumb discussions. The top end of the fine scale is more or less theoretical if you demonstrate any willingness to improve. Looks like Temu has engaged in really bad practices, and they still only get what's (to them) a gentle reminder that there are rules.
So you're saying if I start a company in the EU that violates safety standards, copyright, trademarks, ... I will be allowed to profit of that for 3 years (let's pretend it's just 3 years that Chinese producers have been doing that) before facing any consequences and at that point STILL only be required to clean up my act (ie. not face any consequences for violations already done)?
I find this incredibly, incredibly hard to believe.
The EU does in fact not have an infinite amount of safety inspectors, however hard this is to believe for you.
If you start the company in China and ship to EU. If you start it in a EU country I think local laws will stop you much faster than the EU commission. Still there are plenty of grifters that start fraudulent companies in the EU and roll assets into a new one as they bankrupt, and they can operate for decades before they eventually get stopped.
It will never continue to 20% of worldwide revenue. No matter how long they refuse to comply with EU laws for.
GDPR has been a farce in terms of enforcement.
> Temu has until 28 August 2026 to submit an action plan to the Commission, as required by Article 75 of the DSA. The plan must set out measures to remedy the breach of its risk-assessment obligations. The European Board for Digital Services will have one month from receipt of the plan to issue its opinion. The Commission will then have a further month to adopt its final decision and set a reasonable period for implementation.
> Failure to comply with the non-compliance decision may lead to periodic penalty payments.
So they're just threatening a fine at this stage? It's not clear to me
Since this is under the "Next Steps" section, it's pretty clear to me that the €200M fine is a fixed one-time fine that was issued now, but further, repeated fines ("periodic") will be issued if the hazard is not removed.
No, it's a fine, but the fine doesn't absolve you from fixing it too so it stops. You have this delay to submit a plan for how and on what timeline you will fix it. If you don't do it, or take too long, we will keep fining you, increasingly.
An exemple what how in the old microsoft case they ended up puttin a daily fine for non compliance until microsoft balked back and fixed it (after they tried to act tough and pretended to ignore them).
The end goal ultimately is to get it fixed.
How do they enforce a fine on a Chinese company? What if temu says "up yours"?
I visited Temu from Sweden and clicked on the terms of use, this is the first line:
1.1 These Terms are between you and Whaleco Technology Limited, an Irish company.
you won't be able to sell in the EU market anymore
Doesn’t Temu direct ship to the customer? What if they ship in plain unmarked packaging and keep changing the address of the sender? Is the EU customs peeps just going to start inspecting every single package from China looking for items from Temu? That sounds like a logistical nightmare. This sounds like old school thinking where you can stop whole containers full of stuff from a single supplier.
At some point it's a diplomatic incident and will affect EU-Chinese relationships. Even the Chinese government doesn't want to fuck it up for all Chinese companies just because one of them feels like the rules don't apply to them. It's not like the only goods flowing from China to the EU are cheap trash.
Temu has EU warehouses they appear to ship from: all return addresses I've seen are EU addresses.
Smuggling isn't a great business model for legitimate companies.
The money has to move from the EU to Temu/Pinduoduo coffers at some point.
What logistic company will ship plain unmarked packages? They simply wouldn't be delivered at all.
> Is the EU customs peeps just going to start inspecting every single package from China looking for items from Temu?
They might, why not. It would be unwise to pick a fight like this for any company.
Say they carry on.... How does EU actually stop people ordering from their website and getting items posted to their house?
Maybe going for the money. Forbit EU banks from transferring funds to known Temu accounts.
There are still borders and customs inspections, that's how.
Ordering ISPs to DNS block temu would probably be easier and effective enough.
Or maybe getting google and apple to make the app not available in the EU.
Yes, but who is fining the commision?
The best way to fight Temu would be to maintain a society where young people are not so desperate that the only comfort they can afford is to order the cheapest crap online.
The TEMU shoppers I know are all older and plenty rich and just basically don’t realize/comprehend that there is a cost to shopping low quality toxic garbage beyond what the see on their receipt. I don’t think cost of living crisis is fueling TEMU, its the desire for unbounded consumption + gamification of shopping.
I've been buying everything i can think of from temu for a year now , in anticipation of it surely being outlawed in the EU. That time has come.
Well, enjoy your plastic toys and clothes that are full of known carcinogens I guess.
It's not being outlawed but made more expensive via a 3 euro fee attached to every item purchased.