Daiso Agrees to $2.05 Million Civil Penalty In Connection With CPSC’s Allegations That It Imported, Distributed and Sold Toys With Illegal Lead Content
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.04.10
On March 2, 2010, Daiso Holding USA Inc., Daiso Seattle LLC and Daiso California LLC ("Daiso") reached a consent agreement with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Daiso allegedly failed to comply with federal laws prohibiting excess levels of lead and phthalates in various toys and children's products. Daiso is also alleged to have failed to meet other federal requirements enforced by the CPSC on children's products. Prior to entering into the current decree, Daiso had received Letters of Advice from the CPSC in connection with violations found during port inspections. Some of these prior violations occurred prior to the enactment of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA).
Under the CPSIA, it is illegal to import, manufacture, distribute or sell products designed or intended primarily for children 12 and younger containing more than 300 ppm of lead. The CPSIA also prohibits importing, manufacturing, distributing or selling children's toys or child care articles containing more than 0.1% of certain phthalates. Moreover, the CPSIA gave the CPSC additional civil penalty powers.
According to the decree, Daiso will pay a civil penalty of $2.05 million, and is prohibited from importing any children's products into the United States until it meets the other requirements set forth in the consent decree. In addition, Daiso must establish a comprehensive product safety program, including testing, compliance and reporting procedures.
CPSC Chairman Tenenbaum stated that "[t]his landmark agreement for an injunction sets a precedent for any firm attempting to distribute hazardous products to our nation's children.'' She also warned companies against the sale of noncompliant products, stating that, "[w]e are committed to the safety of children's products, and we will use the full force of our enforcement powers to prevent the sale of harmful products."
The size of the penalty and the Chairman's statement are intended to be stern warnings to industry that the CPSC will not hesitate to exercise and take advantage of its increased enforcement powers under the CPSIA. And this action is further evidence of the agency's continued focus on the compliance of children's products with federal safety regulations.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
