[Reporter’s Notebook] Government’s ‘Direct Purchase Ban’ Crisis Ends After Just Three Days

No Concrete Plan for Direct Purchase Regulation,
Withdrawn After Just Three Days
Consumer Choice Restricted as Overseas Direct Purchases Effectively Blocked
Thorough Discussion Needed...
Regulatory Impact Must Be Considered from Multiple Perspectives

"Since the specific methods have not yet been finalized, further discussions are needed. The details will also be decided in consultation with relevant agencies."

On the 17th, when a reporter asked how the government would filter out products without the National Integrated Certification Mark (KC) during customs clearance, a Customs Service official responded this way. It was a time when consumer confusion was intensifying following the government's announcement the previous day to block overseas direct purchases (direct import) of products without safety certification. Although there were only about two weeks left until the regulation took effect, the responsible authorities, including the Customs Service and the National Institute of Technology and Standards, were unable to establish concrete criteria, causing confusion. Eventually, the government changed its stance, stating that it was merely a risk investigation of uncertified products rather than a direct import ban, effectively withdrawing the 'direct import ban' regulation after just three days.

The regulatory proposal announced by the government was criticized for effectively forcing the KC certification, which is only valid domestically. Considering that the certification costs several million won, it is unlikely that overseas sellers would obtain KC certification solely for the Korean market. Furthermore, the revelation that the government is in the process of amending laws to allow private for-profit corporations to obtain KC certification added unnecessary suspicion.

The potential restriction on consumers' choice was also overlooked. Consumers have long been purchasing the same products relatively cheaply through overseas direct purchases, but with the regulation in place, products would have to go through domestic distribution, inevitably raising prices. Additionally, some consumers who obtained desired products through overseas direct purchases because those products were not released domestically faced the risk of losing their means to acquire them.

On the 16th, a customs official at the Incheon Airport Customs Express Logistics Center is organizing long-term stock cargo delivered from China. Photo by Jinhyung Kang aymsdream@

The government's recent overseas direct purchase measures were justified in the name of consumer safety. They also intended to curb C-commerce (Chinese e-commerce), which has been flooding the market and impacting domestic small businesses. However, the outcome was an 'administrative convenience'-oriented measure that showed little sign of thorough consideration, causing confusion among both the distribution industry and consumers. If the direct import regulation was genuinely for consumer safety, detailed implementation plans and potential side effects should have been discussed with sufficient time.

The government must learn from this confusion and present measures that satisfy both the domestic distribution industry and consumers. Since the survival of domestic distribution businesses and consumer benefits are at stake, careful measures must be prepared through comprehensive review from various perspectives. Regarding overseas direct purchases of harmful products, which were the cause of this regulation, the C-commerce platforms have already entered into voluntary agreements with the Fair Trade Commission. It is not too late to observe the status of platform self-regulation and comprehensively consider the market impact before introducing direct purchase-related measures.