Target Corp. (NYSE: TGT) will be paying about $41,000 in fines to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) shortly, as the federal agency determined that the nation's second-largest discount retailer incurred violations of federal rules on the labeling, distribution and sale of pesticide products. Sounds harsh, right? But, this was not just pesticide out in the lawn and garden area.

The fines stem from the marketing of anti-microbial toilet seats and mattress pads, along with pillows and household cleaner that claimed to be "germ-killing" products. That's a no-no unless there is pesticide involved, according to the FDA. Funny, since I see "kills germs" claims on so many household products these days it would make a normal shopper's head spin.

According to the FDA, Target sold and distributed unregistered pesticides from its stores and on its website based on the above-referenced products. Most likely, Target was just the retail distributor of these products and has very little (if any) oversight to the marketing tactics used on them. But, this brings up a larger point: at what point should a retailer be responsible for all the marketing claims used on all the products in its stores? Or, should it at all?

Although Target is removing the "germ-killing" claims from the products, who was to blame here? If these were Target private-label brands, we may have a problem. But, if the products in question were from other companies and brands not related specifically to Target, are those companies under the auspices of the EPA as well? This reminds me of the recent lead paint recall that affected many toy retailers. After the smoke cleared, the manufacturers were found liable -- not the distributing retailers.