Executive Order Signals Trump Administration’s Continued Focus on “Made in America” Claims

On March 13, 2026, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prioritize enforcement actions involving potentially deceptive “Made in America” or similar American-origin claims. The order places particular emphasis on online marketplaces, where consumers often rely on origin representations when purchasing products.

The order states that consumers are entitled to “clear, accurate, substantiated, and accessible information” about whether products advertised as American-made are actually produced in the United States. It also emphasizes that companies that manufacture all — or “virtually all” — aspects of their products domestically should receive the full branding benefits associated with American-origin claims.

The directive builds on the FTC’s existing regulatory framework governing U.S.-origin representations. Under the FTC’s Made in USA Labeling Rule, marketers may label a product as “Made in the USA” only if final assembly or processing occurs in the United States and the product’s components and manufacturing are “all or virtually all” domestic. See 16 C.F.R. Part 323. Misleading origin claims may constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45.

Key Directives

The executive order directs the Chairman of the FTC, where appropriate, to prioritize enforcement actions where a seller’s or manufacturer’s claim that a product is “Made in America,” “Made in the U.S.A.,” or similar, violates applicable law. In evaluating such claims, the FTC may consult with other federal agencies with relevant subject-matter expertise.

The order further instructs the FTC to consider proposing regulations addressing verification of origin claims on online marketplaces. Specifically, the FTC is directed to evaluate whether an online marketplace’s failure to establish procedures to verify country-of-origin claims could constitute an unfair or deceptive act or practice under the FTC Act. If pursued, such rulemaking could introduce new compliance expectations for digital marketplace operators that host third-party sellers. Notably, this directive comes on the heels of the FTC’s July 2025 notice to Wal-Mart and Amazon, “explaining the FTC’s ‘Made in USA’ requirements and how they apply to online marketplaces.”

In addition, federal agencies with oversight of country-of-origin labeling are directed, in consultation with the FTC, to consider regulations promoting voluntary country-of-origin labeling for products made or manufactured in the United States and to coordinate in providing consistent guidance to businesses.

The order also addresses federal procurement. Agencies overseeing government-wide acquisition contracts — including Multiple Award Schedule contracts and other government-wide purchasing vehicles — are directed to periodically review and verify American-origin claims associated with products sold through these programs. Contractors found to have misrepresented such claims may have their products removed from procurement programs and may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for potential enforcement under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733.

Implications for Businesses

Realistically, the order should not change much for companies that are already complying with the FTC’s Made in USA Labeling Rule. Indeed, the FTC has long been aggressive in pursuing enforcement action against companies for making false and/or misleading claims about the U.S.-origin of their products.¹ Just this past July, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson declared July to be Made in the USA month at the FTC.²

The order, however, does serve as a reminder to companies that American-origin claims are subject to increased scrutiny across several contexts, including consumer marketing, online marketplaces, and federal procurement. Companies that market products as “Made in America” or “Made in the U.S.A.” should ensure those claims are supported by substantiation consistent with the FTC’s “all or virtually all” standard and are applied consistently across product labeling, advertising, and e-commerce listings.

Online marketplace operators may face additional compliance expectations if the FTC proceeds with rulemaking related to verification procedures for origin claims made by third-party sellers. At the same time, companies selling through digital platforms should anticipate increased scrutiny regarding how origin claims are presented and substantiated.

Businesses participating in federal procurement programs should also ensure that any American-origin representations associated with their products are accurate and well-documented, given the order’s directive that agencies review such claims and refer suspected misrepresentations for potential enforcement under the False Claims Act.

Key Takeaways

This recent executive order reinforces that “Made in America” claims remain a significant enforcement and litigation risk. Businesses should consider:

• Reviewing existing American-origin claims across packaging, advertising, and e-commerce listings
• Confirming supply chain substantiation supporting those claims under the FTC’s “all or virtually all” standard
• Ensuring coordination among marketing, legal, and supply chain teams responsible for origin representations
• Monitoring potential FTC rulemaking affecting verification procedures for online marketplaces

Companies that proactively review their origin claims and substantiation practices will be better positioned to manage regulatory and litigation risk as enforcement attention in this area increases. If you have any questions about how your company can evaluate the risk of any Made in USA claims on your products, please reach out to the authors or any of their colleagues on Arnold & Porter’s Consumer Protection & Advertising team.

© Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 2026 All Rights Reserved. This Blog post is intended to be a general summary of the law and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.