FTC Launches “Made in the USA” Enforcement Sweep Following Trump Executive Order, Highlighting Importance of Understanding FTC “Made in USA” Standard

On April 14, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or the Commission) announced a coordinated enforcement sweep involving three law enforcement actions against companies accused of falsely claiming that their products were made in the United States. In the announcement, the Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, Christopher Mufarrige, stated that the FTC will “robustly enforce” the FTC’s “Made in USA” standard “so that the American people have confidence that their purchases of American-made products support American workers and manufacturing.” These actions follow President Trump’s March 13, 2026 executive order directing the FTC to prioritize enforcement involving potentially deceptive “Made in America” and similar U.S.-origin claims. The swiftness with which the Commission announced this recent sweep demonstrates the Commission’s commitment to protecting American consumers from deceptive “Made in USA” advertising and labeling claims.

This Blog provides an overview of the recent enforcement activity, along with some important distinctions between the FTC’s “Made in USA” standard compared to the U.S. origin standard imposed by U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) before closing with some risk mitigation recommendations for companies promoting products with “Made in USA” or similar claims.

Recent FTC Enforcement Action Alleged False or Misleading “Made in USA” Claims

The FTC filed complaints against three companies, alleging each company made false or unsubstantiated “Made in the USA” claims in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, Section 45a, and the FTC’s Made in USA Labeling Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 323. In particular, each company is alleged to be marketing products with “Made in the USA” or similar claims (e.g., “All-American Made,” “100% Made in the USA, or “Handcrafted in the USA”), without the products having been “all or virtually all” made in the United States. As noted by the FTC in its business guidance on “Complying with the Made in USA Standard,” the FTC staff considers “all or virtually all” to mean “that the final assembly or processing of the product occurs in the United States, all significant processing that goes into the product occurs in the United States, and all or virtually all ingredients or components of the product are made and sourced in the United States. That is, the product should contain no — or negligible — foreign content.”

• FTC v. TouchTunes Music Company, LLC. The FTC alleged that TouchTunes falsely claimed its electronic dartboards were “Made in the USA.” According to the complaint, although TouchTunes completed final assembly of the dartboards domestically, many of the product components integral to the dartboards’ function (e.g., computer chips, cameras, and flatscreen monitors) were manufactured outside of the United States. To settle the matter, TouchTunes agreed to a proposed order that includes $625,000 in consumer redress — the largest monetary relief in a Made in USA Labeling Rule case to date — along with prohibitions on misrepresenting “Made in the USA” claims and a requirement to notify consumers of the settlement.
• FTC v. Americana Liberty LLC. Following a July 2025 warning letter, the FTC filed an action against Americana Liberty LLC, Three Nations LLC, and their principals, alleging that they falsely marketed American flags, U.S. military flags, and patriotic display products with claims such as “Made in the USA,” “All-American Made,” and “100% Made in the USA.” According to the complaint, some of the products were entirely imported from China, while others were comprised of significant or essential foreign components. The FTC also alleged that the defendants violated the Textile Act and related rules by failing to provide required country of origin disclosures on the cloth flags. Under the proposed settlement, the defendants agreed to an order that requires payment of $167,743 in consumer redress.
• FTC v. Oak Street Manufacturing Company, LLC. The FTC alleged that Oak Street falsely claimed that its footwear products were “Handcrafted in the USA,” “handcrafted 100%” in the United States, and made “from heel-to-toe, using no pre-assembled components from overseas.” According to the complaint, Oak Street used a factory in the Dominican Republic to produce the upper portions of certain footwear and sourced outsoles from Brazil, with some products not even undergoing final assembly in the United States. The proposed settlement provides $75,000 in consumer redress. This action also followed a July 2025 warning letter.

In addition to announcing the three enforcement actions, the FTC noted that the Commission issued closing letters to two companies that had been under investigation for unsubstantiated “Made in the USA” claims: acrylic product manufacturer Marketing Holders LLC and trailer manufacturer Lamar Trailers, Inc. Both companies agreed to remediate their origin representations, after which the FTC closed its investigations while reserving the right to take further action.

Country of Origin Marking for Foreign Origin Products

Companies also should keep in mind that the FTC’s “Made in the USA” framework is distinct from U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s country-of-origin marking regime. Section 304 of the Tariff Act, 19 U.S.C. § 1304, and CBP’s regulations at 19 C.F.R. § 134 generally require imported articles of foreign origin to be marked with their country of origin. CBP determines country of origin based on where a product was last substantially transformed. Substantial transformation is a fact-based inquiry that includes examining whether processing in a second country results in a new and different article of commerce with a new name, character, or use. Substantial transformation in the United States is a necessary condition for a “Made in USA” claim, but it is not sufficient. Products that are considered substantially transformed in the United States through processing, manufacturing, or assembly may not satisfy the FTC requirements for a “Made in USA” label. CBP does not authorize affirmative “Made in USA” representations, and satisfaction of CBP’s substantial transformation test alone does not establish that an unqualified U.S.-origin claim is appropriate.

Likewise, products that undergo some assembly, processing, manufacturing, or repackaging in the United States may not satisfy CBP’s substantial transformation test. Such products would be considered foreign origin under U.S. customs laws and regulations and should be marked with the required country-of-origin marking pursuant to those rules. Companies therefore should ensure that they are assessing both import marking obligations under the customs laws and FTC advertising standards, particularly where products contain imported inputs.

Key Takeaways

This recent “Made in USA” enforcement sweep reinforces our prior guidance following the March executive order that companies using “Made in America,” “Made in the U.S.A.,” or similar claims (e.g., “Our products are American-made,” “USA,” “Manufactured in USA,” or “Built in USA”), should ensure such claims meet the FTC’s “all or virtually all” standard.

To mitigate the risk of enforcement, businesses using “Made in the U.S.A” claims may want to consider taking the following steps:

• Educate teams on the standard. Many well-intentioned companies run afoul of the FTC’s “Made in the USA” standard because of confusion regarding the difference between the standard for promoting products as “Made in the USA” as compared to making the declaration for customs compliance purchases. Educating marketing and product development teams on the difference can help to mitigate the risk of non-compliant use of the claims.
• Audit existing origin claims. Review all “Made in the USA” and similar representations across product labeling, packaging, advertising, websites, and e-commerce listings to confirm accuracy and substantiation.
• Evaluate supply chain documentation. Ensure that supply chain records support any “Made in the USA” claims under the FTC’s standard, including that final assembly or processing and all or virtually all components and manufacturing are domestic.
• Coordinate across functions. Marketing, legal, and supply chain teams should be aligned on origin representations to avoid inconsistencies that could draw regulatory attention.
• Monitor for new rulemaking. The March executive order also directed the FTC to consider proposing regulations related to the verification of origin claims on online marketplaces. Companies selling through digital platforms should watch for developments in this area.

*          *          *          *          *

The FTC’s sweep sends a clear message that “Made in the USA” enforcement is an active and growing priority. CBP and the U.S. Department of Justice have also increased enforcement activities, as detailed in our prior update. Companies that proactively review and substantiate their “Made in USA” and other origin claims will be better positioned to manage the increasing regulatory and litigation risk in this space. 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. Our trade practice can also advise on country-of-origin marking requirements.

© 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.