“Made in USA” Claims Draw FTC Warning Letters
Review country-of-origin claims across all marketing
In the past couple of months, FTC recently sent warning letters to eight companies that appear to have misrepresented certain products as “Made in the USA (MUSA)” and “Made in Texas” claims. Let’s see what we can learn.
The products included drums, machinery, and e-cigarettes, which is a good reminder that country-of-origin requirements apply across industries.
According to the FTC, products marketed as “Made in USA” must be “all or virtually all” made in the United States. This generally means that final assembly or processing occurs in the U.S., all significant processing occurs here, and all or virtually all ingredients or components are made and sourced domestically.
That is a high standard and is very difficult to meet for dietary supplements. For example, ascorbic acid and most vitamins do not come from the U.S., so a 5-second label review can easily show whether substantial amounts of ingredients come from abroad.
This is why we see the “Made in the USA with globally sourced ingredients” statements on product labels. Also, in my opinion, “Manufactured in the USA” is similar to “Made in the USA,” whereas “Packaged in the USA” or “Formulated in the USA” has a lower level of scrutiny, as long as it is accurate.
One of the warning letters involved statements that products were “handmade in Austin, Texas” using “locally sourced” materials. What is interesting here is that FTC seemed to find these MUSA claims on the company website and social media, including this reference from the company’s FAQs. This is a great reminder to ensure all marketing content is aligned.
From warning letter. “on the Frequently Asked Questions page in response to a question about the Product’s cost: “[W]e are a family owned and operated company that chose to hand make drums (all shells, lugs, hoops, spurs, floor tom legs, all brackets) out of Raw Metals and Woods here in Austin, TX using locally sourced materials and hiring local drummers and artisans, and that is definitely expensive.”
Most of the plaintiff litigation focuses on MUSA claims made on packaging, but as these FTC letters show, any type of marketing, including on websites, is fair game for review.
Beyond private litigation and FTC issues, platforms such as Amazon may delist companies for making unsubstantiated MUSA claims. Here’s a post about this.
Learn more about FTC’s MUSA standard and the recent warning letters.
Written by
