'Made in USA' Claims: Compliance Refresher and Best Practices

With tariffs reshaping the trade landscape and patriotic holidays on the horizon, companies are looking for ways to showcase their US origin, presence, and footprint. But while “Made in USA” claims offer powerful consumer appeal, these claims are subject to intense regulation and scrutiny—and missteps can result in hefty fines and penalties. Understanding the law, the consequences, and best practices today can help prevent costly legal ramifications and brand damage later.

“MADE IN USA” CLAIMS—WHAT ARE THEY?

“Made in USA” claims (also referred to as “US origin claims” or “MUSA claims”) are claims that call out or emphasize a brand, product, or service’s domestic origin, affiliation, or presence.

• Unqualified claims: Unqualified Made in USA claims are claims that a product is entirely (or almost entirely) made in the United States, without any conditions or limitations. Examples beyond “Made in USA” include “Created in the USA,” “Produced in California,” “Built in the USA,” and “American-made.” As discussed below, these claims are heavily regulated and scrutinized.
• Qualified claims: Qualified Made in USA claims are claims accompanied by limitations, qualifiers, or other explanations that describe the extent, amount, or type of a product’s domestic content or processing. Unlike unqualified claims, qualified claims indicate that a product is not entirely of domestic origin. Examples include “70% US content” and “Assembled in USA from Italian leather.”

Critically, Made in USA claims need not include the words “Made in USA” or equivalent terms. They can also include symbols or geographic references like flags, maps, or references to US locations of headquarters or factories—with or without accompanying text. Also, these claims are not limited to more traditional types of marketing (e.g., TV commercials, radio and print ads, and digital ads). Made in USA claims frequently take the shape of labels, product descriptions, packaging, or tags—and can appear in a myriad of other representations made by or on behalf of the company (e.g., press releases, annual reports, and interviews).

“MADE IN USA” CLAIMS—WHO IS WATCHING, AND WHAT’S AT STAKE?

Made in USA claims are subject to various, and at times overlapping, regulations and standards. At the federal level, Made in USA claims are most notably subject to the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Made in USA Labeling Rule, 16 CFR Part 323 (MUSA Rule). The MUSA Rule broadly prohibits the use of unqualified Made in USA claims (i.e., those without limitations or other explanations) unless “all or virtually all” of a product is made in the United States. The threshold for “all or virtually all” is exceedingly high. For a product to qualify, the following conditions must be met:

1. “all significant processing that goes into the product” must occur in the United States;
2. “all or virtually all ingredients or components of the product” must be made and sourced in the United States; and
3. the “final assembly or processing of the product” must occur in the United States.

This means that all significant parts and processing must occur in the United States, and the product may contain only a de minimis amount of foreign content.

Of note, qualified Made in USA claims (i.e., those that specify the extent, amount, or type of a product’s domestic content or processing) can still be deceptive or misleading if they overstate or misrepresent the amount of a product’s US content or US processing. In evaluating whether a qualified Made in USA claim is deceptive or misleading, it is essential to consider the overall net impression conveyed. In other words, what does the underlying representation convey to consumers when it is viewed in its entirety, taking all elements and context into consideration? A qualified Made in USA claim that is factually accurate and truthful in isolation runs the risk of misleading consumers if it is presented in conjunction with other elements, phrases, or images that—when viewed as a whole—overstate or misrepresent the amount of US content or US packaging.

In addition, certain Made in USA claims may trigger the FTC’s Impersonation of Government and Businesses Rule, 16 CFR Part 461 (Impersonation Rule), which prohibits positing as—or misrepresenting an affiliation with—a government entity, business, or their officers, whether directly or by implication.

Violations of either trade regulation rule carry hefty monetary penalties of up to $53,088 per violation, which can quickly add up. Last year, the FTC imposed a $2 million civil penalty against a tractor manufacturer for allegedly misleading Made in USA claims made on certain product labels for replacement parts. [1]

At the state level, Made in USA claims may be subject to false advertising laws, general consumer protection or unfair and deceptive trade practices laws, or other state-specific laws. At the time of this publication, no state has imposed a minimum content requirement that exceeds the MUSA Rule’s “all or virtually all” threshold. [2] However, certain states may have state-specific origin labeling laws that apply to certain products. For example, in 2021, California passed Assembly Bill 535, which imposes limitations and restrictions on how companies can feature the word “California” or other references to the state on certain olive oil products.

Beyond government oversight, Made in USA claims are subject to scrutiny from consumers, competitors, industry trade associations, consumer watchdogs, and self-regulatory bodies like the National Advertising Division (NAD), which provides an alternative forum for competitors to challenge one another’s claims. [3]MUSA claims continue to be a popular target in consumer-driven class actions. In April 2025, a California jury awarded $2.36 million in damages to tea buyers in California who brought a class action lawsuit against a prominent tea manufacturer for labeling its tea products (which are made from imported tea leaves) as “Manufactured in the USA 100%.” [4] In addition, Made in USA claims may be subject to (or overlap with) other laws, regulations, or standards, such as country-of-origin requirements enforced by US Customs and Border Protection or product-specific requirements (e.g., disclosures triggered by the Automobile Information Disclosure Act).

BEST PRACTICES

Below are some best practices to keep in mind when considering the use of Made in USA claims to promote your brand, product, or service:

• Ensure your claim is truthful and substantiated. As with all advertising, Made in USA claims must be truthful and substantiated (i.e., provable) prior to dissemination (i.e., before they are made). This requires competent and reliable evidence to back up all reasonable interpretations of your claim. The level of substantiation required will depend on the type and nature of the product at issue and the scope of the claim being made.
• Exercise extreme caution when making unqualified Made in USA claims. Unqualified Made in USA claims are only permissible if the stringent “all or virtually all” standard discussed above is met. As a practical matter, many products sold in the United States do not meet this standard. If your company is seeking to utilize these claims, proceed with caution and seek input from counsel. And remember—even if one product meets the “all or virtually all” standard, other products (even in the same product line) may not. Avoid making broad claims about all products or entire product lines if only some products meet the “all or virtually all” standard.
• Use qualified Made in USA claims only as appropriate and avoid overstating the amount of domestic content or processing. Qualified Made in USA claims may be suitable for products that include a significant amount of US content or processing. For example, qualified claims that a particular part was manufactured in the United States or a specific manufacturing process was performed in the United States should, in addition to being truthful and substantiated, clearly refer to the specific process or part, rather than speaking generally about the product as a whole. And of course, even qualified Made in USA claims must accurately reflect the extent to which the product was processed in, or its ingredients were sourced from, the United States.
• Remember that overall net impression matters. When evaluating a Made in USA claim, ask yourself, “When viewed in its entirety, what might a reasonable consumer take away from this?” This requires a holistic examination of the claim and overall context, including any surrounding elements.
• Maintain up-to-date internal guidance, conduct regular trainings, and establish a centralized point of review for Made in USA claims. Taking the time to establish a centralized approval process for all Made in USA claims can be a critical step in preventing marketing mishaps—particularly if your company has multiple departments or teams that are responsible for creating and releasing content. Other critical tools to facilitate compliance and streamline processes include regular training sessions, comprehensive written policies, and clear internal guidance documents.
• Request information regarding domestic content from suppliers. When relying on information from suppliers about the domestic content in parts, components, and other elements they produce, request specific information about the percentage of US content before making any claims.
• Exercise caution when making comparative claims about US content. Comparative claims tend to draw heightened scrutiny. Before making a comparative claim about US content, ensure that the claim is based on a meaningful difference or distinction. Comparative claims must be presented in a manner that makes the basis for comparison clear (i.e., whether the comparison is to another brand or to a previous version of the same product).
• Recognize the distinction between “Made in USA” and “Assembled in USA” claims. “Assembled in USA” claims may be appropriate for a product with foreign components if the product’s principal assembly takes place in the United States and the assembly is substantial. Of note, for the “assembly” claim to be valid, a product’s last “substantial transformation” must occur in the United States.
• Consider whether your claim conveys an affiliation with or connection to the government. Claims that misrepresent an affiliation with a government entity, business, or their officers (whether directly or by implication) may run afoul of the FTC’s Impersonation Rule.