Research

What a Made in the USA label has to be true of

A short federal rule sets three conditions for an unqualified American-origin claim, all of which have to hold at once. It also defines the claim broadly enough that a seal, a badge and a sentence of body copy are all covered.

By Nora Castellan, Standards EditorUpdated September 2026

The short answer

A Federal Trade Commission rule titled Made in USA Labeling sets one standard, and it is three conditions joined by the word and.

It is an unfair or deceptive act or practice to label any product as Made in the United States unless 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.

All three have to hold. Final assembly in the United States is not on its own sufficient under the rule, because the second and third conditions reach further back into the supply chain.

The phrase all or virtually all is the rule's own wording for the ingredient condition. No percentage appears in the rule, and none is stated here.

The definition is wider than the phrase

The rule does not limit itself to a particular form of words. Made in the United States is defined as any unqualified representation, express or implied, that a product or service, or a specified component of it, is of U.S. origin.

The definition then gives examples without closing the list: representations that a product or service is made, manufactured, built, produced, created, or crafted in the United States or in America, or any other unqualified U.S.-origin claim.

Two words in that definition carry most of the weight. Unqualified means the claim stands without a limiting statement attached. Implied means the representation does not have to be a sentence. A flag graphic, a seal, or a badge can convey the same thing.

A separate section makes the seal point explicit for one context. To the extent a mail order catalog or mail order promotional material includes a seal, mark, tag, or stamp labeling a product Made in the United States, that label must comply with the standard.

The rule defines mail order catalog and mail order promotional material for itself: materials used in the direct sale or direct offering for sale of any product or service, disseminated in print or by electronic means, soliciting purchase by mail, telephone, electronic mail, or some other method without examining the actual product purchased.

That definition describes online selling without naming it, and it is the reason the seal provision is not a print-era leftover.

Qualified claims are a different thing

Because the rule's definition turns on the word unqualified, the natural next question is what a qualified claim is, and the statute rather than the rule answers it.

The underlying statute states that nothing in it precludes use of such labels for products that contain imported components under the label when the label also discloses such information in a clear and conspicuous manner.

So a claim that names what is imported, clearly and conspicuously, is not the same object as an unqualified claim, and the rule's three-part standard is written for the unqualified version.

The practical reading is that assembled in, designed in, or made in America from domestic and imported materials are each making a narrower statement than the bare phrase. What each one commits a seller to depends on what it actually says, which is a question about a particular label.

The statute behind the rule

The rule's authority note cites a single statutory section, and reading it clarifies what the rule is and is not.

The statute provides that to the extent any person introduces, delivers for introduction, sells, advertises, or offers for sale in commerce a product with a Made in the U.S.A. or Made in America label, or the equivalent, in order to represent that the product was in whole or substantial part of domestic origin, that label shall be consistent with decisions and orders of the Federal Trade Commission issued under the general prohibition on unfair or deceptive acts or practices.

It then limits itself twice in successive sentences. This section only applies to such labels. And nothing in this section shall preclude the application of other provisions of law relating to labeling.

That second sentence matters in a market where labeling is already governed by other regimes. An origin claim being consistent with this rule says nothing about whether a container satisfies any other labeling requirement that applies to it.

The statute also provides that the Commission may from time to time issue rules for the purpose, and that if a rule is issued, a violation shall be treated as a violation of a trade regulation rule regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The rule itself repeats that: any violation of the part shall be treated as a violation of a rule under section 18 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Where the rule stops and a state may go further

The rule has a section on its relation to other federal and state law, and it does two different things in its two paragraphs.

It states that it shall not be construed as superseding, altering, or affecting the application of any other federal law or regulation relating to country-of-origin labeling requirements, naming the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act and the Egg Products Inspection Act as examples.

For state law it says the same, except to the extent a state statute, regulation, order or interpretation is inconsistent with the rule, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency.

Then it defines inconsistent asymmetrically. A state provision is not inconsistent if the protection it affords any consumer is greater than the protection provided under the rule, as determined by the Commission on its own motion or on the petition of any interested party.

So a state rule that is stricter is not displaced by this one. That is the same structural pattern several other consumer rules use, and it is the reason a claim can satisfy a federal standard and still be governed by something else where the buyer lives.

The rule also contains an exemption mechanism. Any person to whom it applies may petition the Commission for a partial or full exemption, and the Commission may issue one, in response to petitions or on its own authority, if it finds application of the requirements is not necessary to prevent the acts or practices the rule relates to. Exemptions may be conditioned on compliance with alternative standards.

What a reader can and cannot verify

The rule describes facts about a supply chain: where final assembly happened, where significant processing happened, and where ingredients or components were made and sourced.

None of those is visible from a product page. A buyer reading a website sees the claim, not the chain behind it, and this site is in the same position: everything on a comparison page was read from the outside, from pages sellers wrote about themselves.

What a reader can do is notice which kind of claim is being made. An unqualified claim and a qualified one are different objects under the rule, and the difference is usually visible in the words. So is whether the claim attaches to the finished product or to one named component, since the rule's definition covers a representation about a specified component too.

Nothing in this article says that any origin claim in this market is false or unsupported. It sets out what such a claim commits a seller to under the rule, which is a different and more modest thing.

Key takeaways

Frequently asked questions

What does Made in the USA have to be true of under the federal rule?

Three things at once. 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. The rule joins them with the word and, so satisfying one is not enough.

Does the rule only cover the exact phrase Made in the USA?

No. It defines the term as any unqualified representation, express or implied, that a product or service, or a specified component of it, is of U.S. origin, and lists made, manufactured, built, produced, created and crafted as examples before extending to any other unqualified U.S.-origin claim. Because the definition includes implied representations, a graphic can convey the claim as well as a sentence.

Is a percentage of American content specified anywhere?

Not in the rule. Its standard is the phrase all or virtually all. The underlying statute says the Commission may periodically consider an appropriate percentage of imported components which may be included in the product and still be reasonably consistent with its decisions and orders, but the rule itself states no figure and none is stated here.

What about a claim that names imported components?

The statute provides that nothing in it precludes use of such labels for products containing imported components when the label also discloses that information in a clear and conspicuous manner. The rule's definition turns on the word unqualified, so a claim that carries such a disclosure is not the same object as the bare claim, and the three-part standard is written for the unqualified version.

Does the rule apply to a website rather than a catalog?

Its seal provision applies to mail order catalogs and mail order promotional material, and the rule defines those as materials used in the direct sale or direct offering for sale of any product or service, disseminated in print or by electronic means, soliciting purchase by mail, telephone, electronic mail, or some other method without examining the actual product purchased. The main prohibition applies to labeling any product in connection with promoting or offering it for sale.

Can a state impose a stricter origin rule?

The rule addresses that directly. It states it does not supersede a state statute, regulation, order or interpretation on country-of-origin labeling except to the extent that provision is inconsistent with the rule, and then defines inconsistency asymmetrically: a state provision is not inconsistent if the protection it affords any consumer is greater than the protection the rule provides, as determined by the Commission.

Sources

Each document below is named as it names itself, with the date printed on that document rather than the day it was read.

  1. Title 16 Code of Federal Regulations Part 323, Made in USA Labeling, read in full — the definitions of Made in the United States and of mail order catalog and mail order promotional material at 323.1, the three-part prohibition at 323.2, the seal provision at 323.3, the enforcement provision at 323.4, the federal and state law relation and greater-protection test at 323.5, and the exemption petition mechanism at 323.6; Source note 86 FR 37032, July 14, 2021, with 323.6 at 86 FR 59854, Oct. 29, 2021 — Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Office of the Federal Register, September 2026
  2. United States Code Title 15, Section 45a, Labels on products — read in full for the consistency requirement, the two limiting sentences confining the section to such labels and preserving other labeling law, the clear and conspicuous disclosure allowance for imported components, and the treatment of a violation as a violation of a trade regulation rule — Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives, September 2026