EO-14392
Ensuring Truthful Advertising of Products Claiming To Be Made in America
- Signed
- Mar 13, 2026
- Published
- Mar 18, 2026
Federal Register: 2026-05383
Source: Federal Register.
Cracking Down on False "Made in America" Product Claims
What it does
This order directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prioritize enforcement against sellers and manufacturers who falsely claim their products are "Made in America" or "Made in the U.S.A." It also directs the FTC to consider new rules that would require online marketplaces to verify country-of-origin claims, and instructs federal agencies to audit and enforce "Buy American" claims made by government contractors — referring fraudulent contractors to the Department of Justice under the False Claims Act.
Who benefits
U.S.-based manufacturers who genuinely produce goods domestically and currently lose business to competitors making false origin claims. American consumers who want to make informed purchasing decisions based on country of origin. Small domestic manufacturers who cannot compete on price with foreign goods falsely labeled as American-made. Federal government agencies and taxpayers who pay for goods under "Buy American" contracts. Workers employed by legitimate domestic manufacturers whose market share is undercut by fraudulent labeling.
Who is affected
Online marketplace platforms (e.g., large e-commerce sites) that would face new compliance costs to verify seller country-of-origin claims. Foreign manufacturers and sellers who currently list products on U.S. digital marketplaces with American-origin claims. Government contractors whose country-of-origin claims will face increased scrutiny and potential removal from procurement lists. Small online sellers who may lack resources to meet new verification procedures. Importers and resellers who blend domestic and foreign components and may face ambiguity about labeling standards.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that false "Made in America" claims are a form of consumer fraud that harms both buyers and honest domestic producers, and that the FTC's existing authority under the FTC Act to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts and practices gives the agency clear legal footing to act. They contend the order levels the playing field for American manufacturers who invest in domestic production and jobs, and that extending verification requirements to online marketplaces closes a well-documented enforcement gap in the modern digital economy.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that directing the FTC to "prioritize" specific enforcement categories could distort the agency's independent judgment and stretch its resources away from other consumer protection priorities. They contend that requiring online marketplaces to verify country-of-origin claims for every listed product would impose significant compliance costs on platforms and small sellers, potentially raising prices or reducing market competition. Critics also note that post-Loper Bright, any new FTC rules extending liability to marketplace platforms for third-party seller claims would face heightened judicial scrutiny over whether the FTC Act clearly authorizes such an expansion.
Constitutional basis
Executive orders rest on constitutional authority or statutory delegation. This summary describes the legal grounding cited or implied by the order.
The order invokes the president's Article II, Section 3 Take Care Clause authority to direct executive agencies in implementing existing law. It relies primarily on the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. §41 et seq.), which grants the FTC authority to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce, and the False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. §3729 et seq.) for government procurement fraud referrals. The Buy American Act also provides statutory grounding for the government contracting provisions.