FTC Follows New Executive Order with a “Made in the USA” Sweep

Following last month’s Executive Order (EO) directing the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Agency) to prioritize enforcement of fraudulent “Made in the U.S.A.” (MUSA) claims (see article here), on April 14, the FTC announced three new enforcement actions. Four companies were involved: TouchTunes Music Company, LLC (TouchTunes); Americana Liberty LLC and Three Nations LLC, as well as those two companies’ principals; and Oak Street Manufacturing Company, LLC (Oak Street), which also does business as Oak Street Bootmakers. The FTC also issued closing letters to two other companies. Two of the companies involved in the enforcement actions received warning letters from FTC last year, but failed to address FTC’s allegations before formal enforcement actions began. The Agency separately investigated Marketing Holders LLC and Lamar Trailers, Inc. for alleged false or misleading MUSA claims, but both agreed to modify their claims in response to the FTC’s inquiries before further enforcement action and received the closing letters.

The three enforcement actions and two closing letters rely on the FTC’s preexisting authority to enforce against false or misleading MUSA claims, without expressly mentioning the EO, although the FTC announcement does reference the EO. While the standard of review appears unchanged, the actions may signal ramped-up federal scrutiny of MUSA claims, which have been an enforcement priority for the FTC even before the EO. As we discussed here, in 2025, the FTC issued a number of warning letters to individual companies (including Americana Liberty and Oak Street) and online marketplaces, following a designation of July 2025 as “‘Made in the USA’ Month.” Meanwhile, in 2024, the Agency resolved four enforcement actions, including one with a record civil penalty for violating a prior FTC order.

The proposed order with TouchTunes in this most recent “sweep” of enforcement actions sets a different record: $625,000 towards consumer redress under Section 19 of the FTC Act. This case could signal that FTC will continue the trend from 2024 of seeking increasing monetary penalties. Indeed, the proposed orders in each of the three cases discussed below include six-figure monetary penalties.

TouchTunes
The FTC alleged that TouchTunes falsely claimed its electronic dartboards were “Made in the USA,” when they contained imported components. Although final product assembly occurred in the U.S., the FTC’s complaint alleged that many components essential to the function and operation of the products—including computer chips, cameras, and flatscreen monitors— were made outside the U.S. Accordingly, the FTC alleged that TouchTunes made false, unqualified “Made in the USA” claims on its online sales page and in other advertisements, in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, Section 45a, and the MUSA Labeling Rule. FTC sought a permanent injunction, monetary relief, and other relief under Sections 13(b) and 19 of the FTC Act.

Under a stipulated proposed order, TouchTunes agreed to:

• Pay $625,000 towards consumer redress under Section 19 of the FTC Act;
• Not make false or misleading U.S.-origin or other country-of-origin claims; and
• Provide notice to consumers of the settlement.

Americana Liberty and Three Nations
Following a July 8, 2025, warning letter, the FTC brought an enforcement action alleging that Americana Liberty, Three Nations, and their principals falsely advertised and labeled a patriotic flag display and related products as “Made in the USA,” “All-American Made,” “100% Made in the USA,” “100% American Made Tough,” and “Built by Americans for Americans.” The FTC further alleged that despite these claims, several products were actually wholly imported from China or comprised of significant or essential foreign components from China. By making these statements, the FTC claimed the defendants violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, Section 45a, the MUSA Labeling Rule, the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act (TFPIA), and the Textile Rules.

Under a stipulated proposed order, the companies agreed to:

• Pay $167,743 towards consumer redress;
• Not make false or misleading U.S.-origin or other country-of-origin claims;
• Make truthful, non-misleading and substantiated disclosures concerning textile fiber products; and
• Provide notice to consumers of the settlement.

Oak Street
Also following a warning letter, the FTC brought an enforcement action against Oak Street, alleging that the company falsely claimed that certain boots, loafers, moccasins, and other footwear products were “handcrafted 100%” in the United States; the “entire product” was made in the U.S. “from heel-to-toe, using no pre-assembled components from overseas”; and that their footwear products were “More than Made in USATM.” Despite these claims, the FTC alleged that the company used a factory in the Dominican Republic to produce the top portion of certain footwear products, while also sourcing outsoles from a factory in Brazil. Oak Street then allegedly shipped these components to the U.S. for final assembly of some footwear products, but final assembly for others was completed in the Dominican Republic. The FTC claimed that this conduct violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, Section 45a, and the MUSA Labeling Rule.

Under a stipulated proposed order, Oak Street agreed to:

• Pay $75,000 towards consumer redress (with an additional $275,000 suspended based on the company’s financial representations); and
• Not make false or misleading U.S.-origin or other country-of-origin claims.

The vote to issue the complaints and proposed stipulated orders in each of the first two cases was unanimous. Commissioner Meador recused himself from the case against Oak Street.

With this recent “sweep” of enforcement, it seems the FTC is ready to fulfill its directive under the EO. While the regulated community might be confused on how best to avoid being a target, as we discussed here, the Agency is aligned with the White House on keeping MUSA claims at the top of its enforcement priority list.