The March 13, 2026 Executive Order on “Made in America” claims directs the Federal Trade Commission to scrutinize U.S. origin claims and prioritize enforcement against companies making unsubstantiated claims. This aspect of the EO isn't surprising. However, other aspects of the order are more consequential. It addresses two distinct legal frameworks with different requirements in one order and signals a potential shift in the responsibility for ensuring that U.S. origin claims are substantiated, particularly for retailers and online marketplaces.

Two Standards, One Order

The Order does not attempt to alter the FTC’s “all or virtually all” standard for substantiating unqualified U.S. origin claims. That standard continues to require (a) final assembly or processing occur in the U.S. ; (b) all significant processing occur domestically.; and (c) all or virtually all components be made and sourced in America.

The Order also addresses government procurement. It directs agencies to review and verify “Buy American Act,” “Country of Origin USA,” and similar claims for products sold to the U.S. government. If those claims are inaccurate, agencies are instructed to remove the products from the procurement channel and refer the matter to DOJ, which “may pursue actions under the False Claims Act.”

The FTC Act and the rules for government contracting impose different standards. Specifically, Buy American and other government procurement standards may tolerate more foreign content than the FTC Act and the Made in USA Labeling Rule. Thus, a product may satisfy Buy American but not the FTC's requirements. By addressing both regimes in a single Order without distinguishing between the two standards, the Order may create some uncertainty. Companies operating in both spaces will need to be mindful of how those standards differ in practice.

A Potential Shift for Retailers and Marketplaces

The most consequential provision may be the the following directive:

“The FTC shall consider issuing proposed regulations providing that the failure of an online marketplace to establish procedures for verifying country-of-origin claims may constitute an unfair or deceptive act or practice…”

Importantly, under current FTC guidance, retailers are permitted to reasonably rely on supplier representations regarding whether U.S. origin claims claims are substantiated. Further, in the July 2025 warning letters issued to certain online retailers, the agency noted that certain U.S. origin claims for products being sold on their platforms may not be appropriately substantiated, but acknowledged that it was not necessarily alleging the retailers violated Section 5 of the FTC Act or the FTC's Made in USA Labeling Rule. Instead, the letters urged the retailers to voluntarily monitor, identify, and take corrective action against third-party sellers who have made unsubstantiated U.S. origin claims.

The Order’s focus on “procedures for verifying” Made in USA claims appears to go further than that existing framework. If rulemaking is implemented, retailers and marketplaces may be expected to take additional steps to assess the accuracy of U.S. origin claims made by manufacturers or third-party sellers. That would represent a meaningful shift, particularly for platforms with large product assortments.

It also presents practical challenges. Verifying compliance with the FTC’s “all or virtually all” standard can require detailed information about sourcing and manufacturing that retailers often do not have.

The Bottom Line

The Executive Order leaves the FTC’s “Made in USA” standard intact, but it addresses consumer advertising and government procurement in the same order and signals potential expansion in terms of the parties responsible for substantiation. Companies operating in this space will need to navigate not only different substantive standards, but also evolving expectations about who must ensure that U.S. origin claims comply with those standards.