Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Importing from China: New California Rules May Help You Assert Made in USA Claims

By Adams Lee on September 3, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

 

What is required for your China product to say "made in the USA"?
What is required for your China product to say “made in the USA”?

If your finished good is ultimately manufactured in the United States and contains only a small amount of China-origin material, California’s new Made in U.S.A. labeling rules may make it easier for you to label your products as Made in U.S.A.  

Prior to California’s new Made in U.S.A. labeling rules, the state prohibited labeling a product as Made in U.S.A. if a product or any of its subcomponent parts were produced or substantially produced outside the United States. By requiring all subcomponent parts to be of U.S. origin, California’s Made in U.S.A. requirement was stricter than the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) standard.

The FTC’s Made in U.S.A. standard requires that “all or virtually all” of a product be made in the United States; the FTC has not established a bright-line rule for what constitutes “all or virtually all” of a product. The FTC explains that this standard will typically be satisfied if all of a product’s significant parts and processing are of U.S. origin. Products with Made in U.S.A. labels must contain only negligible amounts of foreign-sourced parts or materials.

California’s new Made in U.S.A. rule, which goes into effect on January 1, 2016, allows products manufactured in the United States to be sold in California with Made in U.S.A. or similar labeling claims under two scenarios:

(1)  The foreign content of the product represents no more than 5% of the product’s final wholesale value; or

(2)  The manufacturer uses foreign-sourced parts and can demonstrate that it cannot make the finished good without the particular foreign-sourced parts and the value of such foreign-sourced parts or articles does not exceed 10% of the product’s wholesale value.

For manufacturers and companies selling products throughout the United States, California’s new law is a big deal. Companies’ marketing departments like to use Made in U.S.A. claims because U.S. customers generally prefer to purchase goods with such labels. They feel such purchases support U.S. commercial efforts.

Because California is such a large market, companies may have been cautious in the past about labeling their goods as Made in U.S.A. if such labels would not have complied with California law. Companies would not have used two different labels – one without a Made in U.S.A. claim to comply with California’s higher labeling standards and one with such a claim for all other states. Corporate administrative, regulatory and logistics costs would have outweighed any value gained from using two different labels, even if the Made in U.S.A. label could have resulted in greater sales outside California.

California’s new law moves the state closer to federal standards for Made in U.S.A. claims and may open up new opportunities for companies to assert such claims. Even so, companies sourcing components from China should ensure that the value of such components is not significant, especially under California’s new bright-line rules, before labeling their products as Made in U.S.A. The real test now is whether companies will be able to demonstrate that their Made in U.S.A. labels comply with California and federal legal requirements.

 

 

Photo of Adams Lee Adams Lee

Adams Lee has more than twenty years’ experience providing strategic advice and legal guidance on complex international trade and administrative regulatory matters to US and foreign companies, trade associations, and foreign governments. He advises companies in a broad range of industries on international…

Adams Lee has more than twenty years’ experience providing strategic advice and legal guidance on complex international trade and administrative regulatory matters to US and foreign companies, trade associations, and foreign governments. He advises companies in a broad range of industries on international trade remedy and trade policy issues.

Adams brings a wealth of knowledge to Harris Bricken’s international trade practice. He is adept at quickly evaluating strategic options and developing the best comprehensive legal approach in light of relevant policy and case law. Beyond achieving significant DOC and ITC results that improve his clients’ competitive position, Adams helps them understand complex trade issues so they can make well-informed business decisions.

Adams spends his free time exploring all that Seattle and the Northwest have to offer.

Read more about Adams LeeEmailAdams's Linkedin ProfileAdams's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial
  • Blog:
    China Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Harris Sliwoski
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo