Skip to content

Menu

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

FTC Imposes Record $1.2 Million Penalty for a “Made in USA” Case

By Sheila Millar & Jean-Cyril Walker on January 4, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

For the second time since 2016, glue producer Chemence, Inc. (Chemence) has found itself adverse to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for making allegedly deceptive claims that its products are American made. And this time it cost them $1.2 million – the highest settlement amount ever paid in a “Made in USA” case.

In 2016, the FTC charged Chemence, among several other glue manufacturers,[1] with making unqualified, deceptive country-of-origin claims about their cyanoacrylate superglue products such as Kwifix, Krylex, and Hammer Tite, including labeling them “Made in USA,” “Proudly Made in USA,” and using images of the American flag on product packaging. According to the 2016 FTC complaint, a significant proportion of the costs of the chemical components in the glues came from imported chemicals. Further, the FTC alleged that Chemence induced sellers to deceive unwitting consumers by providing them with “Made in USA” promotional materials for the products. The Stipulated Court Order against Chemence fined the company $220,000 and prohibited it from representing, expressly or by implication (including in labelling and advertising) that its products were USA made unless it could show that the product’s final assembly or processing occurred in the United States, that all significant processing occurred in the United States, and that all or virtually all ingredients or components of the product were made and sourced in the United States. Otherwise, Chemence was required to make a “clear and conspicuous qualification [which] appears immediately adjacent to the representation that accurately conveys the extent to which the product contains foreign parts, ingredients, and/or processing.” The order also required the company to submit a compliance report to the FTC one year after the order.

But according to the FTC’s 2020 complaint, Chemence and its president, James Cooke, continued to sell the company’s glue products with “Made in USA” labels using the same foreign-sourced ingredients with no qualifying language, in violation of the 2016 Order. The FTC also asserts that in 2017 Cooke falsely claimed in the company’s annual compliance report that the company had relabeled its glue products to reflect that they are made with globally sourced materials.

The terms of the 2020 proposed settlement agreement bar Chemence and Cooke from making country-of-origin claims they cannot substantiate. Moreover, the agreement bans them from making any unqualified “Made in USA” claims unless they can show that the product’s final assembly and all significant processing occurs in the U.S. and that all or virtually all ingredients or components of the product are made and sourced in the United States. Qualified “Made in USA” claims must clearly and conspicuously disclose how much of a product contains foreign parts, ingredients or components, and/or processing. To support claims that a product is assembled in the U.S., they must demonstrate that the product is substantially transformed in the United States, with its principal assembly in the United States, and substantial U.S. assembly operations. The company must submit yearly compliance reports and inform all sellers that purchased the company’s glue products labeled as USA-made that the products contain imported materials.

The Commission vote to issue the complaint and accept the proposed consent order was 5-0. Commissioner Rohit Chopra issued a statement in which he applauded the Commission’s sanctions against Chemence and its president as “real consequences” and “another step forward in protecting the Made in USA brand and restoring the Commission’s law enforcement credibility.”

Many customers who want to support domestic industries look for “American Made” claims or symbols. Knowing this, the FTC continues to pursue “Made in USA” claims aggressively, and has a pending rulemaking on the topic. Those who are caught once making false U.S. origin claims and continue to make them face significant consequences, as the record-breaking penalty imposed on Chemence and Cooke demonstrates.

Many companies find the difference between country-of-origin rules imposed by Customs and Border Control and the FTC’s “Made in USA” guidance to be confusing, and, as we have previously noted, the landscape is complicated still more because of California’s law on U.S. origin claims.[2] But businesses wishing to advertise their products as American made would be well advised to familiarize themselves with the FTC’s Enforcement Policy Statement on U.S. Origin Claims guidance to avoid their “Made in USA” claims from coming unglued.

[1] See https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2016/02/ftc-challenges-companys-made-usa-claims.

[2] Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17533.7

Photo of Sheila Millar Sheila Millar

Sheila A. Millar is a partner at Keller and Heckman LLP, where she represents businesses and trade associations on a variety of public policy and regulatory issues, including privacy, data security, cybersecurity and advertising matters, as well as product safety issues. She has…

Sheila A. Millar is a partner at Keller and Heckman LLP, where she represents businesses and trade associations on a variety of public policy and regulatory issues, including privacy, data security, cybersecurity and advertising matters, as well as product safety issues. She has been involved in a variety of audit and compliance projects, including, among other issues, privacy and data security audits, and is experienced in providing crisis management legal support to a variety of national and international companies and associations.

Ms. Millar is a frequent speaker on regulatory and public policy matters, and has authored many articles. Ms. Millar is one of the vice chairs of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Marketing and Advertising Commission, and chair of its Working Group on Sustainability, where she spearheaded the development of the ICC Framework Guides on Environmental Marketing Claims.

Ms. Millar is AV® PreeminentTM Rated by Martindale-Hubbell and for the eigth consecutive year was selected by her peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2018 for her work in practicing Advertising Law. She has also received the distinguished honor of Advertising Law “Lawyer of the Year” 2014 in Washington, DC by Best Lawyers®, and was awarded Advertising and Marketing Lawyer of the Year USA by Finance Monthly for their Finance Monthly Global Awards 2017.

Read more about Sheila MillarEmailSheila's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Jean-Cyril Walker Jean-Cyril Walker

JC Walker practices environmental, product safety and energy efficiency law.

Mr. Walker’s environmental practice focuses on a wide range of matters, including compliance with U.S. requirements governing the safe management and disposal of chemical and hazardous substances under the Resource Conservation and Recovery…

JC Walker practices environmental, product safety and energy efficiency law.

Mr. Walker’s environmental practice focuses on a wide range of matters, including compliance with U.S. requirements governing the safe management and disposal of chemical and hazardous substances under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and state analogues. Mr. Walker regularly advises industry and trade association clients on regulations of hazardous air pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and state and local air pollution statutes, as well as emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in adhesives, paints, and other industrial and consumer products.

Mr. Walker also regularly advises clients on product safety issues. This includes assessing compliance with the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA), other Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) requirements, and state consumer product requirements.

Additionally, Mr. Walker counsels a broad range of industries on compliance with the U.S. Energy Policy and Conservation Act and California’s energy efficiency regulations. Representative clients include manufacturers and distributors of: consumer appliances; commercial refrigeration equipment; heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment; and computers and consumer electronic devices.

In addition to compliance advice, Mr. Walker regularly represents clients in actions brought by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and other Federal and state agencies.

Read more about Jean-Cyril WalkerEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Antitrust, Competition and Trade
  • Blog:
    Consumer Protection Connection
  • Organization:
    Keller Heckman
  • 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