Page 1 of 3 

Bureau of Consumer Protection 

 Division of Enforcement 

 Julia Solomon Ensor 

 Attorney 

Email: jensor@ftc.gov 

Direct Dial: (202) 326-2377

 March 19, 2020 

VIA EMAIL

Neil C. Jones, Esq. 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP 

2 W. Washington Street 

Greenville, SC 29601 

neil.jones@nelsonmullins.com 

Dear Mr. Jones: 

 We received your submissions on behalf of J-B Weld Company, LLC (“J-B Weld” or the 

“Company”). During our review, we discussed concerns that marketing materials may have 

overstated the extent to which J-B Weld’s products are made in the United States. Specifically, 

although J-B Weld makes many U.S.-origin epoxy and silicone adhesive products in the United 

States, the Company also sells cyanoacrylate and other adhesive products that either incorporate 

significant imported content, or are wholly imported.1

As discussed, unqualified U.S.-origin claims in marketing materials – including claims 

that products are “Made,” “Built,” or “Manufactured” in the USA – likely suggest to consumers 

that all products advertised in those materials are “all or virtually all” made in the United States.2

 

The Commission may analyze a number of different factors to determine whether a product is 

“all or virtually all” made in the United States, including the proportion of the product’s total 

manufacturing costs attributable to U.S. parts and processing, how far removed any foreign 

 

1

 The staff’s review followed a referral from the National Advertising Review Board of the 

BBB-National Programs (“NARB”) after J-B Weld disagreed with NARB’s finding that its caps, 

tubes, syringes, and/or applicators were covered by the Company’s U.S.-origin claims, and 

declined to comply with NARB’s recommendations. 

2

 Federal Trade Commission, Issuance of Enforcement Policy Statement on “Made in USA” and 

Other U.S. Origin Claims, 62 Fed. Reg. 63756, 63768 (Dec. 2, 1997) (“Policy Statement”). 

Additionally, beyond express “Made in USA” claims, “[d]epending on the context, U.S. symbols 

or geographic references, such as U.S. flags, outlines of U.S. maps, or references to U.S. 

locations of headquarters or factories, may, by themselves or in conjunction with other phrases or 

images, convey a claim of U.S. origin.” Id. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 
Page 2 of 3 

content is from the finished product, and the importance of the foreign content or processing to 

the overall function of the product. 

The Commission has noted that “[w]here a product is not all or virtually all made in the 

United States, any claim of U.S. origin should be adequately qualified to avoid consumer 

deception about the presence or amount of foreign content. In order to be effective, any 

qualifications or disclosures should be sufficiently clear, prominent, and understandable to 

prevent deception. Clarity of language, prominence of type size and style, proximity to the claim 

being qualified, and an absence of contrary claims that could undercut the effectiveness of the 

qualification, will maximize the likelihood that the qualifications and disclosures are 

appropriately clear and prominent.”3

To avoid deceiving consumers, J-B Weld implemented a remedial action plan to update 

and qualify its representations where needed. This plan included: (1) updating packaging for 

three product lines; (2) removing unqualified U.S.-origin claims from general company 

marketing materials, including the J-B Weld website, LinkedIn page, Facebook page, and 

YouTube page; and (3) requiring updates to third-party online marketing materials for affected 

product lines. 

In general, although not specifically covered in the Policy Statement, the FTC has not 

required manufacturers to account for the origin of incidental, discarded packaging when 

analyzing product origin, unless the marketer’s claims expressly or impliedly convey that the 

packaging is of U.S. origin.4

 In this case, in certain instances, J-B Weld made unqualified 

“Made in USA” claims on its packaging about its products. While the glue contained in that 

packaging was “all or virtually all” made in the United States, the packaging itself, which had no 

independent value to consumers and was typically discarded upon depletion, was not. In the 

absence of consumer perception evidence showing otherwise, FTC staff finds it is unlikely that 

reasonable consumers interpreted the unqualified U.S. origin claims on these adhesive products 

as covering the incidental, discarded packaging.

As discussed, it is appropriate for J-B Weld to promote the fact that it employs workers 

 

3 Id. at 63769. 

4 See, e.g., FTC Advisory Opinion No. 368, Disclosure of origin of imported plastic vinegar 

bottles (Oct. 9, 1969), digest available at 

https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/commission_decision_volumes/volume76/ftc_volume_decision_76_july_-_december_1969pages_1039-1125.pdf (stating a 

manufacturer of domestically-made vinegar need not disclose the origin of imported plastic 

containers in the absence of an affirmative representation that the bottles were made in the 

United States). Relatedly, the FTC has long advised marketers that U.S.-origin claims on U.S.-

origin packaging containing imported products likely deceive consumers. See, e.g., FTC 

Advisory Opinion No. 230, Foreign country of origin disclosure on mounting cards displaying 

imported eyelashes (Apr. 4, 1968), digest available at 

https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/commission_decision_volumes/volume73/ftcd-vol73january-june1968pages1289-end.pdf (where imported eyelashes were displayed in 

U.S.-origin packaging, marketer must disclose foreign origin of imported eyelashes). 
Page 3 of 3 

and makes a wide range of products in the United States, provided that marketing materials do 

not convey that all J-B Weld products are made in the United States or overstate the U.S. content 

of products that contain significant imported inputs. As you know, FTC staff is available to 

work with companies to craft qualified claims that serve the dual purposes of conveying nondeceptive information to consumers and highlighting work done in the United States. 

Based on J-B Weld’s actions and other factors, the staff has decided not to pursue this 

investigation any further. This action should not be construed as a determination that there was 

no violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45. The 

Commission reserves the right to take such further action as the public interest may require. If 

you have any questions, you can reach me at (202) 326-2377. 

 Sincerely, 

 Julia Solomon Ensor 

 Staff Attorney 

cc: Kenneth Plevan, Chair, NARB 

-