Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 40665 

1 15 U.S.C. 45. 

2Although the Guides focus on deception, the 

FTC can also address unfair practices should the 

need arise. 

3FTC Policy Statement on Deception, appended 

to Cliffdale Assoc., Inc., 103 FTC 110 (1984); see 

also FTC v. Verity Int’l, 443 F.3d 48, 63 (2d Cir. 

2006); FTC v. Pantron I Corp., 33 F.3d 1088, 1095 

(9th Cir. 1994). Under Section 5, an act or practice 

is unfair if it causes or is likely to cause substantial 

injury that consumers could not reasonably avoid, 

and the injury is not outweighed by countervailing 

benefits to consumers or competition. 15 U.S.C. 

45(n). 

4See generally Deception Policy Statement, 

appended to Cliffdale Assoc., Inc., 103 FTC at 179 

(1984). 

5Sections 23.5(b)(4) (silver) and 23.6(b)(1) 

(platinum). 

6Section 23.3(b)(3). 

7Sections 23.3(b)(4), (5), (6), and (8), (c)(2) and (3) 

(gold); 23.5(b)(5) (silver); and 23.6(b)(2) (platinum). 

8These examples are also referred to as ‘‘safe 

harbor’’ guidance. 

9As proposed, the final Guides eliminate the safe 

harbor provision for ‘‘gold plate(d)’’ coatings 

applied by any method and transfer this term to 

guidance that separately addresses electrolytic and 

mechanical applications. 

10Section 23.3(c)(2). As explained in the SBP, the 

Guides advise a minimum weight ratio, rather than 

the previously proposed coating thickness, based on 

new evidence indicating that 1/40th provides the 

durability consumers expect. 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 23 

Guides for the Jewelry, Precious 

Metals, and Pewter Industries 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; adoption of revised 

guides. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) 

adopts revised Guides for the Jewelry, 

Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries 

(‘‘Jewelry Guides’’ or ‘‘Guides’’). This 

document summarizes the 

Commission’s revisions to the previous 

Guides and includes the final Guides as 

revised. Readers can find the 

Commission’s complete analysis in the 

Statement of Basis and Purpose (‘‘SBP’’) 

on the FTC’s website at https://

www.ftc.gov/public-statements/2018/07/ 

statement-basis-purpose-final-revisionsjewelry-guides. 

DATES: Effective on August 16, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Reenah L. Kim, Attorney, (202) 326– 

2272, Division of Enforcement, Bureau 

of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade 

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of 

its comprehensive review of the Jewelry 

Guides, the Commission reviewed 

public comments and the transcript of a 

public roundtable. The Commission 

developed its final guidance in 

accordance with Section 5 of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act (‘‘FTC 

Act’’), which prohibits deceptive or 

unfair acts or practices.1 The Guides 

focus on advising marketers how to 

make non-deceptive claims about 

jewelry products, rather than preventing 

unfair practices.2 Under Section 5, an 

act or practice is deceptive if it involves 

a material statement or omission that 

would mislead a consumer acting 

reasonably under the circumstances.3

As administrative interpretations of 

Section 5, the Commission’s Jewelry 

Guides are not intended to be stricter 

than Section 5. Rather, they provide the 

Commission’s interpretation of Section 

5 as applied to jewelry marketing, to 

help marketers avoid deceptive 

practices. To comply with Section 5, 

marketers must consider how 

reasonable consumers will view their 

claims as a whole, assessing the net 

impression conveyed by all elements 

(including the text, product names, and 

depictions).4

When the Commission issues or 

revises an industry guide, it is providing 

an administrative interpretation of laws 

it administers, including Section 5’s 

prohibition on unfair and deceptive acts 

or practices in or affecting commerce. 

The Commission provides its 

administrative interpretation based on 

information submitted and any other 

information available, including 

consumer perception evidence 

whenever possible, analyzing the 

information through the reasonable 

person standard first set forth in the 

Deception Policy Statement in 1983, 

and the unfairness standard, first set 

forth in the Unfairness Policy Statement 

announced in 1984 and codified in 

Section 5(n) of the FTC Act. Applying 

the reasonable consumer standard 

supported by consumer perception 

evidence as the Commission revises the 

Jewelry Guides (which originally 

predated the two policy statements) 

enhances the protection of consumers 

from the harm of false or misleading 

claims in jewelry marketing and fosters 

truthful, non-misleading claims in 

jewelry marketing that are beneficial to 

consumers and competition. Based on 

this framework, the Commission now 

makes several modifications and 

additions to the previous Guides and 

adopts the resulting revised Guides as 

final. Specifically, the Commission 

revises the following areas: (I) Surface 

application of precious metals; (II) 

alloys with precious metals in amounts 

below minimum thresholds; (III) 

products containing more than one 

precious metal; (IV) composite gemstone 

products; (V) varietals; (VI) ‘‘cultured’’ 

diamonds; (VII) qualifying claims about 

man-made gemstones; (VIII) pearl 

treatment disclosures; (IX) use of the 

term ‘‘gem’’; (X) misleading 

illustrations; (XI) diamond definition; 

and (XII) exemptions recognized in the 

assay for gold, silver, and platinum. 

Finally, the Commission does not 

expand the existing Guides to address 

certain products and claims as 

requested by commenters. 

Surface Application of Precious Metals 

The final Guides include several 

revisions addressing precious metal 

surface applications. First, based on the 

comments, the Guides now caution 

marketers against using silver or 

platinum terms to describe all or part of 

a coated product unless they adequately 

qualify the term to indicate the product 

has only a surface layer of the 

advertised precious metal.5 The Guides 

retain similar guidance advising 

marketers not to use gold terms to 

describe coated products or parts unless 

the term is qualified to convey that the 

gold is only on the surface.6

Second, for sellers choosing to 

advertise their products’ precious metal 

coatings, the final Guides advise how to 

do so non-deceptively. Specifically, 

they advise marketers advertising their 

product’s gold, silver, or platinum 

coating to assure its reasonable 

durability. In this context, ‘‘reasonable 

durability’’ means ‘‘all areas of the 

plating are sufficiently thick to assure 

coverage that reasonable consumers 

would expect from the surface 

application.’’ 7

Third, based on new durability 

testing, the final Guides include revised 

examples of non-deceptive markings 

and descriptions for gold surface 

applications that are reasonably 

durable.8 For electrolytic applications, 

the Guides retain the same thickness 

and karat fineness amounts as the 

previous Guides, but no longer advise 

marketers they may non-deceptively use 

‘‘gold flashed’’ and ‘‘gold washed’’ for 

products with an electroplating that 

does not have a minimum thickness 

throughout equivalent to 0.175 microns 

(approximately 7/1,000,000ths of an 

inch) of fine gold. For mechanical 

applications, the Guides now advise a 1/ 

40th minimum weight ratio for nondeceptive use of the terms ‘‘gold 

plate(d),’’ 9 ‘‘gold overlay,’’ ‘‘rolled gold 

plate.’’ 10 In addition, the Guides retain 

existing guidance advising a 1/20th 

weight ratio for ‘‘gold filled’’ products, 

and the guidance advising marketers to 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
40666 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

11Section 23.3(c)(2). As proposed, the final 

Guides eliminate a note concerning outdated terms 

(e.g., ‘‘Duragold,’’ ‘‘Diragold’’) which commenters 

agreed are no longer used. However, they do not set 

standards for new coating terms (e.g., ‘‘clad,’’ 

‘‘bonded’’) or other precious metal coatings such as 

silver or platinum. 

12Sections 23.3(b)(1) and (2) (gold); 23.5(b)(1) 

(silver); and 23.6(b)(3) (platinum). In addition, 

based on the comments, the Guides now include 

karat fineness disclosures in the description and 

marking examples for gold electrolytic applications, 

consistent with the examples for mechanical 

applications. Section 23.3(b)(5), (6), and (8); 

23.3(c)(2) and (3). 

13Rhodium is a platinum group metal often used 

to enhance the white color of silver and white gold 

jewelry. Section 23.7. 

14Section 23.3(b)(2). 

15Section 23.5(b)(1). 

16Section 23.5(b)(2). 

17Section 23.5(b)(3). 18Section 23.25(d). 

disclose weight ratio when using ‘‘gold 

overlay’’ or ‘‘rolled gold plate’’ for 

products below 1/20th.11

Fourth, the final Guides advise 

marketers to disclose the purity of 

coatings made with a gold, silver, or 

platinum alloy. The Guides already 

caution marketers against unqualified 

use of ‘‘gold,’’ ‘‘silver,’’ or ‘‘platinum’’ to 

describe alloys containing less than 24K 

gold, 925 PPT silver, or 950 PPT 

platinum. To clarify that this guidance 

applies equally to products coated with 

a gold, silver, or platinum alloy, the 

Commission amends the guidance to 

advise that marketers qualify their use 

of gold, silver, or platinum terms to 

describe ‘‘all or part’’ of a product, 

‘‘including the surface layer of a coated 

product,’’ with equally conspicuous, 

accurate purity disclosures.12

Finally, the final Guides advise 

marketers to disclose rhodium coatings 

over products advertised as precious 

metal, such as rhodium-plated items 

marketed as ‘‘white gold’’ or silver.13

Below-Threshold Precious Metal Alloys 

The previous Guides cautioned 

marketers against using the words 

‘‘gold,’’ ‘‘silver,’’ ‘‘platinum,’’ or their 

abbreviations to describe or mark a 

product unless it contained the precious 

metal in an amount that met or 

exceeded specified thresholds. The final 

Guides remove the thresholds for gold 

and silver alloys because new evidence 

indicates they are no longer necessary to 

prevent deception. Specifically, the 

final Guides now advise marketers they 

may use gold terms to describe a 

product or part thereof composed 

throughout of gold alloy—whether 

above or below 10 karats—if they 

qualify the term with an equally 

conspicuous, accurate karat fineness 

disclosure.14 The final Guides also 

advise marketers they may use ‘‘silver’’ 

to describe a product or part thereof 

composed throughout of an alloy 

containing less than 925 parts per 

thousand (PPT), as long as an equally 

conspicuous, accurate PPT designation 

immediately precedes the silver term.15

These changes will give marketers 

greater flexibility in providing accurate 

information about their products’ 

content. 

However, the final Guides retain the 

guidance advising a 925 PPT threshold 

for ‘‘solid silver,’’ ‘‘Sterling Silver,’’ 

‘‘Sterling,’’ and the ‘‘Ster.’’ 

Abbreviation,16 and reserving ‘‘coin’’ 

and ‘‘coin silver’’ for products that are 

900 PPT,17 based on their longstanding 

use and therefore probable consumer 

understanding. Rather than merely 

signaling the presence of silver, these 

terms likely denote specific purity 

levels (e.g., that ‘‘coin silver’’ contains 

less silver than ‘‘sterling silver’’). In 

addition, the Guides retain the existing 

platinum alloy guidance without change 

because the record indicates that, unlike 

gold and silver, which have 

traditionally been mixed with base 

metals to create jewelry, consumers 

expect platinum products to be 

substantially composed of pure 

platinum. 

Products Containing More Than One 

Precious Metal 

Based on consumer perception 

evidence, the final Guides contain a 

new section (Section 23.8), which states 

it is unfair or deceptive to misrepresent 

the relative quantity of each precious 

metal in a product that contains more 

than one precious metal, and provides 

examples of markings and descriptions 

of terms that may be misleading (e.g., 

use of the term ‘‘Platinum + Silver’’ to 

describe a product that contains more 

silver than platinum by weight). This 

guidance generally advises marketers to 

list precious metals in the order of their 

relative weight in the product from 

greatest to least. Marketers, however, 

may list metals in a different order if the 

context makes clear that the metal listed 

first is not predominant (e.g., ‘‘14k goldaccented silver’’), and the Guides 

provide illustrative examples of such 

contexts. 

Composite Gemstone Products 

Based on the record, the final Guides 

contain new guidance in Section 23.25 

to address increased prevalence of 

deceptive claims resulting from the 

marketing of composite gemstone 

products made with gemstone material 

and any amount of filler or binder, such 

as lead glass. Specifically, this guidance 

cautions marketers not to use an 

unqualified gemstone name to describe 

these products, and advises against 

calling them ‘‘treated [gemstone name].’’ 

It also cautions against using the 

unqualified terms ‘‘composite [gemstone 

name],’’ ‘‘hybrid [gemstone name],’’ or 

‘‘manufactured [gemstone name]’’ 

unless the term is qualified to disclose 

clearly and conspicuously that the 

product: (a) Does not have the same 

characteristics as the named stone; and 

(b) requires special care. The final 

Guides further recommend that the 

seller disclose the special care 

requirements to the purchaser.18

Varietals 

Based on consumer perception 

evidence, Section 23.26 contains new 

guidance stating it is unfair or deceptive 

to mark or describe a product with an 

incorrect varietal name. Varietal names 

describe a division of gem species or 

genus based on color, type of optical 

phenomenon, or other distinguishing 

characteristic of appearance (e.g., crystal 

structure). To help sellers avoid making 

deceptive claims, this section also 

provides two examples of markings or 

descriptions that may be misleading: (a) 

Use of the term ‘‘yellow emerald’’ to 

describe a golden beryl or heliodor, and 

(b) use of the term ‘‘green amethyst’’ to 

describe prasiolite. 

‘‘Cultured’’ Diamonds 

The final Guides include new 

guidance addressing use of the word 

‘‘cultured’’ to describe laboratorycreated diamonds. Based on consumer 

perception evidence showing marketers 

can effectively qualify the term, Section 

23.12(c)(3) advises them to qualify their 

use of ‘‘cultured’’ by disclosing clearly 

and conspicuously that the product is 

not a mined stone. Additionally, the 

record indicates that marketers can 

effectively qualify the term ‘‘cultured 

diamond’’ in some circumstances even 

when the Guides’ suggested disclosures 

(‘‘laboratory-created,’’ ‘‘laboratorygrown,’’ ‘‘[manufacturer-name]- 

created’’) do not appear in immediate 

conjunction to the term. For example, 

some lab-created diamond sellers may 

choose to emphasize their products’ 

man-made nature in advertisements 

targeting consumers seeking diamonds 

that are not traditionally mined. 

Therefore, to provide greater flexibility, 

the final Guides advise that marketers 

may qualify their ‘‘cultured diamond’’ 

claim with words or phrases similar to 

those detailed in the Guides. Moreover, 

these marketers do not need to make 

these qualifying disclosures 

immediately adjacent to the word 

‘‘cultured,’’ provided they disclose 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 40667 

19This new section tracks the existing guidance 

regarding gemstone treatments. 

20The distinctions between these lab-created 

diamonds and mined stones are addressed 

elsewhere in the Guides. See Sections 23.12(c)(3) 

and 23.25. 

21Furthermore, the Commission removes an 

outdated provision in paragraph (e) of the 

Appendix regarding platinum. The provision listed 

additional exemptions for items marked in 

accordance with guidance that once addressed 

products containing less than 500 PPT platinum. 

Because the Commission eliminated this guidance 

in a prior proceeding, the corresponding list of 

assay exemptions is no longer necessary. See 62 FR 

16669, 16674 (Apr. 8, 1997). The final Appendix 

therefore retains the exemptions for platinum 

products, but does not include additional 

exemptions for products with less than 500 PPT. 

22The Commission does, however, add precious 

metal clays, ingots, and casting grain to the ‘‘raw 

materials’’ listed in the Note to this section (Section 

23.2). 

23Additionally, the Commission declines to make 

changes regarding the use of parts per thousand, 

instead of karats, for gold content disclosures. 

clearly and conspicuously that the 

product is not a mined stone. 

Qualifying Claims About Man-Made 

Gemstones 

To provide marketers greater 

flexibility, the final Guides also include 

revisions to the guidance regarding the 

use of gemstone names generally 

(Section 23.25(b)). This amended 

guidance now advises marketers of manmade gemstones sharing the same 

optical, physical, and chemical 

properties as the named stone that they 

may use words or phrases other than the 

ones listed in the previous Guides 

(‘‘laboratory-grown,’’ ‘‘laboratorycreated,’’ ‘‘[manufacturer name]- 

created,’’ ‘‘synthetic’’) if they clearly 

and conspicuously convey that the 

product is not a mined stone. 

Treatments to Pearl Products 

Based on the comments, the final 

Guides include a new section (Section 

23.23) advising that marketers disclose 

clearly and conspicuously treatments to 

pearls and cultured pearls that: (a) Are 

not permanent, (b) create special care 

requirements, or (c) significantly affect 

value.19

Use of the Term ‘‘Gem’’ 

The final Guides eliminate two 

provisions that discussed use of the 

word ‘‘gem’’ because they are not 

necessary to prevent deception. 

Specifically, the final Guides do not 

include the former Section 23.25 

(Misuse of the word ‘‘gem’’) and Section 

23.20(j) (misuse of the word ‘‘gem’’ as to 

pearls). Instead, they include the term 

‘‘gem’’ in Section 23.25 (Misuse of the 

words ‘‘ruby,’’ ‘‘sapphire,’’ ‘‘emerald,’’ 

‘‘topaz, ‘‘stone,’’ ‘‘birthstone,’’ 

‘‘gemstone,’’ etc.). 

Misleading Illustrations 

To streamline the guidance, the final 

Guides also eliminate a section that 

discussed misleading illustrations 

(former Section 23.2) because it 

provided guidance already addressed in 

other areas: Section 23.1 (Deception 

(general)) and Section 23.0 (Scope and 

application). To preserve its specific 

guidance regarding diamond 

illustrations and gemstone size, 

however, the former Note to Section 

23.2 has been transferred to Section 

23.1. 

Diamond Definition 

Based on changes in the market, the 

final Guides eliminate the word 

‘‘natural’’ from the definition of 

diamond in Section 23.12(a) because 

lab-created products that have 

essentially the same optical, physical, 

and chemical properties as mined 

diamonds are also diamonds.20

Exemptions in the Assay for Gold, 

Silver, and Platinum 

Based on the comments, the final 

Guides add bracelet and necklace snap 

tongues to the exempted items listed in 

the Appendix for gold alloy products 

and for products made of silver in 

combination with gold. These items are 

already included in the exemptions for 

mechanically-coated gold products, 

silver products, and platinum products. 

Thus, with this revision, bracelet and 

necklace snap tongues appear in each 

section addressing assay exemptions.21

Products and Claims Not Addressed 

The final Guides do not make some 

revisions that commenters sought. 

Specifically, the final Guides do not 

expand the existing guidance to address 

products made with palladium, use of 

the term ‘‘natural’’ to describe treated 

gemstones, or the use of geographic and 

regional identifiers because the 

evidence does not demonstrate that 

amendments are necessary to prevent 

deception. For the same reason, the 

Commission declines to make revisions 

addressing diamond-related issues such 

as use of the terms ‘‘blue white,’’ 

‘‘ethical’’ and ‘‘conflict free,’’ as well as 

grading and appraisals. Furthermore, 

the final Guides do not expand the 

guidance regarding ‘‘handmade’’ and 

similar terms specifically to include or 

exclude hand-cast items because the 

Commission lacks sufficient evidence 

on which to base new guidance.22 For 

the same reason, the Guides do not 

address whether marketers may nondeceptively describe ‘‘large-scale’’ and 

‘‘mass’’ or ‘‘industrially’’ produced 

jewelry as ‘‘handmade.’’ 23

Conclusion 

For further analysis of comments and 

the final guidance, please see the SBP 

on the FTC’s website, available at 

https://www.ftc.gov/public-statements/ 

2018/07/statement-basis-purpose-finalrevisions-jewelry-guides. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 23 

Advertising, Jewelry, Labeling, 

Pewter, Precious metals, and Trade 

practices. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Federal Trade 

Commission revises 16 CFR part 23 to 

read as follows: 

PART 23—GUIDES FOR THE 

JEWELRY, PRECIOUS METALS, AND 

PEWTER INDUSTRIES 

Sec. 

23.0 Scope and application. 

23.1 Deception (general). 

23.2 Misuse of the terms ‘‘handmade,’’ 

‘‘hand-polished,’’ etc. 

23.3 Misrepresentation as to gold content. 

23.4 Misuse of the word ‘‘vermeil.’’ 

23.5 Misrepresentation as to silver content. 

23.6 Misuse of the words ‘‘platinum,’’ 

‘‘iridium,’’ ‘‘palladium,’’ ‘‘ruthenium,’’ 

‘‘rhodium,’’ and ‘‘osmium.’’ 

23.7 Disclosure of surface-layer application 

of rhodium. 

23.8 Misrepresentation as to products 

containing more than one precious 

metal. 

23.9 Misrepresentation as to content of 

pewter. 

23.10 Additional guidance for the use of 

quality marks. 

23.11 Misuse of ‘‘corrosion proof,’’ ‘‘noncorrosive,’’ ‘‘corrosion resistant,’’ ‘‘rust 

proof,’’ ‘‘rust resistant,’’ etc. 

23.12 Definition and misuse of the word 

‘‘diamond.’’ 

23.13 Misuse of the words ‘‘flawless,’’ 

‘‘perfect,’’ etc. 

23.14 Disclosure of treatments to diamonds. 

23.15 Misuse of the term ‘‘blue white.’’ 

23.16 Misuse of the term ‘‘properly cut,’’ 

etc. 

23.17 Misuse of the words ‘‘brilliant’’ and 

‘‘full cut.’’ 

23.18 Misrepresentation of weight and 

‘‘total weight.’’ 

23.19 Definitions of various pearls. 

23.20 Misuse of the word ‘‘pearl.’’ 

23.21 Misuse of terms such as ‘‘cultured 

pearl,’’ ‘‘seed pearl,’’ ‘‘Oriental pearl,’’ 

‘‘natura,’’ ‘‘kultured,’’ ‘‘real,’’ ‘‘gem,’’ 

‘‘synthetic,’’ and regional designations. 

23.22 Misrepresentation as to cultured 

pearls. 

23.23 Disclosure of treatments to pearls and 

cultured pearls. 

23.24 Disclosure of treatments to 

gemstones. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
40668 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

24See paragraph (c) of this section for examples 

of acceptable markings and descriptions. 

23.25 Misuse of the words ‘‘ruby,’’ 

‘‘sapphire,’’ ‘‘emerald,’’ ‘‘topaz,’’ 

‘‘stone,’’ ‘‘birthstone,’’ ‘‘gemstone,’’ etc. 

23.26 Misrepresentation as to varietal name. 

23.27 Misuse of the words ‘‘real,’’ 

‘‘genuine,’’ ‘‘natural,’’ ‘‘precious,’’ etc. 

23.28 Misuse of the words ‘‘flawless,’’ 

‘‘perfect,’’ etc. 

Appendix to Part 23—Exemptions 

Recognized in the Assay for Quality of 

Gold Alloy, Gold Filled, Gold Overlay, 

Rolled Gold Plate, Silver, and Platinum 

Industry Products 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 45, 46. 

§ 23.0 Scope and application. 

(a) The guides in this part apply to 

jewelry industry products, which 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: Gemstones and their 

laboratory-created and imitation 

substitutes; natural and cultured pearls 

and their imitations; and metallic watch 

bands not permanently attached to 

watches. These guides also apply to 

articles, including optical frames, pens 

and pencils, flatware, and hollowware, 

fabricated from precious metals (gold, 

silver, and platinum group metals), 

precious metal alloys, and their 

imitations. These guides also apply to 

all articles made from pewter. For the 

purposes of these guides, all articles 

covered by these guides are defined as 

‘‘industry products.’’ 

(b) These guides apply to persons, 

partnerships, or corporations, at every 

level of the trade (including but not 

limited to manufacturers, suppliers, and 

retailers) engaged in the business of 

offering for sale, selling, or distributing 

industry products. 

Note to Paragraph (b): To prevent 

consumer deception, persons, partnerships, 

or corporations in the business of appraising, 

identifying, or grading industry products 

should utilize the terminology and standards 

set forth in the guides. 

(c) These guides apply to claims and 

representations about industry products 

included in labeling, advertising, 

promotional materials, and all other 

forms of marketing, whether asserted 

directly or by implication, through 

words, symbols, emblems, logos, 

illustrations, depictions, product brand 

names, or through any other means. 

(d) These guides set forth the Federal 

Trade Commission’s current thinking 

about claims for jewelry and articles 

made from precious metals and pewter. 

The guides help marketers and other 

industry members avoid making claims 

that are unfair or deceptive under 

Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 45. 

They do not confer any rights on any 

person and do not operate to bind the 

FTC or the public. The Commission, 

however, may take action under the FTC 

Act if a marketer or other industry 

member makes a claim inconsistent 

with the guides. In any such 

enforcement action, the Commission 

must prove that the challenged act or 

practice is unfair or deceptive in 

violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act. 

(e) The guides consist of general 

principles, specific guidance on the use 

of particular claims for industry 

products, and examples. Claims may 

raise issues that are addressed by more 

than one example and in more than one 

section of the guides. The examples 

provide the Commission’s views on how 

reasonable consumers likely interpret 

certain claims. Industry members may 

use an alternative approach if the 

approach satisfies the requirements of 

Section 5 of the FTC Act. Whether a 

particular claim is deceptive will 

depend on the net impression of the 

advertisement, label, or other 

promotional material at issue. In 

addition, although many examples 

present specific claims and options for 

qualifying claims, the examples do not 

illustrate all permissible claims or 

qualifications under Section 5 of the 

FTC Act. 

§ 23.1 Deception (general). 

It is unfair or deceptive to 

misrepresent the type, kind, grade, 

quality, quantity, metallic content, size, 

weight, cut, color, character, treatment, 

substance, durability, serviceability, 

origin, price, value, preparation, 

production, manufacture, distribution, 

or any other material aspect of an 

industry product. 

Note 1 to § 23.1: If, in the sale or offering 

for sale of an industry product, any 

representation is made as to the grade 

assigned the product, the identity of the 

grading system used should be disclosed. 

Note 2 to § 23.1: To prevent deception, any 

qualifications or disclosures, such as those 

described in the guides, should be 

sufficiently clear and prominent. Clarity of 

language, relative type size and proximity to 

the claim being qualified, and an absence of 

contrary claims that could undercut 

effectiveness, will maximize the likelihood 

that the qualifications and disclosures are 

appropriately clear and prominent. 

Note 3 to § 23.1: An illustration or 

depiction of a diamond or other gemstone 

that portrays it in greater than its actual size 

may mislead consumers, unless a disclosure 

is made about the item’s true size. 

§ 23.2 Misuse of the terms ‘‘handmade,’’ 

‘‘hand-polished,’’ etc. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to 

represent, directly or by implication, 

that any industry product is handmade 

or hand-wrought unless the entire 

shaping and forming of such product 

from raw materials and its finishing and 

decoration were accomplished by hand 

labor and manually-controlled methods 

which permit the maker to control and 

vary the construction, shape, design, 

and finish of each part of each 

individual product. 

Note to Paragraph (a): As used herein, 

‘‘raw materials’’ include bulk sheet, strip, 

wire, precious metal clays, ingots, casting 

grain, and similar items that have not been 

cut, shaped, or formed into jewelry parts, 

semi-finished parts, or blanks. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to 

represent, directly or by implication, 

that any industry product is handforged, hand-engraved, hand-finished, 

or hand-polished, or has been otherwise 

hand-processed, unless the operation 

described was accomplished by hand 

labor and manually-controlled methods 

which permit the maker to control and 

vary the type, amount, and effect of 

such operation on each part of each 

individual product. 

§ 23.3 Misrepresentation as to gold 

content. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to 

misrepresent the presence of gold or 

gold alloy in an industry product, or the 

quantity or karat fineness of gold or gold 

alloy contained in the product, or the 

karat fineness, thickness, weight ratio, 

or manner of application of any gold or 

gold alloy plating, covering, or coating 

on any surface of an industry product or 

part thereof. 

(b) The following are examples of 

markings or descriptions that may be 

misleading: 24

(1) Use of the word ‘‘Gold’’ or any 

abbreviation, without qualification, to 

describe all or part of an industry 

product, including the surface layer of 

a coated product, which is not 

composed throughout of fine (24 karat) 

gold. 

(2) Use of the word ‘‘Gold’’ or any 

abbreviation to describe all or part of an 

industry product (including the surface 

layer of a coated product) composed 

throughout of an alloy of gold (i.e., gold 

that is less than 24 karats), unless a 

correct designation of the karat fineness 

of the alloy immediately precedes the 

word ‘‘Gold’’ or its abbreviation, and 

such fineness designation is of at least 

equal conspicuousness. 

(3) Use of the word ‘‘Gold’’ or any 

abbreviation to describe all or part of an 

industry product that is not composed 

throughout of gold or a gold alloy, but 

is surface-plated or coated with gold 

alloy, unless the word ‘‘Gold’’ or its 

abbreviation is adequately qualified to 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 40669 

25For the purpose of this section, ‘‘reasonable 

durability’’ means that all areas of the plating are 

sufficiently thick to assure coverage that reasonable 

consumers would expect from the surface 

application. Since industry products include items 

having surfaces and parts of surfaces that are 

subject to different degrees of wear, the thickness 

of the surface application for all items or for 

different areas of the surface of individual items 

does not necessarily have to be uniform. 

26See footnote 2. 

27See footnote 2. 

28See footnote 2. 29See footnote 2. 

30See footnote 2. 

31A product containing 1 micron (otherwise 

known as 1m) of 12 karat gold is equivalent to onehalf micron of 24-karat gold. 

32Under the National Stamping Act, articles or 

parts made of gold or of gold alloy that contain no 

solder have a permissible tolerance of three parts 

per thousand. If the part tested contains solder, the 

permissible tolerance is seven parts per thousand. 

For full text, see 15 U.S.C. 295, et seq. 

indicate that the product or part is only 

surface-plated. 

(4) Marking, describing, or otherwise 

representing all or part of an industry 

product as being plated or coated with 

gold or gold alloy unless all significant 

surfaces of the product or part contain 

a plating or coating of gold or gold alloy 

that is of reasonable durability.25

(5) Use of the term ‘‘Gold Plate,’’ 

‘‘Gold Plated,’’ or any abbreviation to 

describe all or part of an industry 

product unless such product or part 

contains a surface-plating of gold alloy, 

applied by any process, which is of such 

thickness and extent of surface coverage 

that reasonable durability 26 is assured, 

and unless the term is immediately 

preceded by a correct designation of the 

karat fineness of the alloy that is of at 

least equal conspicuousness as the term 

used. 

(6) Use of the terms ‘‘Gold Filled,’’ 

‘‘Rolled Gold Plate,’’ ‘‘Rolled Gold 

Plated,’’ ‘‘Gold Overlay,’’ or any 

abbreviation to describe all or part of an 

industry product unless such product or 

part contains a surface-plating of gold 

alloy applied by a mechanical process 

and of such thickness and extent of 

surface coverage that reasonable 

durability 27 is assured, and unless the 

term is immediately preceded by a 

correct designation of the karat fineness 

of the alloy that is of at least equal 

conspicuousness as the term used. 

(7) Use of the terms ‘‘Gold Plate,’’ 

‘‘Gold Plated,’’ ‘‘Gold Filled,’’ ‘‘Rolled 

Gold Plate,’’ ‘‘Rolled Gold Plated,’’ 

‘‘Gold Overlay,’’ or any abbreviation to 

describe a product in which the layer of 

gold plating has been covered with a 

base metal (such as nickel), which is 

covered with a thin wash of gold, unless 

there is a disclosure that the primary 

gold coating is covered with a base 

metal, which is gold washed. 

(8) Use of the term ‘‘Gold 

Electroplate,’’ ‘‘Gold Electroplated,’’ or 

any abbreviation to describe all or part 

of an industry product unless such 

product or part is electroplated with 

gold or a gold alloy and such 

electroplating is of such karat fineness, 

thickness, and extent of surface 

coverage that reasonable durability 28 is 

assured, and unless the term is 

immediately preceded by a correct 

designation of the karat fineness of the 

alloy that is of at least equal 

conspicuousness as the term used. 

(9) Use of any name, terminology, or 

other term to misrepresent that an 

industry product is equal or superior to, 

or different than, a known and 

established type of industry product 

with reference to its gold content or 

method of manufacture. 

(c) The following are examples of 

markings and descriptions that are 

consistent with the principles described 

above: 

(1) An industry product or part 

thereof, composed throughout of an 

alloy of gold may be marked and 

described as ‘‘Gold’’ when such word 

‘‘Gold,’’ wherever appearing, is 

immediately preceded by a correct 

designation of the karat fineness of the 

alloy, and such karat designation is of 

equal conspicuousness as the word 

‘‘Gold’’ (for example, ‘‘14 Karat Gold,’’ 

‘‘14 K. Gold,’’ ‘‘14 Kt. Gold,’’ ‘‘9 Karat 

Gold,’’ or ‘‘9 Kt. Gold’’). Such product 

may also be marked and described by a 

designation of the karat fineness of the 

gold alloy unaccompanied by the word 

‘‘Gold’’ (for example, ‘‘14 Karat,’’ 

‘‘14Kt.,’’ ‘‘14 K.,’’ or ‘‘9 K.’’). 

Note to Paragraph (c)(1): Use of the term 

‘‘Gold’’ or any abbreviation to describe all or 

part of a product that is composed 

throughout of gold alloy, but contains a 

hollow center or interior, may mislead 

consumers, unless the fact that the product 

contains a hollow center is disclosed in 

immediate proximity to the term ‘‘Gold’’ or 

its abbreviation (for example, ‘‘14 Karat GoldHollow Center,’’ or ‘‘14 K. Gold Tubing,’’ 

when of a gold alloy tubing of such karat 

fineness). Such products should not be 

marked or described as ‘‘solid’’ or as being 

solidly of gold or of a gold alloy. For 

example, when the composition of such a 

product is 14 karat gold alloy, it should not 

be described or marked as either ‘‘14 Kt. 

Solid Gold’’ or as ‘‘Solid 14 Kt. Gold.’’ 

(2) An industry product or part 

thereof on which there has been affixed 

on all significant surfaces by soldering, 

brazing, welding, or other mechanical 

means a plating of gold alloy of not less 

than 10 karat fineness and of reasonable 

durability 29 may be marked or 

described as ‘‘Gold Plate,’’ ‘‘Gold 

Plated,’’ ‘‘Gold Overlay,’’ ‘‘Rolled Gold 

Plate,’’ ‘‘Rolled Gold Plated,’’ or an 

adequate abbreviation, when such 

plating constitutes at least 1/40th of the 

weight of the metal in the entire article 

and when the term is immediately 

preceded by a designation of the karat 

fineness of the plating which is of equal 

conspicuousness as the term used (for 

example, ‘‘14 Kt. Gold Overlay,’’ or 

‘‘14K. R.G.P.’’). When such plating 

constitutes at least 1/20th of the weight 

of the metal in the entire article, the 

term ‘‘Gold Filled’’ may be used. The 

terms ‘‘Gold Overlay,’’ ‘‘Rolled Gold 

Plate,’’ and ‘‘Rolled Gold Plated’’ may 

be used when the karat fineness 

designation is immediately preceded by 

a fraction accurately disclosing the 

portion of the weight of the metal in the 

entire article accounted for by the 

plating, and when such fraction is of 

equal conspicuousness as the term used 

(for example, ‘‘1/40th 12 Kt. Rolled Gold 

Plate’’ or ‘‘1/40 12 Kt. R.G.P.’’). 

(3) An industry product or part 

thereof on which there has been affixed 

on all significant surfaces by an 

electrolytic process an electroplating of 

gold, or of a gold alloy of not less than 

10 karat fineness, which is of reasonable 

durability 30 and has a minimum 

thickness throughout equivalent to 

0.175 microns (approximately 7/ 

1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold,31

may be marked or described as ‘‘Gold 

Plate,’’ ‘‘Gold Plated,’’ ‘‘Gold 

Electroplate’’ or ‘‘Gold Electroplated,’’ 

or so abbreviated, if the term is 

immediately preceded by a designation 

of the karat fineness of the plating 

which is of equal conspicuousness as 

the term used (e.g., ‘‘12 Karat Gold 

Electroplate’’ or ‘‘12K G.E.P.’’). When 

the electroplating is of the minimum 

fineness specified above and of a 

minimum thickness throughout 

equivalent to two and one half (21⁄2) 

microns (or approximately 100/ 

1,000,000ths of an inch) of fine gold, the 

marking or description may be ‘‘Heavy 

Gold Electroplate’’ or ‘‘Heavy Gold 

Electroplated.’’ When electroplatings 

qualify for the term ‘‘Gold Electroplate’’ 

(or ‘‘Gold Electroplated’’), or the term 

‘‘Heavy Gold Electroplate’’ (or ‘‘Heavy 

Gold Electroplated’’), and have been 

applied by use of a particular kind of 

electrolytic process, the marking may be 

accompanied by identification of the 

process used, as for example, ‘‘Gold 

Electroplated (X Process)’’ or ‘‘Heavy 

Gold Electroplated (Y Process).’’ 

(d) The provisions of this section 

relating to markings and descriptions of 

industry products and parts thereof are 

subject to the applicable tolerances of 

the National Stamping Act or any 

amendment thereof.32


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
40670 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

33See footnote 2. 

34See footnote 2. 

35Under the National Stamping Act, sterling 

silver articles or parts that contain no solder have 

a permissible tolerance of four parts per thousand. 

If the part tested contains solder, the permissible 

tolerance is ten parts per thousand. For full text, see 

15 U.S.C. 294, et seq. 

36See paragraph (c) of this section for examples 

of acceptable markings and descriptions. 37See footnote 2. 

Note to Paragraph (d): Exemptions 

recognized in the assay of karat gold industry 

products and in the assay of gold filled, gold 

overlay, and rolled gold plate industry 

products, and not to be considered in any 

assay for quality, are listed in the appendix. 

§ 23.4 Misuse of the word ‘‘vermeil.’’ 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to 

represent, directly or by implication, 

that an industry product is ‘‘vermeil’’ if 

such mark or description misrepresents 

the product’s true composition. 

(b) An industry product may be 

described or marked as ‘‘vermeil’’ if it 

consists of a base of sterling silver 

coated or plated on all significant 

surfaces with gold, or gold alloy of not 

less than 10 karat fineness, that is of 

reasonable durability 33 and a minimum 

thickness throughout equivalent to two 

and one half (21⁄2) microns (or 

approximately 100/1,000,000ths of an 

inch) of fine gold. 

Note 1 to § 23.4: It is unfair or deceptive 

to use the term ‘‘vermeil’’ to describe a 

product in which the sterling silver has been 

covered with a base metal (such as nickel) 

plated with gold unless there is a disclosure 

that the sterling silver is covered with a base 

metal that is plated with gold. 

Note 2 to § 23.4: Exemptions recognized in 

the assay of gold filled, gold overlay, and 

rolled gold plate industry products are listed 

in the appendix. 

§ 23.5 Misrepresentation as to silver 

content. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to 

misrepresent that an industry product 

contains silver, or to misrepresent an 

industry product as having a silver 

content, plating, electroplating, or 

coating. 

(b) The following are examples of 

markings or descriptions that may be 

misleading: 

(1) Use of the unqualified word 

‘‘silver’’ to mark, describe, or otherwise 

represent all or part of an industry 

product, including the surface layer of 

a coated product, unless an equally 

conspicuous, accurate quality fineness 

designation indicating the pure silver 

content in parts per thousand 

immediately precedes the term (e.g., 

‘‘750 silver’’). 

(2) Use of the words ‘‘solid silver,’’ 

‘‘Sterling Silver,’’ ‘‘Sterling,’’ or the 

abbreviation ‘‘Ster.’’ to mark, describe, 

or otherwise represent all or part of an 

industry product unless it is at least 

925/1,000ths pure silver. 

(3) Use of the words ‘‘coin’’ or ‘‘coin 

silver’’ to mark, describe, or otherwise 

represent all or part of an industry 

product unless it is at least 900/1,000ths 

pure silver. 

(4) Use of the word ‘‘silver’’ to mark, 

describe, or otherwise represent all or 

part of an industry product that is not 

composed throughout of silver, but has 

a surface layer or coating of silver, 

unless the term is adequately qualified 

to indicate that the product or part is 

only coated. 

(5) Marking, describing, or otherwise 

representing all or part of an industry 

product as being plated or coated with 

silver unless all significant surfaces of 

the product or part contain a plating or 

coating of silver that is of reasonable 

durability.34

(c) The provisions of this section 

relating to markings and descriptions of 

industry products and parts thereof are 

subject to the applicable tolerances of 

the National Stamping Act or any 

amendment thereof.35

Note 1 to § 23.5: The National Stamping 

Act provides that silver plated articles shall 

not ‘‘be stamped, branded, engraved or 

imprinted with the word ‘sterling’ or the 

word ‘coin,’ either alone or in conjunction 

with other words or marks.’’ 15 U.S.C. 297(a). 

Note 2 to § 23.5: Exemptions recognized in 

the assay of silver industry products are 

listed in the appendix. 

§ 23.6 Misuse of the words ‘‘platinum,’’ 

‘‘iridium,’’ ‘‘palladium,’’ ‘‘ruthenium,’’ 

‘‘rhodium,’’ and ‘‘osmium.’’ 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

words ‘‘platinum,’’ ‘‘iridium,’’ 

‘‘palladium,’’ ‘‘ruthenium,’’ ‘‘rhodium,’’ 

and ‘‘osmium,’’ or any abbreviation to 

mark or describe all or part of an 

industry product if such marking or 

description misrepresents the product’s 

true composition. The Platinum Group 

Metals (PGM) are Platinum, Iridium, 

Palladium, Ruthenium, Rhodium, and 

Osmium. 

(b) The following are examples of 

markings or descriptions that may be 

misleading: 36

(1) Use of the word ‘‘Platinum’’ or any 

abbreviation to describe all or part of a 

product that is not composed 

throughout of platinum, but has a 

surface layer or coating of platinum, 

unless the word ‘‘Platinum’’ or its 

abbreviation is adequately qualified to 

indicate that the product or part is only 

coated. 

(2) Marking, describing, or otherwise 

representing all or part of an industry 

product as being plated or coated with 

platinum unless all significant surfaces 

of the product or part contain a plating 

or coating of platinum that is of 

reasonable durability.37

(3) Use of the word ‘‘Platinum’’ or any 

abbreviation, without qualification, to 

describe all or part of an industry 

product (including the surface layer of 

a coated product) that is not composed 

throughout of 950 parts per thousand 

pure Platinum. 

(4) Use of the word ‘‘Platinum’’ or any 

abbreviation accompanied by a number 

indicating the parts per thousand of 

pure Platinum contained in the product 

without mention of the number of parts 

per thousand of other PGM contained in 

the product, to describe all or part of an 

industry product that is not composed 

throughout of at least 850 parts per 

thousand pure platinum, for example, 

‘‘600Plat.’’ 

(5) Use of the word ‘‘Platinum’’ or any 

abbreviation thereof, to mark or describe 

any product that is not composed 

throughout of at least 500 parts per 

thousand pure Platinum. 

(6) Use of the word ‘‘Platinum,’’ or 

any abbreviation accompanied by a 

number or percentage indicating the 

parts per thousand of pure Platinum 

contained in the product, to describe all 

or part of an industry product that 

contains at least 500 parts per thousand, 

but less than 850 parts per thousand, 

pure Platinum, and does not contain at 

least 950 parts per thousand PGM (for 

example, ‘‘585 Plat.’’) without a clear 

and conspicuous disclosure, 

immediately following the name or 

description of such product: 

(i) Of the full composition of the 

product (by name and not abbreviation) 

and percentage of each metal; and 

(ii) That the product may not have the 

same attributes or properties as 

traditional platinum products. Provided, 

however, that the marketer need not 

make disclosure under this paragraph 

(b)(6)(ii), if the marketer has competent 

and reliable scientific evidence that 

such product does not differ materially 

from any one product containing at least 

850 parts per thousand pure Platinum 

with respect to the following attributes 

or properties: Durability, luster, density, 

scratch resistance, tarnish resistance, 

hypoallergenicity, ability to be resized 

or repaired, retention of precious metal 

over time, and any other attribute or 

property material to consumers. 

Note to Paragraph (b)(6): When using 

percentages to qualify platinum 

representations, marketers should convert the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 40671 

amount in parts per thousand to a percentage 

that is accurate to the first decimal place 

(e.g., ‘‘58.5% Platinum, 41.5% Cobalt’’). 

(c) The following are examples of 

markings and descriptions that are not 

considered unfair or deceptive: 

(1) The following abbreviations for 

each of the PGM may be used for quality 

marks on articles: ‘‘Plat.’’ or ‘‘Pt.’’ for 

Platinum; ‘‘Irid.’’ or ‘‘Ir.’’ for Iridium; 

‘‘Pall.’’ or ‘‘Pd.’’ for Palladium; ‘‘Ruth.’’ 

or ‘‘Ru.’’ for Ruthenium; ‘‘Rhod.’’ or 

‘‘Rh.’’ for Rhodium; and ‘‘Osmi.’’ or 

‘‘Os.’’ for Osmium. 

(2) An industry product consisting of 

at least 950 parts per thousand pure 

Platinum may be marked or described as 

‘‘Platinum.’’ 

(3) An industry product consisting of 

850 parts per thousand pure Platinum, 

900 parts per thousand pure Platinum, 

or 950 parts per thousand pure Platinum 

may be marked ‘‘Platinum,’’ provided 

that the Platinum marking is preceded 

by a number indicating the amount in 

parts per thousand of pure Platinum (for 

industry products consisting of 950 

parts per thousand pure Platinum, the 

marking described in § 23.7(b)(2) above 

is also appropriate). Thus, the following 

markings may be used: ‘‘950Pt.,’’ 

‘‘950Plat.,’’ ‘‘900Pt.,’’ ‘‘900Plat.,’’ 

‘‘850Pt.,’’ or ‘‘850Plat.’’ 

(4) An industry product consisting of 

at least 950 parts per thousand PGM, 

and of at least 500 parts per thousand 

pure Platinum, may be marked 

‘‘Platinum,’’ provided that the mark of 

each PGM constituent is preceded by a 

number indicating the amount in parts 

per thousand of each PGM (e.g., 

‘‘600Pt.350Ir.,’’ ‘‘600Plat.350Irid.,’’ 

‘‘550Pt.350Pd.50Ir.,’’ or 

‘‘550Plat.350Pall.50Irid’’). 

(5) An industry product consisting of 

at least 500 parts per thousand, but less 

than 850 parts per thousand, pure 

Platinum, and not consisting of at least 

950 parts per thousand PGM, may be 

marked or stamped accurately, with a 

quality marking on the article, using 

parts per thousand and standard 

chemical abbreviations (e.g., ‘‘585 Pt., 

415 Co.’’). 

Note to § 23.6: Exemptions recognized in 

the assay of platinum industry products are 

listed in the appendix. 

§ 23.7 Disclosure of surface-layer 

application of rhodium. 

It is unfair or deceptive to fail to 

disclose a surface-layer application of 

rhodium on products marked or 

described as precious metal. 

§ 23.8 Misrepresentation as to products 

containing more than one precious metal. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to 

misrepresent the relative quantity of 

each precious metal in a product that 

contains more than than one precious 

metal. Marketers should list precious 

metals in the order of their relative 

weight in the product from greatest to 

least (i.e., leading with the predominant 

metal). Listing precious metals in order 

of relative weight is not necessary where 

it is clear to reasonable consumers from 

context that the metal listed first is not 

predominant. 

(b) The following are examples of 

markings or descriptions that may be 

misleading: 

(1) Use of the terms ‘‘Platinum + 

Silver’’ to describe a product that 

contains more silver than platinum by 

weight. 

(2) Use of the terms ‘‘14K/Sterling’’ to 

describe a product that contains more 

silver than gold by weight. 

(c) The following are examples of 

markings and descriptions that are not 

considered unfair or deceptive: 

(1) For a product comprised primarily 

of silver with a surface-layer application 

of platinum, ‘‘900 platinum over silver.’’ 

(2) For a product comprised primarily 

of silver with visually distinguishable 

parts of gold, ‘‘14k gold-accented 

silver.’’ 

(3) For a product comprised primarily 

of gold with visually distinguishable 

parts of platinum, ‘‘850 Platinum inset, 

14K gold ring.’’ 

§ 23.9 Misrepresentation as to content of 

pewter. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to mark, 

describe, or otherwise represent all or 

part of an industry product as ‘‘Pewter’’ 

or any abbreviation if such mark or 

description misrepresents the product’s 

true composition. 

(b) An industry product or part 

thereof may be described or marked as 

‘‘Pewter’’ or any abbreviation if it 

consists of at least 900 parts per 1,000 

Grade A Tin, with the remainder 

composed of metals appropriate for use 

in pewter. 

§ 23.10 Additional guidance for the use of 

quality marks. 

As used in these guides, the term 

quality mark means any letter, figure, 

numeral, symbol, sign, word, or term, or 

any combination thereof, that has been 

stamped, embossed, inscribed, or 

otherwise placed on any industry 

product and which indicates or suggests 

that any such product is composed 

throughout of any precious metal or any 

precious metal alloy or has a surface or 

surfaces on which there has been plated 

or deposited any precious metal or 

precious metal alloy. Included are the 

words ‘‘gold,’’ ‘‘karat,’’ ‘‘carat,’’ ‘‘silver,’’ 

‘‘sterling,’’ ‘‘vermeil,’’ ‘‘platinum,’’ 

‘‘iridium,’’ ‘‘palladium,’’ ‘‘ruthenium,’’ 

‘‘rhodium,’’ or ‘‘osmium,’’ or any 

abbreviations thereof, whether used 

alone or in conjunction with the words 

‘‘filled,’’ ‘‘plated,’’ ‘‘overlay,’’ or 

‘‘electroplated,’’ or any abbreviations 

thereof. Quality markings include those 

in which the words or terms ‘‘gold,’’ 

‘‘karat,’’ ‘‘silver,’’ ‘‘vermeil,’’ ‘‘platinum’’ 

(or platinum group metals), or their 

abbreviations are included, either 

separately or as suffixes, prefixes, or 

syllables. 

(a) Deception as to applicability of 

marks. (1) If a quality mark on an 

industry product is applicable to only 

part of the product, the part of the 

product to which it is applicable (or 

inapplicable) should be disclosed when, 

absent such disclosure, the location of 

the mark misrepresents the product or 

part’s true composition. 

(2) If a quality mark is applicable to 

only part of an industry product, but not 

another part which is of similar surface 

appearance, each quality mark should 

be closely accompanied by an 

identification of the part or parts to 

which the mark is applicable. 

(b) Deception by reason of difference 

in the size of letters or words in a 

marking or markings. It is unfair or 

deceptive to place a quality mark on a 

product in which the words or letters 

appear in greater size than other words 

or letters of the mark, or when different 

markings placed on the product have 

different applications and are in 

different sizes, when the net impression 

of any such marking would be 

misleading as to the metallic 

composition of all or part of the 

product. (An example of improper 

marking would be the marking of a gold 

electroplated product with the word 

‘‘electroplate’’ in small type and the 

word ‘‘gold’’ in larger type, with the 

result that purchasers and prospective 

purchasers of the product might only 

observe the word ‘‘gold.’’) 

Note 1 to § 23.10: Legibility of markings. If 

a quality mark is engraved or stamped on an 

industry product, or is printed on a tag or 

label attached to the product, the quality 

mark should be of sufficient size type as to 

be legible to persons of normal vision, should 

be so placed as likely to be observed by 

purchasers, and should be so attached as to 

remain thereon until consumer purchase. 

Note 2 to § 23.10: Disclosure of identity of 

manufacturers, processors, or distributors. 

The National Stamping Act provides that any 

person, firm, corporation, or association, 

being a manufacturer or dealer subject to 

section 294 of the Act, who applies or causes 

to be applied a quality mark, or imports any 

article bearing a quality mark ‘‘which 

indicates or purports to indicate that such 

article is made in whole or in part of gold 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
40672 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

or silver or of an alloy of either metal’’ shall 

apply to the article the trademark or name of 

such person. 15 U.S.C. 297. 

§ 23.11 Misuse of ‘‘corrosion proof,’’ 

‘‘noncorrosive,’’ ‘‘corrosion resistant,’’ ‘‘rust 

proof,’’ ‘‘rust resistant,’’ etc. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to: 

(1) Use the terms ‘‘corrosion proof,’’ 

‘‘noncorrosive,’’ ‘‘rust proof,’’ or any 

other term of similar meaning to 

describe an industry product unless all 

parts of the product will be immune 

from rust and other forms of corrosion 

during the life expectancy of the 

product; or 

(2) Use the terms ‘‘corrosion 

resistant,’’ ‘‘rust resistant,’’ or any other 

term of similar meaning to describe an 

industry product unless all parts of the 

product are of such composition as to 

not be subject to material damage by 

corrosion or rust during the major 

portion of the life expectancy of the 

product under normal conditions of use. 

(b) Among the metals that may be 

considered as corrosion (and rust) 

resistant are: Pure nickel; gold alloys of 

not less than 10 Kt. fineness; and 

austenitic stainless steels. 

§ 23.12 Definition and misuse of the word 

‘‘diamond.’’ 

(a) A diamond is a mineral consisting 

essentially of pure carbon crystallized in 

the isometric system. It is found in 

many colors. Its hardness is 10; its 

specific gravity is approximately 3.52; 

and it has a refractive index of 2.42. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

unqualified word ‘‘diamond’’ to 

describe or identify any object or 

product not meeting the requirements 

specified in the definition of diamond 

provided above, or which, though 

meeting such requirements, has not 

been symmetrically fashioned with at 

least seventeen (17) polished facets. 

Note to Paragraph (b): It is unfair or 

deceptive to represent, directly or by 

implication, that industrial grade diamonds 

or other non-jewelry quality diamonds are of 

jewelry quality. 

(c) The following are examples of 

descriptions that are not considered 

unfair or deceptive: 

(1) The use of the words ‘‘rough 

diamond’’ to describe or designate 

uncut or unfaceted objects or products 

satisfying the definition of diamond 

provided above; or 

(2) The use of the word ‘‘diamond’’ to 

describe or designate objects or products 

satisfying the definition of diamond but 

which have not been symmetrically 

fashioned with at least seventeen (17) 

polished facets when, in immediate 

conjunction with the word ‘‘diamond,’’ 

there is either a disclosure of the 

number of facets and shape of the 

diamond or the name of a type of 

diamond that denotes shape and that 

usually has less than seventeen (17) 

facets (e.g., ‘‘rose diamond’’). 

(3) The use of the word ‘‘cultured’’ to 

describe laboratory-created diamonds 

that have essentially the same optical, 

physical, and chemical properties as 

mined diamonds if the term is qualified 

by a clear and conspicuous disclosure 

(for example, the words ‘‘laboratorycreated,’’ ‘‘laboratory-grown,’’ 

‘‘[manufacturer name]-created,’’ or some 

other word or phrase of like meaning) 

conveying that the product is not a 

mined stone. 

Note to Paragraph (c): Additional guidance 

about imitation and laboratory-created 

diamond representations and misuse of the 

words ‘‘real,’’ ‘‘genuine,’’ ‘‘natural,’’ 

‘‘precious,’’ ‘‘semi-precious,’’ and similar 

terms is set forth in §§ 23.25 and 23.27. 

§ 23.13 Misuse of the words ‘‘flawless,’’ 

‘‘perfect,’’ etc. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘flawless’’ to describe any 

diamond that discloses flaws, cracks, 

inclusions, carbon spots, clouds, 

internal lasering, or other blemishes or 

imperfections of any sort when 

examined under a corrected magnifier at 

10-power, with adequate illumination, 

by a person skilled in diamond grading. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘perfect,’’ or any representation of 

similar meaning, to describe any 

diamond unless the diamond meets the 

definition of ‘‘flawless’’ and is not of 

inferior color or make. 

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

words ‘‘flawless’’ or ‘‘perfect’’ to 

describe a ring or other article of jewelry 

having a ‘‘flawless’’ or ‘‘perfect’’ 

principal diamond or diamonds, and 

supplementary stones that are not of 

such quality, unless there is a disclosure 

that the description applies only to the 

principal diamond or diamonds. 

§ 23.14 Disclosure of treatments to 

diamonds. 

A diamond is a gemstone product. 

Treatments to diamonds should be 

disclosed in the manner prescribed in 

§ 23.24 of these guides (Disclosure of 

treatments to gemstones). 

§ 23.15 Misuse of the term ‘‘blue white.’’ 

It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘blue white’’ or any representation 

of similar meaning to describe any 

diamond that under normal, north 

daylight or its equivalent shows any 

color or any trace of any color other 

than blue or bluish. 

§ 23.16 Misuse of the term ‘‘properly cut,’’ 

etc. 

It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

terms ‘‘properly cut,’’ ‘‘proper cut,’’ 

‘‘modern cut,’’ or any representation of 

similar meaning to describe any 

diamond that is lopsided, or is so thick 

or so thin in depth as to detract 

materially from the brilliance of the 

stone. 

Note to § 23.16: Stones that are commonly 

called ‘‘fisheye’’ or ‘‘old mine’’ should not be 

described as ‘‘properly cut,’’ ‘‘modern cut,’’ 

etc. 

§ 23.17 Misuse of the words ‘‘brilliant’’ and 

‘‘full cut.’’ 

It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

unqualified expressions ‘‘brilliant,’’ 

‘‘brilliant cut,’’ or ‘‘full cut’’ to describe, 

identify, or refer to any diamond except 

a round diamond that has at least thirtytwo (32) facets plus the table above the 

girdle and at least twenty-four (24) 

facets below. 

Note to § 23.17: Such terms should not be 

applied to single or rose-cut diamonds. They 

may be applied to emerald-(rectangular) cut, 

pear-shaped, heart-shaped, oval-shaped, and 

marquise-(pointed oval) cut diamonds 

meeting the above-stated facet requirements 

when, in immediate conjunction with the 

term used, the form of the diamond is 

disclosed. 

§ 23.18 Misrepresentation of weight and 

‘‘total weight.’’ 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to 

misrepresent the weight of a diamond. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘point’’ or any abbreviation in any 

representation, advertising, marking, or 

labeling to describe the weight of a 

diamond, unless the weight is also 

stated as decimal parts of a carat (e.g., 

25 points or .25 carat). 

Note to Paragraph (b): A carat is a standard 

unit of weight for a diamond and is 

equivalent to 200 milligrams (1⁄5 gram). A 

point is one one-hundredth (1/100) of a carat. 

(c) If diamond weight is stated as 

decimal parts of a carat (e.g., .47 carat), 

the stated figure should be accurate to 

the last decimal place. If diamond 

weight is stated to only one decimal 

place (e.g., .5 carat), the stated figure 

should be accurate to the second 

decimal place (e.g., ‘‘.5 carat’’ could 

represent a diamond weight between 

.495–.504). 

(d) If diamond weight is stated as 

fractional parts of a carat, a conspicuous 

disclosure of the fact that the diamond 

weight is not exact should be made in 

close proximity to the fractional 

representation and a disclosure of a 

reasonable range of weight for each 

fraction (or the weight tolerance being 

used) should also be made. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 40673 

Note to Paragraph (d): When fractional 

representations of diamond weight are made, 

as described in paragraph (d) of this section, 

in catalogs or other printed materials, the 

disclosure of the fact that the actual diamond 

weight is within a specified range should be 

made conspicuously on every page where a 

fractional representation is made. Such 

disclosure may refer to a chart or other 

detailed explanation of the actual ranges 

used. For example, ‘‘Diamond weights are 

not exact; see chart on p. X for ranges.’’ 

§ 23.19 Definitions of various pearls. 

As used in these guides, the terms set 

forth below have the following 

meanings: 

(a) Pearl: A calcareous concretion 

consisting essentially of alternating 

concentric layers of carbonate of lime 

and organic material formed within the 

body of certain mollusks, the result of 

an abnormal secretory process caused 

by an irritation of the mantle of the 

mollusk following the intrusion of some 

foreign body inside the shell of the 

mollusk, or due to some abnormal 

physiological condition in the mollusk, 

neither of which has in any way been 

caused or induced by humans. 

(b) Cultured pearl: The composite 

product created when a nucleus 

(usually a sphere of calcareous mollusk 

shell) planted by humans inside the 

shell or in the mantle of a mollusk is 

coated with nacre by the mollusk. 

(c) Imitation pearl: A manufactured 

product composed of any material or 

materials that simulate in appearance a 

pearl or cultured pearl. 

(d) Seed pearl: A small pearl, as 

defined in paragraph (a), that measures 

approximately two millimeters or less. 

§ 23.20 Misuse of the word ‘‘pearl.’’ 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

unqualified word ‘‘pearl’’ or any other 

word or phrase of like meaning to 

describe, identify, or refer to any object 

or product that is not in fact a pearl, as 

defined in § 23.19(a). 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘pearl’’ to describe, identify, or 

refer to a cultured pearl unless it is 

immediately preceded, with equal 

conspicuousness, by the word 

‘‘cultured’’ or ‘‘cultivated,’’ or by some 

other word or phrase of like meaning, so 

as to indicate definitely and clearly that 

the product is not a pearl. 

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘pearl’’ to describe, identify, or 

refer to an imitation pearl unless it is 

immediately preceded, with equal 

conspicuousness, by the word 

‘‘artificial,’’ ‘‘imitation,’’ or ‘‘simulated,’’ 

or by some other word or phrase of like 

meaning, so as to indicate definitely and 

clearly that the product is not a pearl. 

(d) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

terms ‘‘faux pearl,’’ ‘‘fashion pearl,’’ 

‘‘Mother of Pearl,’’ or any other such 

term to describe or qualify an imitation 

pearl product unless it is immediately 

preceded, with equal conspicuousness, 

by the word ‘‘artificial,’’ ‘‘imitation,’’ or 

‘‘simulated,’’ or by some other word or 

phrase of like meaning, so as to indicate 

definitely and clearly that the product is 

not a pearl. 

§ 23.21 Misuse of terms such as ‘‘cultured 

pearl,’’ ‘‘seed pearl,’’ ‘‘Oriental pearl,’’ 

‘‘natura,’’ ‘‘kultured,’’ ‘‘real,’’ ‘‘synthetic,’’ and 

regional designations. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘cultured pearl,’’ ‘‘cultivated 

pearl,’’ or any other word, term, or 

phrase of like meaning to describe, 

identify, or refer to any imitation pearl. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘seed pearl’’ or any word, term, or 

phrase of like meaning to describe, 

identify, or refer to a cultured or an 

imitation pearl, without using the 

appropriate qualifying term ‘‘cultured’’ 

(e.g., ‘‘cultured seed pearl’’) or 

‘‘simulated,’’ ‘‘artificial,’’ or ‘‘imitation’’ 

(e.g., ‘‘imitation seed pearl’’). 

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘Oriental pearl’’ or any word, term, 

or phrase of like meaning to describe, 

identify, or refer to any industry product 

other than a pearl taken from a salt 

water mollusk and of the distinctive 

appearance and type of pearls obtained 

from mollusks inhabiting the Persian 

Gulf and recognized in the jewelry trade 

as Oriental pearls. 

(d) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘Oriental’’ to describe, identify, or 

refer to any cultured or imitation pearl. 

(e) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘natura,’’ ‘‘natural,’’ ‘‘nature’s,’’ or 

any word, term, or phrase of like 

meaning to describe, identify, or refer to 

a cultured or imitation pearl. It is unfair 

or deceptive to use the term ‘‘organic’’ 

to describe, identify, or refer to an 

imitation pearl, unless the term is 

qualified in such a way as to make clear 

that the product is not a natural or 

cultured pearl. 

(f) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘kultured,’’ ‘‘semi-cultured pearl,’’ 

‘‘cultured-like,’’ ‘‘part-cultured,’’ 

‘‘premature cultured pearl,’’ or any 

word, term, or phrase of like meaning to 

describe, identify, or refer to an 

imitation pearl. 

(g) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘South Sea pearl’’ unless it 

describes, identifies, or refers to a pearl 

that is taken from a salt water mollusk 

of the Pacific Ocean South Sea Islands, 

Australia, or Southeast Asia. It is unfair 

or deceptive to use the term ‘‘South Sea 

cultured pearl’’ unless it describes, 

identifies, or refers to a cultured pearl 

formed in a salt water mollusk of the 

Pacific Ocean South Sea Islands, 

Australia, or Southeast Asia. 

(h) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

term ‘‘Biwa cultured pearl’’ unless it 

describes, identifies, or refers to 

cultured pearls grown in fresh water 

mollusks in the lakes and rivers of 

Japan. 

(i) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘real,’’ ‘‘genuine,’’ ‘‘precious,’’ or 

any word, term, or phrase of like 

meaning to describe, identify, or refer to 

any imitation pearl. 

(j) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘synthetic’’ or similar terms to 

describe cultured or imitation pearls. 

(k) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

terms ‘‘Japanese Pearls,’’ ‘‘Chinese 

Pearls,’’ ‘‘Mallorca Pearls,’’ or any 

regional designation to describe, 

identify, or refer to any cultured or 

imitation pearl, unless the term is 

immediately preceded, with equal 

conspicuousness, by the word 

‘‘cultured,’’ ‘‘artificial,’’ ‘‘imitation,’’ or 

‘‘simulated,’’ or by some other word or 

phrase of like meaning, so as to indicate 

definitely and clearly that the product is 

a cultured or imitation pearl. 

§ 23.22 Misrepresentation as to cultured 

pearls. 

It is unfair or deceptive to 

misrepresent the manner in which 

cultured pearls are produced, the size of 

the nucleus artificially inserted in the 

mollusk and included in cultured 

pearls, the length of time that such 

products remained in the mollusk, the 

thickness of the nacre coating, the value 

and quality of cultured pearls as 

compared with the value and quality of 

pearls and imitation pearls, or any other 

material matter relating to the 

formation, structure, properties, 

characteristics, and qualities of cultured 

pearls. 

§ 23.23 Disclosure of treatments to pearls 

and cultured pearls. 

It is unfair or deceptive to fail to 

disclose that a pearl or cultured pearl 

has been treated if: 

(a) The treatment is not permanent. 

The seller should disclose that the pearl 

or cultured pearl has been treated and 

that the treatment is or may not be 

permanent; 

(b) The treatment creates special care 

requirements for the pearl or cultured 

pearl. The seller should disclose that the 

pearl or cultured pearl has been treated 

and has special care requirements. It is 

also recommended that the seller 

disclose the special care requirements to 

the purchaser; or 

(c) The treatment has a significant 

effect on the product’s value. The seller 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
40674 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

38Field pieces of lockets are those inner portions 

used as frames between the inside edges of the 

locket and the spaces for holding pictures. Bezels 

are the separable inner metal rings to hold the 

pictures in place. 

should disclose that the pearl or 

cultured pearl has been treated. 

Note to § 23.23: The disclosures outlined in 

this section are applicable to sellers at every 

level of trade, as defined in § 23.0(b) of these 

guides, and they may be made at the point 

of sale prior to sale, except that where a 

product can be purchased without personally 

viewing the product (e.g., direct mail 

catalogs, online services, televised shopping 

programs), disclosure should be made in the 

solicitation for, or description of, the 

product. 

§ 23.24 Disclosure of treatments to 

gemstones. 

It is unfair or deceptive to fail to 

disclose that a gemstone has been 

treated if: 

(a) The treatment is not permanent. 

The seller should disclose that the 

gemstone has been treated and that the 

treatment is or may not be permanent; 

(b) The treatment creates special care 

requirements for the gemstone. The 

seller should disclose that the gemstone 

has been treated and has special care 

requirements. It is also recommended 

that the seller disclose the special care 

requirements to the purchaser; or 

(c) The treatment has a significant 

effect on the stone’s value. The seller 

should disclose that the gemstone has 

been treated. 

Note to § 23.24: The disclosures outlined in 

this section are applicable to sellers at every 

level of trade, as defined in § 23.0(b) of these 

guides, and they may be made at the point 

of sale prior to sale, except that where a 

product can be purchased without personally 

viewing the product (e.g., direct mail 

catalogs, online services, televised shopping 

programs), disclosure should be made in the 

solicitation for, or description of, the 

product. 

§ 23.25 Misuse of the words ‘‘ruby,’’ 

‘‘sapphire,’’ ‘‘emerald,’’ ‘‘topaz,’’ ‘‘stone,’’ 

‘‘birthstone,’’ ‘‘gem,’’ ‘‘gemstone,’’ etc. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

unqualified words ‘‘ruby,’’ ‘‘sapphire,’’ 

‘‘emerald,’’ ‘‘topaz,’’ or the name of any 

other precious or semi-precious stone to 

describe any product that is not in fact 

a mined stone of the type described. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘ruby,’’ ‘‘sapphire,’’ ‘‘emerald,’’ 

‘‘topaz,’’ or the name of any other 

precious or semi-precious stone, or the 

word ‘‘stone,’’ ‘‘birthstone,’’ ‘‘gem,’’ 

‘‘gemstone,’’ or similar term to describe 

a laboratory-grown, laboratory-created, 

[manufacturer name]-created, synthetic, 

imitation, or simulated stone, unless 

such word or name is immediately 

preceded with equal conspicuousness 

by the word ‘‘laboratory-grown,’’ 

‘‘laboratory-created,’’ ‘‘[manufacturer 

name]-created,’’ or some other word or 

phrase of like meaning, or by the word 

‘‘imitation’’ or ‘‘simulated,’’ so as to 

disclose clearly the nature of the 

product and the fact it is not a mined 

gemstone. 

Note 1 to Paragraph (b): The use of the 

word ‘‘faux’’ to describe a laboratory-created 

or imitation stone is not an adequate 

disclosure that the stone is not a mined 

stone. 

Note 2 to Paragraph (b): Marketers may use 

the word ‘‘cultured’’ to describe laboratorycreated gemstone products that have 

essentially the same optical, physical, and 

chemical properties as the named stone if the 

term (e.g., ‘‘cultured ruby’’) is qualified by a 

clear and conspicuous disclosure (for 

example, the words ‘‘laboratory-created,’’ 

‘‘laboratory-grown,’’ ‘‘[manufacturer name]- 

created,’’ or some other word or phrase of 

like meaning) conveying that the product is 

not a mined stone. Additional guidance 

regarding the use of ‘‘cultured’’ to describe a 

laboratory-created diamond is set forth in 

§ 23.12(c)(3). 

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘laboratory-grown,’’ ‘‘laboratorycreated,’’ ‘‘[manufacturer name]- 

created,’’ ‘‘synthetic,’’ or other word or 

phrase of like meaning with the name of 

any natural stone to describe any 

industry product unless such product 

has essentially the same optical, 

physical, and chemical properties as the 

stone named. 

(d) It is unfair or deceptive to describe 

products made with gemstone material 

and any amount of filler or binder, such 

as lead glass, in the following way: 

(1) With the unqualified word ‘‘ruby,’’ 

‘‘sapphire,’’ ‘‘emerald,’’ ‘‘topaz,’’ or 

name of any other precious or semiprecious stone; 

(2) As a ‘‘treated ruby,’’ ‘‘treated 

sapphire,’’ ‘‘treated emerald,’’ ‘‘treated 

topaz,’’ or ‘‘treated [gemstone name]’’; 

(3) As a ‘‘laboratory-grown [gemstone 

name],’’ ‘‘laboratory-created [gemstone 

name],’’ ‘‘[manufacturer name]-created 

[gemstone name],’’ ‘‘or ‘‘synthetic 

[gemstone name];’’ or 

(4) As a ‘‘composite [gemstone 

name],’’ ‘‘hybrid [gemstone name],’’ or 

‘‘manufactured [gemstone name],’’ 

unless the term is qualified to disclose 

clearly and conspicuously that the 

product: (A) Does not have the same 

characteristics as the named stone; and 

(B) requires special care. It is further 

recommended that the seller disclose 

the special care requirements to the 

purchaser. 

§ 23.26 Misrepresentation as to varietal 

name. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to mark or 

describe an industry product with the 

incorrect varietal name. 

(b) The following are examples of 

markings or descriptions that may be 

misleading: 

(1) Use of the term ‘‘yellow emerald’’ 

to describe golden beryl or heliodor. 

(2) Use of the term ‘‘green amethyst’’ 

to describe prasiolite. 

Note to § 23.26: A varietal name is given 

for a division of gem species or genus based 

on a color, type of optical phenomenon, or 

other distinguishing characteristic of 

appearance. 

§ 23.27 Misuse of the words ‘‘real,’’ 

‘‘genuine,’’ ‘‘natural,’’ ‘‘precious,’’ etc. 

It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘real,’’ ‘‘genuine,’’ ‘‘natural,’’ 

‘‘precious,’’ ‘‘semi-precious,’’ or similar 

terms to describe any industry product 

that is manufactured or produced 

artificially. 

§ 23.28 Misuse of the words ‘‘flawless,’’ 

‘‘perfect,’’ etc. 

(a) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘flawless’’ as a quality description 

of any gemstone that discloses 

blemishes, inclusions, or clarity faults of 

any sort when examined under a 

corrected magnifier at 10-power, with 

adequate illumination, by a person 

skilled in gemstone grading. 

(b) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘perfect’’ or any representation of 

similar meaning to describe any 

gemstone unless the gemstone meets the 

definition of ‘‘flawless’’ and is not of 

inferior color or make. 

(c) It is unfair or deceptive to use the 

word ‘‘flawless,’’ ‘‘perfect,’’ or any 

representation of similar meaning to 

describe any imitation gemstone. 

Appendix to Part 23—Exemptions 

Recognized in the Assay for Quality of 

Gold Alloy, Gold Filled, Gold Overlay, 

Rolled Gold Plate, Silver, and Platinum 

Industry Products 

(a) Exemptions recognized in the industry 

and not to be considered in any assay for 

quality of a karat gold industry product 

include springs, posts, and separable backs of 

lapel buttons, posts and nuts for attaching 

interchangeable ornaments, bracelet and 

necklace snap tongues, metallic parts 

completely and permanently encased in a 

nonmetallic covering, field pieces and bezels 

for lockets,38 and wire pegs or rivets used for 

applying mountings and other ornaments, 

which mountings or ornaments shall be of 

the quality marked. 

Note to Paragraph (a): Exemptions 

recognized in the industry and not to be 

considered in any assay for quality of a karat 

gold optical product include: the hinge 

assembly (barrel or other special types such 

as are customarily used in plastic frames); 

washers, bushings, and nuts of screw 

assemblies; dowels; springs for spring shoe 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 40675 

39Oxfords are a form of eyeglasses where a flat 

spring joins the two eye rims and the tension it 

exerts on the nose serves to hold the unit in place. 

Oxfords are also referred to as pince nez. 

straps; metal parts permanently encased in a 

non-metallic covering; and for oxfords,39 coil 

and joint springs. 

(b) Exemptions recognized in the industry 

and not to be considered in any assay for 

quality of a gold filled, gold overlay and 

rolled gold plate industry product, other than 

watchcases, include joints, catches, screws, 

pin stems, pins of scarf pins, hat pins, etc., 

field pieces and bezels for lockets, posts and 

separate backs of lapel buttons, bracelet and 

necklace snap tongues, springs, and metallic 

parts completely and permanently encased in 

a nonmetallic covering. 

Note to Paragraph (b): Exemptions 

recognized in the industry and not to be 

considered in any assay for quality of a gold 

filled, gold overlay and rolled gold plate 

optical product include: Screws; the hinge 

assembly (barrel or other special types such 

as are customarily used in plastic frames); 

washers, bushings, tubes and nuts of screw 

assemblies; dowels; pad inserts; springs for 

spring shoe straps, cores and/or inner 

windings of comfort cable temples; metal 

parts permanently encased in a nonmetallic 

covering; and for oxfords, the handle and 

catch. 

(c) Exemptions recognized in the industry 

and not to be considered in any assay for 

quality of a silver industry product include 

screws, rivets, springs, spring pins for wrist 

watch straps; posts and separable backs of 

lapel buttons; wire pegs, posts, and nuts used 

for applying mountings or other ornaments, 

which mountings or ornaments shall be of 

the quality marked; pin stems (e.g., of badges, 

brooches, emblem pins, hat pins, and scarf 

pins, etc.); levers for belt buckles; blades and 

skeletons of pocket knives; field pieces and 

bezels for lockets; bracelet and necklace snap 

tongues; any other joints, catches, or screws; 

and metallic parts completely and 

permanently encased in a nonmetallic 

covering. 

(d) Exemptions recognized in the industry 

and not to be considered in any assay for 

quality of an industry product of silver in 

combination with gold include joints, 

catches, screws, pin stems, pins of scarf pins, 

hat pins, etc., posts and separable backs of 

lapel buttons, springs, bracelet and necklace 

snap tongues, and metallic parts completely 

and permanently encased in a nonmetallic 

covering. 

(e) Exemptions recognized in the industry 

and not to be considered in any assay for 

quality of a platinum industry product 

include springs, winding bars, sleeves, crown 

cores, mechanical joint pins, screws, rivets, 

dust bands, detachable movement rims, hat 

pin stems, and bracelet and necklace snap 

tongues. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2018–17454 Filed 8–15–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

19 CFR Part 24 

[CBP Dec. 18–09; Docket No. USCBP–2018– 

0033] 

RIN 1515–AE39 

Refund of Alcohol Excise Tax 

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, Department of Homeland 

Security; Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Interim regulations; solicitation 

of comments. 

SUMMARY: This document updates 

language in the U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) regulations to 

reflect the current organization of CBP 

and the Department of the Treasury. The 

document also eliminates a restriction 

pertaining to CBP’s authority to refund 

excessive duties, taxes, fees, or interest 

imposed on distilled spirits, wine, and 

beer to facilitate implementation of 

Subpart A (Craft Beverage 

Modernization and Tax Reform) of Part 

IX of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed 

December 22, 2017, commonly referred 

to as the Craft Beverage Modernization 

Act. 

DATES: This interim final rule is 

effective August 16, 2018; comments 

must be received by October 15, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number USCBP– 

2018–0033, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Trade and Commercial 

Regulations Branch, Regulations and 

Rulings, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection, 90 K Street NE, 

10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229– 

1177. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket title for this rulemaking, and 

must reference docket number USCBP– 

2018–0033. All comments received will 

be posted without change to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on submitting 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

the document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http://

www.regulations.gov. Submitted 

comments may also be inspected during 

business days between the hours of 9:00 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and 

Commercial Regulations Branch, 

Regulations and Rulings, Office of 

Trade, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, 

Washington, DC. Arrangements to 

inspect submitted comments should be 

made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph 

Clark at (202) 325–0118. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sharolyn J. McCann, Supervisory 

Program Manager, Office of Trade, U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection, (571) 

468–5478, sharolyn.j.mccann@

cbp.dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written data, views, or 

arguments on all aspects of the interim 

rule. See ADDRESSES above for 

information on how to submit 

comments. U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) also invites comments 

that relate to the effects that might result 

from this interim rule. Comments that 

will provide the most assistance to CBP 

will reference a specific portion of the 

interim rule, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include data, 

information, or authority that support 

such recommended change. 

Background 

CBP is amending § 24.36 of title 19 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 

24.36) regarding the authority of CBP to 

issue refunds of excessive duties, taxes, 

fees, or interest to: 

(1) Reflect changes in departmental 

organization, a statutory citation to 

account for the Internal Revenue Code 

of 1986, and current form names and 

numbers. The current text refers to the 

Department of the Treasury’s (Treasury) 

organization that preceded the 1972 

transfer of certain functions from the 

Internal Revenue Service to the Bureau 

of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. See 

Treasury Order 221 (June 6, 1972). The 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 

107–296, December 25, 2002) later 

transferred these functions described in 

19 CFR 24.36(e) to the Alcohol and 

Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB). 

The reference to Internal Revenue 

Form 843 in § 24.36(e)(1) predates the 

1963 republication of chapter I of title 

19 (see 28 FR 14546, 14815 (Dec. 31, 

1963)) and is obsolete. The current IRS 

Form 843 is not related to excise tax. 

Current TTB Form 5620.8, ‘‘Claim— 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES