Federal Trade Commission
Received Documents
June 24, 1996
P894219
B18354900169

                  CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
                     HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
                   Washington, D.C.  20515-3311

                           June 7, 1996
                                 

Mr. Robert Pitofsky
Chairman
Federal Trade Commission
Pennsylvania Avenue at Sixth Street, NW
Washington, D. C.  20580

Dear Robert:

     I am writing to convey my strong support for the Commission's standard for using an unqualified
"Made in  USA" claim and to express my strong belief that the Commission should not weaken the current
standard, which supports investment in U.S. manufacturing at all levels an creates secure, high paying jobs in
this country.  Diluting the "all or virtually all" standard would negatively impact many American workers and
their families.

     For years, the Commission has consistently held that a "Made in U.S.A" claim is an affirmative
representation that "all or virtually all" of a product in question is of U.S. origin.  Therefore, the Commission
has considered the use of such a claim with respect to a product that contains more than a de minimis foreign
content to be deceptive.

     The Commission would retain the current rule.  The widespread interest in the Commission's review
of "Made in  USA" claims is evidence of the powerful marketing edge that the Made in  USA label provides. 
Weakening the Made in U.S.A standard would eliminate the incentive to meet the all or virtually all standard. 
Many companies that today rely on U.S. manufacturing would be compelled to shift to foreign sources to
compete on price and other factors.

     The Commission's rules do not create an "all or nothing" dilemma for investment in U.S.
manufacturing.  On the contrary, the Commission specifically authorizes the use of qualified claims, such as
"Made in U.S.A from foreign and domestic components."  Thus, companies that have substantial U.S. 
manufacturing but do not meet the all or virtually all standard may use non-deceptive, qualified Made in 
USA claims to inform consumers of their products' U.S. content.  Also, it is worth noting that a company's
use of the Made in  USA claim is purely a discretionary choice.

     For these reasons, I urge the Commission not to alter current standard for unqualified Made in  USA
claims.  The rule provides a critical incentive to invest in U.S. manufacturing and to maintain valuable
American jobs in the era of globalization of sourcing.

                                   Sincerely,



                                   Charles H.  Taylor
                                   Member of Congress
CHT/cc