The complaint charges that, in spite of such claims, many of the company\u2019s products were wholly imported from China or contained significant imported content.<\/p>\n
In addition, the complaint points to numerous instances when Old Southern Brass claimed affiliation with the U.S. military, including that the company was veteran-operated, donated 10 percent of sales to military service charities, and that it sold products that included bullets or casings used by the U.S. military.<\/p>\n
One post on the company\u2019s website said \u201c\u2026 as a veteran-operated business in the United States, our mission is to give back to fellow American patriots who have served and protected our country.\u201d<\/p>\n A product listing on the company\u2019s website advertised an engraved 50 caliber casing bottle opener as being \u201cHandcrafted from an authentic 50 cal casing that was previously used by the\u00a0U.S. military.\u201d<\/p>\n Despite the company\u2019s claims, the company was not operated by a veteran, and the products it sold as being used by the U.S. military were not actually used by the U.S. military. The complaint also charged that the company did not donate 10 percent of sales to veterans\u2019 charities as it claimed. In fact, the company claimed charitable deductions that amounted to less than one-half of 1 percent of sales.<\/p>\n The FTC\u2019s proposed order against the company and Oliver, which they have agreed to, prohibits them from making any false or misleading claims, including any about affiliation with or support of the U.S. military or veterans. It also requires that $150,000 must be turned over to the FTC.<\/p>\n The order also includes a number of requirements about the claims they make about the origin of their products:<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The order includes a monetary judgment of $4,572,137.66, which is partially suspended due to the defendants\u2019 inability to pay the full amount. If the Commission finds that the defendants lied about their financial status, the full amount of the judgment could become immediately payable.<\/p>\n The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and to accept the consent agreement was 3-0.<\/p>\n The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register soon. The agreement will be subject to public comment, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Instructions for filing comments appear in the published notice on regulations.gov.<\/p>\n NOTE:<\/strong> The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has \u201creason to believe\u201d that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $50,120.<\/p>\n The lead staff attorney on this matter was Julia Solomon Ensor in the Bureau of Consumer Protection.<\/p>\n The FTC is committed to ensuring that \u201cMade in USA\u201d claims are truthful. The FTC\u2019s Enforcement Policy Statement on U.S. Origin Claims<\/a>\u00a0provides guidance on making non-deceptive \u201cMade in USA\u201d claims. In addition, the FTC\u2019s Made in USA Labeling Rule<\/a>\u00a0went into effect on Aug. 13, 2021. Companies that violate the Rule from that date forward may be subject to civil penalties.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n