Make American Flags in America Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Langworthy, Nicholas A. [R-NY-23]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Feb 18, 2025
Bottom line
This bill requires all U.S. flags displayed or purchased by federal agencies to be entirely made in the United States and initiates a study on flag labeling enforcement.
What it actually does
This bill mandates that federal agencies cannot display or procure flags of the United States unless they are 100 percent manufactured in the U.S. from 100 percent U.S.-produced materials. It also directs the Federal Trade Commission to conduct a study on the enforcement of country-of-origin labeling for U.S. flags and report recommendations to Congress.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill strengthens American manufacturing, supports domestic jobs, and ensures that the national symbol is produced entirely within the nation it represents, reinforcing patriotism and economic security by reducing reliance on foreign supply chains.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that such a strict '100 percent made in the U.S.' requirement could significantly increase procurement costs for federal agencies, limit competition, and potentially violate international trade agreements, leading to retaliatory measures or trade disputes.
The bill is very short and easy to read, allowing ample time for comprehensive evaluation.
Section 2(a), adding Section 11 to Chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code.
Made in United States Requirement for Federal Flags
This provision mandates that federal agencies cannot display a U.S. flag on federal property or use appropriated funds to procure a U.S. flag unless that flag has been 100 percent manufactured in the United States, using articles, materials, or supplies that are also 100 percent produced or manufactured in the United States. This applies broadly to Executive, military, legislative, and judicial branches, as well as the D.C. government and government-controlled corporations.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision ensures that the symbol of the nation is produced entirely by American labor and resources, bolstering national pride, supporting domestic industry, and reducing reliance on foreign supply chains for a critical national emblem.
Critics contend
Critics might contend that the strict 100% domestic content requirement could be difficult to meet for all components, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers and limiting competition, or even violating existing international trade agreements.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the desire to support domestic manufacturing and national symbolism against potential increases in procurement costs and complexities related to international trade obligations.
Section 2(a), adding Section 11(c) to Chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code.
Consistency with International Agreements
This clause specifies that the 'Made in United States' requirement for flags must be applied in a manner consistent with the United States' obligations under international agreements. This aims to prevent the bill from inadvertently causing breaches of trade treaties or other international commitments.
Section 3
FTC Study on Flag Labeling Enforcement
This section directs the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to conduct a study within one year. The study will assess the enforcement scheme for country-of-origin labeling for U.S. flags, determine the number of fines or penalties imposed for violations, and identify the percentage of repeat violations. The FTC Chair must then report these findings and any recommendations for improving enforcement and deterrence to relevant Congressional committees.
Defines 'made in the United States' as 100 percent manufactured in the United States from articles, materials, or supplies that have been 100 percent produced or manufactured in the United States.
Section 2(a), adding Section 11(e)(3) to Chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code.
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to place definitions at the end of a section. However, the strictness of this definition is highly consequential.
Case for: Proponents argue this strict definition ensures true American manufacturing, preventing situations where a product is merely assembled in the U.S. from foreign components, thereby maximizing domestic economic benefit.
Case against: Critics might argue this 100% requirement is exceptionally stringent and could be difficult to implement, potentially limiting the pool of eligible manufacturers even within the U.S. if any raw materials or sub-components are sourced internationally.
Estimated impact: Significantly narrows the scope of what qualifies as 'Made in the United States' for federal flag procurement, potentially impacting supply chains and costs.
Specifies that the display requirement takes effect 2 years after enactment, while the procurement requirement takes effect 90 days after enactment.
Section 2(c)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice for transition periods to allow for implementation.
Case for: Proponents argue these staggered dates provide federal agencies and domestic manufacturers reasonable time to adjust to the new requirements, particularly for existing flag inventories and establishing fully domestic supply chains.
Case against: Critics might argue that the 2-year delay for display is too long if the intent is immediate national symbolism, or that 90 days for procurement might be too short for some agencies to find compliant suppliers given the strict '100 percent' definition.
Estimated impact: Determines the timeline for federal agencies to comply, influencing immediate market shifts versus gradual adaptation.