Morning Consult<\/a> in association with the Alliance for American Manufacturing, over 80% said they prefer to buy America-made products over similar imported goods. They cite strengthening the U.S. economy (59%), creating American jobs (59%) and supporting small businesses (50%) as their primary reasons. <\/p>\nAnd consumers\u2019 preference for \u201cMade in USA\u201d is growing. Compared with last year, half of Americans said they are more likely to purchase products made domestically today. Yet when they try to find American-made goods\u2014especially when shopping online\u2014they run into obstacles, confirming the Columbia Center\u2019s findings. <\/p>\n
Some 35% said it is difficult to identify a product’s origin when shopping online, and 77% believe online retailers should be required to display country-of-origin labels, just as brick-and-mortar stores do. To find American-made goods, shoppers primarily rely on local independent retailers (39%) and social media (38%). <\/p>\n
The business opportunity is clear: major retailers, like Walmart and Amazon, are leaving dollars on the table by not providing more American-made choices or making them easier to find. More than 80% of consumers said they would buy more \u201cMade in USA\u201d products if such products were more widely available at large retailers.<\/p>\n
All this points directly to what the Columbia Center\u2019s research uncovered. Walmart and Amazon are erecting artificial barriers to make domestically made products harder to find, and in a twist that defies the established laws of retail, the research suggests the suppression is intentional\u2014not a technical limitation but engineered into the design of the AI shopping agents. <\/p>\n
Rigged System<\/p>\n
The Center for Law and the Economy study, entitled \u201cMade in America, Hidden by AI\u201d and authored by Meyer and the Center\u2019s program manager Zachary Harris, documents how \u201cMade in USA\u201d claims break down on both the Walmart and Amazon websites\u2014the researchers provide the methodology so individuals can conduct their own tests. <\/p>\n
Specifically, the research revealed that both Amazon and Walmart have the technical capability to detect and flag fraudulent \u201cMade in USA\u201d products. Amazon\u2019s Alexa misidentified imported T-shirts\u2014clearly stated imported on the individual product listings\u2014as domestically made in its own promotionally authored comparison charts, while Walmart\u2019s Sparky was able to rate the \u201cMade in USA\u201d claims for technical gear as highly suspicious or credible when asked. <\/p>\n
The researchers also found that \u201cMade in USA\u201d fraud appears rampant on both Amazon and Walmart. They found dozens of mislabeled products worth thousands of dollars, noting that the only limiting factor was the time required to find the mislabeled listings, not the availability of examples. <\/p>\n
And specific to Amazon, the researchers found Alexa blocks questions about \u201cMade in USA\u201d products while answering equivalent questions about goods sourced in China. When asked to find domestically produced fly-fishing rods, Alexa said it did not have access to that information. However, when asked for \u201cMade in China\u201d fly-fishing rods, Amazon returned a detailed comparison table including prices, rating and brand-origin analysis. <\/p>\n
When queried about the discrepancy, Alexa explained that 40% to 50% of Amazon\u2019s active sellers are based in China and filtering for American-made goods \u201cwould visibly redirect shoppers away from a large portion of the seller base.\u201d <\/p>\n
Amazon disputes the broader conclusions in the Center\u2019s research. \u201cThe suggestion that we intentionally withhold country-of-origin information customers is incorrect,\u201d an Amazon spokesperson shared with me. \u201cCountry-of-origin information, when available, is currently displayed on product detail pages and we\u2019re continually working to improve Alexa for Shopping\u2019s ability to accurately provide this information.\u201d Walmart did not respond to my request for comment.<\/p>\n
Designed To Deceive?<\/p>\n
While Amazon and Walmart appear willing to allow falsely labeled products to remain on their platforms, ironically their own AI shopping agents\u2014Alexa and Sparky\u2014reveal the truth about why the behavior is allowed to persist. Both describe the inaction as a business decision, not a technical limitation. <\/p>\n
For example, when Walmart\u2019s Sparky is asked why items with suspicious \u201cMade in USA\u201d labels aren\u2019t flagged, it admits there is no technical reason such a validity check shouldn\u2019t exist but calls the \u201cbarriers more organizational than technical.\u201d <\/p>\n
Pressed further about whether following the labeling laws on made in USA products is a platform priority, Sparky responded that following the law isn\u2019t optional, while it also made an excuse as to why it doesn\u2019t comply. <\/p>\n
\u201cEnforcement gaps exist because the legal risk has historically been low\u2014the FTC pursues relatively few cases against retailers (as opposed to manufacturers), so the practical pressure to build proactive compliance systems has been limited,\u201d Sparky stated. <\/p>\n
Amazon\u2019s Alexa goes even further. When confronted with falsely labeled \u201cMade in USA\u201d T-shirts presented in its own comparison chart, Amazon disowns the listing.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe chart incorrectly marking \u201cin USA\u201d as \u201cyes\u201d contradicts the official import designation,\u201d Alexa stated, adding, \u201cDon\u2019t trust that comparison chart\u2014it contains false information. Check each product\u2019s \u2018Product information\u2019 section for the accurate Origin field.\u201d <\/p>\n
However, even Amazon\u2019s product listings were found to contain false information. A Golden Fox Work Boot was titled \u201cMade in USA,\u201d yet its detailed listings stated it was imported. But Alexa offered \u201cgood news\u201d about the quality construction of the work boot: \u201cThey compare favorably to higher-priced boots, like Red Wing.\u201d Red Wing boots are officially made in the United States and the brand operates a dedicated Red Wing Shoe Store on Amazon.<\/p>\n
One might ask why would Alexa favor a cheaper imported dupe over a higher-priced American-made classic? Alexa provided the answer: \u201cUS-based manufacturers are a minority on Amazon\u2019s seller base and their collective lobbying power is limited compared to the volume sellers being protected by inaction.\u201d <\/p>\n
Alexa also added that high-volume overseas sellers rely on \u201corigin ambiguity,\u201d and that Amazon has no \u201cinternal champion\u201d to change the current system. <\/p>\n
Regulatory Reckoning<\/p>\n
If Amazon\u2019s claims that it is continually working to improve Alexa\u2019s ability to serve customers with accurate information are valid, this investigative report gives the company ample material to dig deeper into the platform\u2019s AI inner workings. <\/p>\n
Ironically, the same systems that obscure origin information also reveal the truth about why the behavior persists\u2014it\u2019s in the best interest of the companies, not the customers. This fact gives law enforcement and regulatory agencies fresh ammunition to take action.<\/p>\n
A year ago, the FTC sent warning letters to Amazon and Walmart over false \u201cMade in USA\u201d claims on their platforms and President Trump has directed the FTC to prioritize \u201cMade in USA\u201d enforcement, including on online marketplaces. <\/p>\n
Since then, the agency has brought only three enforcement actions against small businesses that received the same warning letter as Amazon and Walmart. The penalties for falsely labeling products were substantial: up to $53,088 per violation per day. <\/p>\n
The Center\u2019s report argues that regulators have barely scratched the surface to address the scale of the problem. It urges federal and state enforcement agencies to investigate the conduct uncovered in the report, even potentially holding platform executives legally responsible. <\/p>\n
The Center also calls on Congress to hold hearings on agentic AI oversight and consider establishing a federal private right of action, giving consumers and companies the ability to take platforms to court for alleged fraud.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the case of \u2018Made in USA\u2019 fraud, despite more than 100 years of authority from Congress and endless speeches from officials, federal enforcers have consistently failed to act and the domestic economy has experienced irreparable harm,\u201d the report authors concluded. \u201cThe public needs the right to defend itself, especially when the government has the authority but not the will to act against powerful companies.\u201d<\/p>\n
See Also:<\/p>\n
ForbesWashington Watchdogs Take Notice As AI Becomes Retail\u2019s Front DoorBy Pamela N. Danziger<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Made in USA label on the side of an unopened cardboard box with copy space. Manufacturing and economy…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":126029,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[24,63206,321,25,63205,63204,63203,63201,63202,1427],"class_list":["post-126028","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-ai","tag-ai","tag-ai-agentic-shopping-agents-bias","tag-amazon","tag-artificial-intelligence","tag-consumer-demand-for-made-in-usa-products","tag-country-of-origin-fraud","tag-made-in-america-products","tag-made-in-usa","tag-product-origin-labels-online","tag-walmart"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/126028","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=126028"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/126028\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/126029"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=126028"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=126028"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=126028"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"Made](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/1785518410_410_0x0.jpg\")
<\/p>\n