Best Practices

FDA Finalizes Guidance on Mandatory Cosmetics Recalls: What Importers and Manufacturers Need to Know

On October 23, 2026, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a notice announcing the availability of its final guidance, Questions and Answers Regarding Mandatory Cosmetics Recalls: Guidance for Industry. The guidance explains how FDA intends to exercise its mandatory recall authority under the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA).

The guidance addresses when FDA may order a mandatory recall, the procedures the agency must follow, and what companies can expect if a recall is ordered. It finalizes a December 2025 draft without substantive changes.

For cosmetics importers, manufacturers, distributors, and brand owners, the guidance reinforces the importance of having procedures in place to identify potentially unsafe products, respond to FDA communications, and manage recalls when necessary.

Key Takeaways

  • FDA Clarifies Mandatory Recall Authority: The final guidance explains how FDA may require the recall of certain adulterated or misbranded cosmetic products that present a serious health risk.
  • Voluntary Recalls Remain the First Step: FDA generally must provide the responsible person an opportunity to voluntarily recall the affected product before ordering a mandatory recall.
  • Importers and Manufacturers Should Review Recall Procedures: Businesses should evaluate product traceability, supplier communications, distribution records, and recall response plans.
  • No New Recall Authority Created: The authority comes from MoCRA, enacted in 2022. The final guidance […]

2026 CBP Trade and Cargo Security Summit: Key Takeaways for Importers 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) brought together government officials and members of the trade community in Dallas from September 8–10, 2026, for its annual Trade and Cargo Security Summit (TCSS). This year’s theme “Knowing Your Supply Chain to Remain Compliant and Mitigate Risk” was reflected throughout three days of discussions on enforcement, supply chain visibility, artificial intelligence, forced labor, transshipment, CTPAT, cybersecurity, and the future of customs compliance.  

Here are some of the most important takeaways for importers.

  1. CBP Is Entering a New Era of Customs Enforcement

A major focus of the Summit was the Administration’s June 3, 2026 “Strengthening Customs Enforcement” Executive Order and the regulatory changes expected to follow. 

The Executive Order calls for, among other things, heightened requirements for Importers of Record (IORs), expanded data and identification requirements, and increased vetting of IORs and other parties throughout the import process. CBP officials emphasized that implementation will be an agency-wide effort and that additional regulatory packages are expected.  

The shift is already visible in the government’s broader enforcement posture. Discussions at the Summit emphasized customs fraud, shell companies, identity theft, false importer information, double invoicing, and other schemes CBP is encountering in the trade environment. CBP also stressed that its focus is not on ordinary clerical mistakes, but on identifying and escalating consequences for parties intentionally exploiting the system.  

  1. Supply Chain Visibility Is Becoming a National Security Issue

Perhaps no […]

BIS FY2025 Annual Report Signals Major Increase in Export Enforcement 

The U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) released its Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Report to Congress, providing a detailed look at the agency’s export control, licensing, and enforcement activity.  

Key Takeaways 

  • BIS reports an 18-fold increase in penalties, from approximately $16 million in calendar year 2024 to approximately $324 million in 2025. 
  • BIS completed 53 administrative enforcement actions, resulting in more than $108 million in civil penalties during FY2025. 
  • BIS enforcement activity included 455 warning letters, 705 detentions, 232 seizures, and 29 denial orders. 
  • BIS investigations resulted in 65 criminal convictions of individuals and companies during FY2025. 
  • BIS completed 1,840 end-use checks across 73 countries, demonstrating the agency’s ability to scrutinize transactions even after goods leave the United States. 
  • BIS added 142 entities to the Entity List, including parties associated with advanced computing, quantum technology, hypersonic weapons programs, and Iranian drone procurement. 
  • Licensing for Entity List parties has become significantly more restrictive: BIS reports granting only 16 new licenses to Entity List companies during Q2–Q4 2025. 
  • Exporters should reassess restricted-party screening, end-user and end-use diligence, product classification, licensing procedures, recordkeeping, and escalation protocols in light of […]

BIS End-Use Checks: What Happens When an Export Control Officer Calls Your Customer 

BIS has published a plain-language FAQ on its End-Use Check program, the on-site visits its Export Control Officers conduct at foreign consignees and end users of U.S.-origin items. This article explains what those visits are, what your foreign customer will be asked to produce, the statutory and regulatory authority behind the request, and the consequences when a check cannot be completed. It matters because the penalty for a failed check falls on the exporter’s ability to ship, not only on the foreign party being visited. 

Key Takeaways 

  • An End-Use Check (EUC) is BIS verifying, on site and overseas, that your foreign customer is who it says it is and used your items the way the license or the EAR required. 
  • A failed or incomplete check does not need a finding of wrongdoing to hurt you. The customer can land on the Unverified List, license exceptions disappear, and every shipment then requires a UVL statement. 
  • Since October 2022, a check that stays incomplete for 60 days after Unverified List placement, because a host government blocks it, triggers Entity List proceedings. 
  • The exporter’s exposure is set before the visit ever happens: by the accuracy of the license application, the quality of the paper trail, and whether the foreign party was told what to expect. 
  • Diaz Trade Law prepares exporters […]

FTC Cracks Down on False “Made in the USA” Claims 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced law enforcement actions involving three companies that falsely claimed that their products were made in the United States.  

Made in the USA

The “Made in the USA” labeling rules were enacted to prevent deceptive advertising and ensure customers can make informed purchasing choices. The concept of labeling products with the correct country of origin dates all the way back to the McKinley Tariff Act in 1890, and Congress and federal agencies have updated “Made in the USA” rules over the years.  

FTC Jurisdiction 

The FTC is charged with preventing deception and unfairness in the marketplace. Under the FTC Act, the Commission may bring legal action against “false or misleading claims that a product is of U.S. origin”. The agency is authorized to issue a civil penalty of up to $40,654 per violation. 

The FTC has issued guidance on complying with the “Made in the USA” standard, most recently in 2021. View the latest guidance here.

When Can I Say Made in the USA? 

For a product to be considered as “Made in the USA” without qualification, that product must be “all or virtually all” made in the U.S. How the Commission determines whether a product is “all or virtually all” made in the U.S. is by looking at whether there was “a ‘reasonable basis’ to support the claim at the time it is made”. To prove […]

Go to Top