Care Labeling Rule SS-2024-FINAL

Federal Trade Commission
Supporting Statement for Information Collection Provisions of
The Care Labeling Rule
16 C.F.R. Part 423
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) requests approval for a threeyear extension of an existing clearance relating to the disclosure requirements under the Care
Labeling of Textile Wearing Apparel and Certain Piece Goods As Amended (“Care Labeling
Rule”), 16 C.F.R. Part 423. There is no change in the disclosure requirements. Annual burden
estimates for this renewal period remained the same while expected annual labor costs are
projected to increase.
1.

Necessity for Collecting the Information

In 1971, the FTC determined that it is unfair or deceptive to sell textile clothing (and
piece goods used to make textile clothing) without providing basic care information to
consumers.1 The Commission found that, absent care information, consumers suffer
substantial economic injury when they are unable to shop for clothing on the basis of care
characteristics, and when they use improper care procedures that damage clothing.
Accordingly, the Commission issued a trade regulation rule to require permanent labels
that fully inform purchasers about how to care for and maintain textile clothing.
The Care Labeling Rule requires manufacturers and importers to attach a permanent
care label to all covered, non-exempted textile clothing. Also, manufacturers and importers
of piece goods used to make textile clothing must provide the same care information on the
end of each bolt or roll of fabric. This information must fully disclose either washing or dry
cleaning instructions, or that the item cannot be cleaned if such is the case. If washing
instructions are given, the label must also disclose a drying procedure and, in some
circumstances, bleaching and ironing care. If dry cleaning instructions are given, the
appropriate solvent(s) must be disclosed if all solvents cannot be used. Use of standardized
terminology is suggested, but not required, for all care instructions. For exempted items,
the Rule requires disclosure of care instructions on a hang tag, on the package, or in some
other conspicuous place.
2.

Use of the Information

Consumers use the information disclosed on care labels to make purchase decisions
and to avoid ineffective garment care practices that may damage garments. Professional
cleaners also use the information to avoid damaging garments and ineffective care
procedures. Textile products that are used to make clothing comprise a vast array of
fibers, fabrics, and finishes. Each of these products may have unique care performance
characteristics and require the use of specific care techniques. The large number of
products on the market makes it impracticable for consumers and professional cleaners to
be informed about appropriate care practices. If manufacturers and importers of these
1

36 Fed. Reg. 23,883 (1971).

1

products did not disclose care instructions to prospective purchasers, consumers would
be unable to determine with certainty what care procedures to employ. In addition,
consumers would not have the opportunity to consider care requirements, along with
other product attributes, in making informed choices among available textile clothing
products.
3.

Consideration of the Use of Improved Information Technology to Reduce Burden

Effective disclosure of care information to consumers entails labeling on garments
themselves so that consumers can be informed of proper care procedures at the time of
purchase and at the time of care; thus, providing an option for electronic disclosure
pursuant to the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, Pub. L. No. 105-277, Title XVII,
112 Stat. 2681-749, is impracticable.
4.

Burden/Efforts to Identify Duplication/Availability of Similar Information

Except for a limited requirement under the Flammable Fabrics Act regulations, see 16
C.F.R. pts. 1602-1632, there is no other federal or state law or regulation that requires care
labeling of textile clothing. The Care Labeling Rule provides that, in the event of a conflict
between its provisions and the rules issued under the Flammable Fabrics Act, the latter will
take precedence.2 During the 1983 amendment proceeding, the Commission found that
there were no known conflicts between the two sets of regulations.3
5.

Efforts to Minimize Burden on Small Businesses

The Commission has minimized the burden on all businesses in a number of ways.
Except for certain exempted items, the Rule requires a label disclosing a method of care or
that the item cannot be cleaned if such is the case. In August 2000, the Commission
considered but decided not to require instructions to disclose alternative methods of care. See
65 Fed. Reg. 47261 (2000). If an item is both washable and dry cleanable, the Rule might
have required the care label to include instructions for both methods. By not requiring the
disclosure of more than one care method, the Rule has avoided imposing additional costs to
establish a reasonable basis for the additional care method. However, the Rule does not
prohibit the disclosure of more than one method of care. Thus, manufacturers that wish to
include more information may do so, provided they have a reasonable basis for each method
listed on the label.
One of the principal considerations in the Commission’s 1983 Rule amendment
proceeding was how to improve care information while reducing unnecessary burdens
on industry. To accomplish these ends, the Rule outlines the necessary elements for
both washing and dry cleaning instructions. A warning system of labeling, that
succinctly identifies cleaning methods to avoid, is used to minimize the number of
words necessary to give a complete care instruction. The Rule provides a glossary of
standardized care terms to assist manufacturers or importers in drafting complete
2

16 C.F.R. § 423.9.

3

48 Fed. Reg. 22,741 (1983).

2

instructions and ensure that instructions can be more easily understood.4
Manufacturers must have a reasonable basis for the care information they provide on
labels, because such information constitutes a material claim. During the 1983
amendment proceeding, the Commission considered (but did not adopt) specific testing
and recordkeeping requirements. Instead, the Rule describes six categories of evidence
that may be used to establish a reasonable basis ranging from product tests to “other
reliable evidence.”5 The firms’ experience, other industry expertise, current technical
literature, and similar reliable evidence may provide the required reasonable basis. A
recordkeeping requirement was not considered necessary for Commission enforcement
purposes.
Evidence in the rulemaking record showed that retailers of piece goods were not, in
many cases, providing consumers the care labels supplied by the manufacturers. However,
the record also showed that the majority of consumers who did receive the labels did not
sew them into homemade garments. Based on this information, the Commission decided not
to impose a duty of distributing such labels and relieved the piece goods manufacturers of
the obligation to supply such labels. Instead, such manufacturers must now only put the care
instructions on the end of each bolt or roll of cloth.
The original Rule required industry members to petition the Commission for all
exemptions and to submit samples or tests to support such petitions. The 1983 amendments
retained this petition system only for products that the manufacturer or importer claim
would be harmed in appearance by the requirement for a permanent label.6 No industry
member has requested an exemption since 2000. The other permitted exemptions apply
automatically, based upon a determination by a manufacturer or importer that a product
meets the criteria listed in the Rule. Thus, if a product meets the criteria, it is not necessary
to file a request for this exemption with the Commission.
6.

Consequences of Conducting Collection Less Frequently

The public disclosure required by this Rule consists of placing a single label on each
garment as it is manufactured or imported. Because this information is necessary to assist
consumers in making informed purchasing decisions, it is not feasible to modify the timing
of these disclosures.
7.

Circumstances Requiring Collection Inconsistent with Guidelines

The disclosures required by this Rule are consistent with all applicable
guidelines contained in 5 C.F.R. § 1320.5(d)(2).

4

16 C.F.R. § 423, Appendix A.

5

16 C.F.R. § 423.6(c).

6

16 C.F.R. § 423.8(d).

3

8.

Solicitation of Comments/Consultation Outside the Agency

The FTC sought public comment on its request to OMB for a three-year extension of the
current PRA clearance for the information collection aspects of the Rule, as required by 5
C.F.R. § 1320.8(d). See 89 Fed. Reg. 25,266 (Apr. 10, 2024). No germane comments were
received.7 The FTC is providing a second opportunity for public comment while seeking
OMB approval to extend the existing PRA clearance for the Rule.
9.

Payments or Gifts to Respondents
Not applicable. The Rules does not provide for any payments or gifts to respondents.

10-11.

Assurances of Confidentiality and Matters of a Sensitive Nature

Not applicable. The Rule does not require the submission of any information of a
sensitive or confidential nature. The requirements for which the Commission seeks OMB
clearance do not involve disclosure of confidential or sensitive information but, rather, the
labeling of products with information regarding the appropriate care of covered products.
12.

Estimated Annual Hours Burden: 27,489,476 hours (solely relating to disclosure).8

Staff estimates that approximately 10,744 manufacturers or importers of textile apparel,
producing about 18.4 billion textile garments annually, are subject to the Rule’s disclosure
requirements. Staff estimates the burden of determining care instructions to be 100 hours each
year per firm, for a cumulative total of 1,074,400 hours. Staff further estimates that the burden of
drafting and providing labels is 80 hours each year per firm, for a total of 859,520 hours. Staff
believes that the process of attaching labels is fully automated and integrated into other
production steps for about 50 percent (approximately 9.2 billion) of the approximately 18.4
billion garments that are required to have care instructions on permanent labels. For the
remaining 9.2 billion items, the process is semi-automated and requires an average of
approximately ten seconds per item, for a total of 25,555,556 hours per year. Thus, the total
estimated annual burden for all firms is 27,489,476 hours. The chart below summarizes the total
estimated labor costs.

7

The American Apparel & Footwear Association submitted a comment proposing amendments to the
Rule. This comment was not germane to the request for extension of current PRA clearance because it
did not address the current estimates of annual hours of burden or costs imposed by the Rule.

8

The Care Labeling Rule imposes no specific recordkeeping requirements. Although the Rule requires
manufacturers and importers to have reliable evidence to support the recommended care instructions,
companies may rely on current technical literature or past experience rather than testing.

4

projected to increase.
16.

Statistical Use of Information
There are no plans to publish any information for statistical use.

17.

Display of the Expiration Date for OMB Approval
Not applicable.

18.

Exceptions to the Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

The FTC certifies that this collection of information is consistent with the requirements
of 5 C.F.R. § 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 C.F.R. § 1320.8(b)(3), and is not seeking
an exemption to these certification requirements.

6