16 C.F.R. § 301.44

Misrepresentation of prices

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) No person shall, with respect to a fur or fur product, advertise such fur or fur product at alleged wholesale prices or at alleged manufacturers cost or less, unless such representations are true in fact; nor shall any person advertise a fur or fur product at prices purported to be reduced from what are in fact fictitious prices, nor at a purported reduction in price when such purported reduction is in fact fictitious.

(b) No person shall, with respect to a fur or fur product, advertise such fur or fur product with comparative prices and percentage savings claims except on the basis of current market values or unless the time of such compared price is given.

(c) No person shall, with respect to a fur or fur product, advertise such fur or fur product as being “made to sell for”, being “worth” or “valued at” a certain price, or by similar statements, unless such claim or representation is true in fact.

(d) No person shall, with respect to a fur or fur product, advertise such fur or fur product as being of a certain value or quality unless such claims or representations are true in fact.

(e) Persons making pricing claims or representations of the types described in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d) of this section shall maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims or representations are based.

(f) No person shall, with respect to a fur or fur product, advertise such fur or fur product by the use of an illustration which shows such fur or fur product to be a higher priced product than the one so advertised.

(g) No person shall, with respect to a fur or fur product, advertise such fur or fur product as being “bankrupt stock”, “samples”, “show room models”, “Hollywood Models”, “Paris Models”, “French Models”, “Parisian Creations”, “Furs Worn by Society Women”, “Clearance Stock”, “Auction Stock”, “Stock of a business in a state of liquidation”, or similar statements, unless such representations or claims are true in fact.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1961–1961 · leading case: Morton's Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 286 F.2d 158 (1st Cir. 1961).
Morton's Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 286 F.2d 158 (1st Cir. 1961). “The Commission interpreted 16 C.F.R. § 301.44 (e) so that this rule is violated if the Commission decides that a respondent has engaged in fictitious pricing, no matter what records may have been kept by the respondent.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.