FTC Influencer Disclosure Rules: What Changed in 2025

The FTC’s influencer disclosure rules got a significant update in 2025, tightening what counts as adequate disclosure and expanding who those rules apply to. The core requirement has not changed: if there is a material connection between an influencer and a brand, audiences must be told clearly and conspicuously. What has changed is how the FTC defines “clearly and conspicuously,” and the agency has made it plain that platform-native disclosure tools are not a substitute for explicit labelling.

For brands running influencer programmes, this matters more than most compliance updates. The liability does not sit with the creator alone. Brands that brief, pay, or gift influencers without ensuring proper disclosure are in the frame too.

What the FTC Actually Updated and When

The FTC revised its Endorsement Guides in June 2023, the first substantive update since 2009. Those revisions came into force and have shaped enforcement activity throughout 2024 and into 2025. The headline changes covered three areas: the definition of what constitutes a material connection, the standard for what “clear and conspicuous” disclosure actually means in practice, and the explicit extension of liability to brands and agencies, not just individual creators.

The 2023 guides also addressed the specific mechanics of disclosure in video content, making clear that verbal disclosures buried mid-video or disclosed only in descriptions do not meet the standard. For short-form video in particular, the FTC’s position is that disclosure needs to appear on screen in a way that a reasonable viewer will see before they have processed the promotional content.

Into 2025, enforcement actions have continued. The FTC has issued warning letters to brands and creators, and the pattern is consistent: the agency is focused on cases where disclosure is technically present but practically invisible. That is the gap most brands are sitting in right now.

If you want a broader grounding in how influencer marketing works commercially before getting into compliance specifics, the influencer marketing hub at The Marketing Juice covers the channel from vetting through to measurement.

What “Clearly and Conspicuously” Actually Means Now

This is where most brands are getting it wrong, and it is worth being specific about what the FTC means.

The standard is not “disclosure exists somewhere in the content.” The standard is that a typical viewer, watching or reading at normal speed, without any special effort, would see the disclosure before engaging with the promotional content. That is a materially higher bar than most influencer briefs currently set.

In practice, this rules out several things that have become common in the industry. A disclosure buried in a string of hashtags at the end of a caption does not meet the standard. A disclosure in a YouTube description that requires the viewer to click “more” does not meet the standard. A spoken disclosure that appears 45 seconds into a 60-second video does not meet the standard. A disclosure visible only on desktop when most of the audience is on mobile does not meet the standard.

What does meet the standard: a clear text overlay on video content that appears at the start, before the promotional content begins. A disclosure at the very beginning of a caption, not the end. A spoken disclosure at the start of a video that is also displayed on screen simultaneously. Simple language: “Ad,” “Paid partnership with [Brand],” or “Gifted by [Brand]” placed where it cannot be missed.

I have reviewed influencer briefs from brands spending seven figures annually on the channel that contain no disclosure guidance whatsoever. The brief covers content pillars, posting schedule, tone of voice, and even caption length. Disclosure is not mentioned. That is a commercial and legal risk sitting in plain sight.

Why Platform Disclosure Tools Are Not Enough

Instagram’s “Paid Partnership” label, YouTube’s paid promotion disclosure checkbox, TikTok’s branded content toggle. These tools exist, they are better than nothing, and the FTC has acknowledged their existence. They are not, however, a substitute for explicit disclosure in the content itself.

The FTC’s position is that platform labels are not always visible to all users on all devices, are not consistent across platforms, and are controlled by the platform rather than the creator or brand. They can form part of a disclosure approach, but they cannot be the whole of it.

This is a practical problem for brands that have built their compliance approach around ticking the platform’s box and moving on. It is also a problem for agencies that have told clients the platform label is sufficient. It is not. The brand needs explicit disclosure in the content, and the brand needs to be able to demonstrate that the creator was briefed to include it.

When I was running agency operations, we had a client in the consumer goods space who had been running gifting campaigns for two years. No disclosure guidance in any of the outreach. No requirement in the briefs. The creators were posting, the content was performing, and nobody had thought about what happened if the FTC came knocking. The answer, when we audited it, was that the brand had no paper trail showing they had instructed disclosure. That is the exposure most brands are carrying right now.

Gifting Is Not a Disclosure Loophole

There is a persistent belief in some corners of the industry that gifting arrangements sit outside the disclosure rules because no money changes hands. They do not.

The FTC’s position is clear: if a brand sends a product to a creator with the expectation or hope that the creator will post about it, that is a material connection and disclosure is required. The word “expectation” does not even need to be explicit. If the brand is running a gifting programme with the commercial objective of generating content, the connection is material, regardless of whether there is a formal agreement or payment.

This catches a lot of brands off guard, particularly those running seeding campaigns at scale. Sending 200 products to 200 creators and hoping for organic-looking content is not a disclosure-free strategy. If those creators post, the content needs to be disclosed. If the brand cannot ensure disclosure, the brand is taking on risk for content it does not control.

The practical answer is to include disclosure requirements in every outreach communication, even for gifting. Influencer outreach templates are a reasonable starting point for structuring this, but the disclosure requirement needs to be explicit in the message, not implied.

Brand and Agency Liability: The Part Most Brands Have Not Read

The 2023 updates made it explicit that brands and agencies can be held liable for inadequate disclosure, not just the individual creator. This is the part of the guidance that has received the least attention in the trade press, and it is the part that matters most commercially.

The FTC’s position is that a brand that pays, gifts, or otherwise compensates an influencer has a responsibility to ensure disclosure happens correctly. That responsibility does not transfer to the creator simply because the creator is the one posting. If the brand briefed the campaign, the brand is in the frame.

Agencies are in a similar position. An agency that manages an influencer programme on behalf of a brand, and does not build disclosure requirements into its processes, is exposed. The FTC has issued warning letters to agencies as well as brands, and the pattern of enforcement suggests the agency is not protected simply by pointing to the client relationship.

For anyone running an influencer programme at scale, this means disclosure compliance needs to be a contractual requirement, not a verbal expectation. Contracts with creators should specify the disclosure language to be used, the placement of that disclosure, and the timing relative to the content. That contract is your paper trail if the FTC comes asking.

There is a useful overview of how to think about investing in influencer marketing as a channel, including the structural considerations that go beyond content performance. Compliance is one of those structural considerations, and it belongs in the investment conversation, not as an afterthought.

What Compliant Disclosure Actually Looks Like in Practice

Concrete examples are more useful than principles here, so let me be specific about what the FTC considers adequate across different content formats.

For Instagram feed posts, disclosure should appear at the very start of the caption, before any other text. “Ad” or “Paid partnership with [Brand]” are both acceptable. The disclosure should not be buried after three lines of copy that require the viewer to tap “more” to see.

For Instagram Stories, a text overlay on the story itself is required. The platform’s “Paid Partnership” label alone is not sufficient. The overlay should be large enough to read without zooming and should appear at the start of the story sequence, not on the final frame.

For TikTok and Reels, a text overlay at the start of the video, before the promotional content begins, meets the standard. A spoken disclosure at the opening also helps, but text overlay is the primary mechanism the FTC looks for in video content.

For YouTube, disclosure in the video description is not sufficient on its own. The creator should verbally disclose at the start of the video and include an on-screen text element. For longer videos, a reminder disclosure mid-video is considered best practice, though the FTC’s minimum standard is disclosure before the promotional content.

For blog and written content, disclosure should appear at the top of the post, before the reader encounters any promotional content. A disclosure at the bottom of a long post does not meet the standard.

The influencer marketing resources at Crazy Egg cover some of the practical mechanics of running campaigns, including content formats, which is useful context for thinking about where disclosure requirements apply across a programme.

Building Disclosure Into Your Programme Without Adding Friction

The compliance argument and the commercial argument are not in conflict here. Proper disclosure, done consistently, does not meaningfully reduce content performance. The data from platforms and the experience of brands running compliant programmes at scale suggests that audiences have largely normalised disclosure. They know influencer content is often paid. Clear disclosure does not destroy trust. Undisclosed promotion, when audiences notice it, does.

The practical approach is to build disclosure requirements into every touchpoint of your influencer programme. Outreach emails should include the disclosure requirement. Contracts should specify the exact language and placement. Briefs should show examples of compliant disclosure. Content approval processes should check for disclosure before sign-off. And post-publication monitoring should flag content that goes live without it.

That sounds like a lot of process, and it is, but most of it can be templated. The influencer outreach guidance from Unbounce covers some of the structural elements of building a repeatable outreach process, which is the right layer to embed disclosure requirements into.

For brands running larger programmes, the question of tooling comes up. Influencer marketing platforms vary significantly in how they handle disclosure compliance. Some build disclosure prompts into the creator workflow. Others leave it entirely to the brand. If you are evaluating platforms, disclosure compliance features should be on your checklist.

I have spent time across a lot of industries over the years, and the brands that handle compliance well tend to be the ones that treat it as a business process rather than a legal formality. They build it into the workflow, they train the team, and they do not rely on creators to self-police. That is the mindset shift most influencer programmes still need to make.

The Enforcement Reality in 2025

The FTC does not have the resources to pursue every non-compliant influencer post. That is a fact, and some brands have made the calculation that the enforcement risk is low enough to ignore. I think that is the wrong frame.

The enforcement risk is not the only risk. Consumer trust is a risk. Brand reputation is a risk. And the FTC’s enforcement pattern suggests it targets cases that generate press, which means high-profile brands and high-profile creators are more exposed than the volume of enforcement actions implies.

The FTC has also been explicit that it will pursue cases where the non-compliance is systematic, meaning brands that have a pattern of inadequate disclosure across multiple campaigns are more likely to be targeted than brands with an isolated incident. If your programme has been running without disclosure requirements for two years, you have a systematic problem, not a one-off.

There is also a practical consideration around the direction of travel. Regulatory scrutiny of influencer marketing is increasing, not decreasing. The EU has its own disclosure requirements under the Digital Services Act, and other markets are moving in the same direction. Brands that build compliant processes now are better positioned for what comes next than brands that are still catching up to 2023.

For product launch campaigns specifically, where influencer content is often a significant part of the go-to-market push, the stakes are higher. Influencer marketing for product launches involves concentrated activity over a short window, which means non-compliant content reaches a large audience quickly. That is exactly the kind of campaign the FTC notices.

There is more on the broader mechanics of running influencer programmes effectively at the influencer marketing section of The Marketing Juice, including pieces on vetting, measurement, and building programmes that hold up commercially over time.

About the Author

Keith Lacy is a marketing strategist and former agency CEO with 20+ years of experience across agency leadership, performance marketing, and commercial strategy. He writes The Marketing Juice to cut through the noise and share what works.

Frequently Asked Questions