What do creators actually have to disclose?

Part of: For creators

The rule creators actually need is short: if you get anything of value in return for a recommendation, and your audience would not assume that, say so where they will see it. Everything else is detail. Here is the detail, quoted rather than paraphrased from folklore.

Nickelodeon Rugrats plush at a US retailer, the kind of product a creator would link with an affiliate tag — The moment a link on this product can pay you, the recommendation carries a material connection - whether or not anyone clicks it.

Zero-earnings disclosure: LinkToLooks has been approved by no affiliate network and has earned $0 in commission to date. We have no income screenshots, no case studies and no creator success stories, because we have neither. Every number below is either quoted from a named primary source or explicitly flagged as one we could not verify.

What the regulation says, in its own words

What the rule says	Where it says it
An endorsement is "any advertising message...that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experiences of a party other than the sponsoring advertiser".	16 CFR § 255.0(b)
A material connection is one that "might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience)".	16 CFR § 255.5
Such a connection "must be fully disclosed", and the disclosure must be clear and conspicuous to the audience.	16 CFR § 255.5

Two things follow from that language and they are the two most commonly missed.

First, the trigger is the connection, not the money. A material connection is anything the audience would not reasonably expect — a commission, a gifted product, a discount code that pays you, an affiliate relationship, a job at the company, a family tie. Whether a sale ever happens is irrelevant. You are not disclosing income; you are disclosing a reason a reader might discount your opinion.

Second, "clear and conspicuous" is measured on the audience, not on you. A disclosure that technically exists but that nobody reads has not met the standard. That single sentence disposes of most of the placements creators actually use.

Where the disclosure has to sit

Placement	The problem with it	Verdict
In the caption, above the fold, before any "more" link	None. The reader sees it before they read the recommendation.	Works
In the caption, below a "...more" truncation	Most readers never expand a caption. A disclosure they do not see is not conspicuous.	Fails
In a block of hashtags at the end	Buried among unrelated tags, and read as decoration rather than as information.	Fails
Bio only, not on the post	The disclosure has to travel with the endorsement. Posts are seen individually and reshared without the profile.	Fails
Platform's own paid-partnership label, alone	It is placed and worded by the platform, not by you, and it may not cover an affiliate-commission relationship at all.	Not sufficient on its own
Spoken aloud in video, and on screen in text	None, provided it is early enough that a viewer who leaves at fifteen seconds has heard it.	Works

Second Nickelodeon Rugrats plush listing at a US retailer, priced September 2026 — Every product link in a post carries the same obligation. One disclosure covering the post is fine; no disclosure is not.

Wording that works, and wording that does not

Works: plain, ordinary words. "I earn a commission if you buy through my links." "Paid partnership with [brand]." "[Brand] sent me this."
Fails: jargon and abbreviations your audience has to decode. "aff", "sp", "collab", "#ad" buried in a hashtag wall, "thanks [brand]" with no statement of the relationship, and anything in a language the audience does not read.
Fails quietly: a disclosure in grey 10-point text on a white background, or one that flashes on screen for a second. Conspicuousness is about whether it is actually noticed.

The parts creators get wrong most often

Assuming the platform's label is enough. A built-in paid-partnership tag is placed and worded by the platform. It may not describe an affiliate-commission arrangement, and it is not within your control. Use it and say it yourself.
Disclosing once, at the top of a series. Individual posts get seen individually. Each one needs its own.
Thinking a free product does not count. A gifted item is a material connection even if no money changed hands and even if you were free to say you hated it.
Putting it only in a linked page. A disclosure a reader has to click through to is not one they saw before reading the recommendation.

Our own disclosure, as a worked example

Every page on this site carries a line saying that some links are affiliate links, that LinkToLooks has earned $0 from them to date, and that no network has approved us. It sits in the body of the page, in the same size type as the rest, above the reader gets to the end. That is what we would defend if asked, and you are welcome to copy the shape of it.

Honest empty and a real limitation: this page quotes the FTC's Endorsement Guides at 16 CFR Part 255, which are the Commission's published interpretation of how it applies Section 5 of the FTC Act to endorsements. We are an identification desk, not lawyers, and this is not legal advice. We have also deliberately published no penalty figures, no enforcement statistics and no "the FTC fined X creators last year" claim, because we could not verify any such number against a primary source during this run. Pages that quote those figures at you very often cannot either.

Last verified 1 September 2026 against the text of 16 CFR Part 255, sections 255.0 and 255.5. Quoted phrases are from that text. Placement and wording guidance is our reading of the clear-and-conspicuous standard applied to how the platforms actually render posts, and is labelled as our reading rather than as regulation.

Some links here are affiliate links. LinkToLooks has earned $0 from them to date — no network has approved us yet — so nothing on this page is picked to hit a payout.

Frequently asked

Do I have to disclose affiliate links?

Yes, where the relationship is one your audience would not reasonably expect. Under 16 CFR 255.5 a connection that "might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement" must be fully disclosed, clearly and conspicuously. An affiliate commission is such a connection.

Is #ad in my hashtags enough?

Not reliably. The standard is that the disclosure is clear and conspicuous to the audience, and a tag buried in a block of unrelated hashtags at the end of a caption is read as decoration rather than as information.

Do I need to disclose a gifted product if I was not paid?

Yes. A free product is a material connection whether or not money changed hands, and whether or not you were free to give a negative review.

Is the platform's paid partnership label sufficient?

Use it, but do not rely on it alone. The label is worded and positioned by the platform, is outside your control, and may not describe an affiliate-commission relationship at all.

Where exactly should the disclosure go?

Before the recommendation and where it cannot be truncated away: in the visible part of a caption above any "more" link, spoken aloud early in a video as well as shown on screen, and on each individual post rather than once in a bio.

Sources

16 CFR Part 255, Guides Concerning Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising — the definition of an endorsement at 255.0(b), and the material-connection definition and disclosure requirement at 255.5.