Penalty Amount
$225,000,000
The FTC and the state of Washington filed a joint complaint and proposed stipulated order requiring Amway Corp. and two affiliates—World Wide Group, L.L.C. (WWG) and Leadership Team Development Inc. (LTD)—to pay a $225 million judgment, the largest monetary recovery ever obtained from an MLM in an FTC action, over allegations that they used deceptive earnings claims and unfair tactics to recruit Independent Business Owners. The complaint alleges the companies falsely promised substantial income and recruitment success, pressured IBOs to buy products they could not resell, and instructed IBOs to falsely report sales. Nearly all of the judgment will be used as redress for IBOs who lost money, and the proposed order imposes structural reforms including a 70% resale requirement, independent audits of sales records, and a ban on approved providers charging new IBOs for first-year training.
A $225 million judgment, nearly all of which will be paid as redress to IBOs recruited by WWG and LTD who lost money. The proposed order further requires: IBOs to resell at least 70% of products purchased from Amway each month; substantially reduced recruiter compensation when recruits buy products without reselling them; prompt reporting of all customer sales at actual prices with receipts sent to customers; termination of IBOs who fake sales or teach others to do so; regular independent outside audits of Amway's sales records; mandatory training for IBOs before they may recruit; and a prohibition on approved providers, including WWG and LTD, charging new IBOs for any training or services during their first year.
This is a consumer protection action targeting deceptive earnings claims and multilevel marketing practices rather than a data privacy matter, but it carries significant contract implications for any company operating direct selling, affiliate, or 'approved provider' networks. In-house teams should review approved provider, affiliate, and training-vendor agreements for clauses governing: representations about earnings or income potential and substantiation requirements; approval and content-control rights over third-party training materials and marketing; sales-reporting and record-keeping obligations paired with audit rights (the order mandates regular independent outside audits); compensation structures tied to verified retail resale rather than internal or recruit purchases; termination rights for participants who falsify sales or induce others to do so; and restrictions on fees that providers may charge new recruits. Recruit- and customer-facing terms should include clear income disclaimers, and indemnification provisions should ensure channel partners bear liability for their own deceptive representations and any resulting regulatory penalties.
Entity
Amway Corp.
Industry
RetailOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/09/ftc-takes-historic-action-against-multilevel-marketing-operator-amway-unfair-deceptive-business
Amway Complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Amway-Complaint.pdf
Amway StipulatedOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Amway-StipulatedOrder.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Amway Corp., one of the largest multilevel marketing companies in the U.S., and two of its affiliates—World Wide Group, L.L.C. (WWG) and Leadership Team Development Inc. (LTD)—will pay $225 million"
"Proposed order will require Amway and two of its affiliates to pay $225 million, the largest monetary recovery ever collected from an MLM in an FTC action"
"imposes a $225 million judgment, nearly all of which will go to IBOs recruited by WWG and LTD who lost money."
"use unfair and deceptive tactics to recruit members to its direct selling and multilevel marketing opportunity"
"deceptive and unfair tactics, including misrepresentations about likely earnings, to incentivize and pressure IBOs to buy Amway products they don't want"
"Falsely telling IBOs that they are likely to earn substantial income, exceeding $40,000 a year"
$600K
The FTC and Washington alleged that Riverside Payments and affiliates misrepresented savings and cancellation terms, concealed fees and auto-renewing contracts, and obtained consumers’ financial information using false or fraudulent statements. The proposed stipulated order requires a $600,000 payment, customer notice and a period to rescind agreements without penalty, and prohibits deceptive claims while requiring clear disclosures, informed consent for negative-option billing, and a simple cancellation method.
FTC staff announced warning letters to 25 healthcare plan marketers and lead generators about deceptive or unfair claims concerning plan benefits, coverage, costs, and enrollment incentives. The letters do not allege wrongdoing by their recipients or impose penalties; they encourage companies to review their advertisements for compliance.
The FTC summarized enforcement actions and other efforts targeting businesses and individuals allegedly impersonating government agencies or legitimate businesses. The release reports more than $80 million in consumer redress across prior actions and takedowns of 19 websites, but it does not announce a new settlement or impose a specific penalty.
The FTC and state and local co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit alleging Toast imposed hidden and unauthorized fees, enrolled restaurants in add-ons without consent, obstructed subscription cancellations, and misrepresented customer support availability. The complaint is pending in federal court; the press release announces no monetary penalty or imposed remedy.
The FTC issued information orders to nine companies to examine whether they use personal data and other factors to set individualized consumer prices or gig-worker compensation. This is a study and information-gathering inquiry, not a finding that the companies violated the law; recipients must respond within 45 days of receiving the orders.
The FTC and 20 states sued Dollar General, alleging that it repeatedly charged customers more at checkout than advertised prices and failed to correct the problem despite consumer complaints and corporate knowledge. The complaint alleges violations of federal and state laws; the case is pending, and the press release does not report a penalty or final remedy.