Federal Trade Commission - Protecting America's Consumers

FTC Action Against E-Commerce Business Opportunity Scam Results in Permanent Bans for Owner and his Companies

Thu, 17 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The remaining defendants in a business opportunity scheme halted by the Federal Trade Commission will turn over cash and property valued in the millions of dollars to settle allegations they lured consumers with false promises of big returns selling goods through Amazon’s and Walmart’s online marketplaces. Under the order, Steven J. Mayer and companies associated with him will turn over cash, real estate interests, and personal property which will be used for consumer redress. The FTC secured similar settlements from the other defendants in this case in March 2025.

“Sellers of e-commerce business opportunities and investments must follow the law,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “These defendants took advantage of people looking to provide for their families and obtain financial security. The FTC will take action against those who promise big returns that they can’t back up.”

In October 2024, the FTC filed suit alleging that the companies and their operators made false claims that consumers could earn significant profits from online e-commerce stores that the defendants would establish and operate on their behalf. For example, they promised that consumers would generate sales of “$100K+ per month” and that their stores could become “million-dollar” operations. These promises rarely, if ever, materialized. Most consumers lost tens of thousands of dollars investing with defendants, and many incurred crushing debts due to the alleged scam.

The first court order announced today bans Mayer and Ecom Genie Consulting from any involvement with the sales, marketing, or operations of any business opportunity. It also prohibits them from deceiving consumers about any good or service they sell, including by making unsubstantiated earnings claims. The order contains a monetary judgment of nearly $14 million, which is partially suspended based on their inability to pay the full amount.

The four defendants subject to that order, including relief defendants Alpine Management Group Inc. and Vicenza Capital Corp., are required to turn over their interest in commercial real estate in Canada, other property worth more than $300,000, and roughly $1.7 million in cash.

If any of the defendants are found to have misled the FTC about their financial status, the full monetary judgment will immediately become due.

The other proposed order bans Profitable Automation and Lunar Capital Ventures from any involvement with the sales, marketing, or operations of any business opportunity. The order also requires Profitable Automation to turn over roughly $73,000 in cash.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final orders was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed orders in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The staff attorneys on this matter are Sara Tonnesen and Molly Rucki of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

FTC Takes Action Against Telemedicine Firm NextMed Over Charges It Used Misleading Prices, Fake Reviews, and Deceptive Weight Loss Claims to Sell GLP-1 Weight-Loss Programs

Mon, 14 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The operators of telemedicine company Southern Health Solutions, Inc., doing business as Next Medical and NextMed, have agreed to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s charges that they used deceptive cost and weight loss claims, as well as fake reviews and testimonials to lure consumers into buying their weight-loss membership programs that had hidden terms and conditions.

In its complaint, the FTC alleges that New York-based NextMed, its founders Robert Epstein, and CEO Frank Leonardo III sold telehealth weight-loss programs providing access to medical providers who could prescribe popular glucagon-like peptide 1 agonist (GLP-1) weight-loss drugs, such as Wegovy and Ozempic, that were the subject of skyrocketing interest when NextMed began offering its weight-loss programs in early 2022. NextMed sold its membership programs at an advertised monthly price, typically at $138 or $188, without adequately disclosing that the price did not include the cost of the actual GLP-1 drug, the cost of the lab work required to determine eligibility for such drugs, or the cost of the consultation with a medical provider that was necessary to obtain a prescription.

The complaint also alleges that NextMed failed to adequately disclose that its membership programs had a required one-year commitment with early termination fees, and that many customers who called to cancel or request refunds faced significant delays in resolving their complaints due to NextMed’s insufficient customer service staffing and capacity.

The FTC also alleged that the company suppressed negative reviews on Trustpilot by selectively challenging critical reviews, offering Amazon gift cards to consumers to remove or change negative reviews, and by conditioning refunds on consumers’ agreement to remove negative reviews. In addition, the complaint alleges that the company generated fake positive reviews that were posted on Trustpilot and used testimonials and before-and-after photos from people who were not NextMed clients and had not used GLP-1 drugs for weight loss.

“Consumers who signed up for NextMed’s programs faced significant unexpected costs and the company’s customer service failures prevented consumers from cancelling or getting a refund,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Today’s action makes clear that companies cannot hide important information from consumers or neglect their responsibility to respond to valid complaints and concerns.”

In its complaint, the FTC alleges that NextMed, Epstein and Leonardo:

lured customers with unsubstantiated weight loss claims that members of its weight-loss programs lose 53 pounds and 23% of their body weight on average;
used deceptive before and after photos of people who were not their customers in its marketing materials;
published fake testimonials created by hired individuals, employees, and family members who did not use NextMed’s programs or GLP-1 drugs;
distorted consumer reviews by flagging negative reviews without a basis, selectively soliciting positive reviews from satisfied customers, and providing refunds or gift cards in exchange for customers changing or removing negative reviews;
failed to adequately disclose the terms of its membership programs, including the 12-month commitment and early termination fee;
failed to process consumers’ cancellation and refund requests in a timely manner due having insufficient staffing and capacity to handle those requests; and
failed to obtain informed consent to charge consumers

In addition to requiring NextMed and its principals to pay $150,000, which is expected to be used to provide refunds to consumers, the proposed consent order:

prohibits them from misrepresenting the cost of telehealth services, including what is included in that cost, the timing or manner of billing or any charge, that a consumer authorized a transaction or is obligated to pay a charge, or material information relating to refund and cancellation policies;
requires competent and reliable evidence to support claims about the average or typical results users will achieve;
prohibits misrepresentations that reviews are truthful or from real consumers, and requires disclosure of any unexpected material connection with endorsers or reviewers;
prohibits manipulation of reviews, including selectively soliciting reviews from consumers more likely to provide positive reviews, offering payments or incentives to consumers to remove or edit negative reviews, and reporting or disputing negative reviews as false or suspicious without a reasonable basis for doing so;
requires them to obtain informed consent before billing consumers and authorization to use any electronic fund transfer; and
requires them to clearly disclose important terms relating to refunds or cancellations before consumers are asked to pay, provide a simple way for consumers to request cancellations or refunds, and to promptly honor any cancellation or refund requests that comply with policies that were in effect at the time of purchase.

The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and to accept the proposed consent agreement was 3-0.

The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register soon. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Instructions for filing comments will appear in the published notice. Once processed, comments will be posted on Regulations.gov.

NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $53,088.

The staff attorney on this matter is Christine DeLorme of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

FTC Sends Refunds to Consumers Harmed by Weight-loss Supplement Marketer’s Deceptive Claims and Review Practices

Wed, 09 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $409,000 to consumers who bought products from weight-loss supplement marketer Roca Labs.

In 2018, a federal court granted the FTC’s request for summary judgment against Roca Labs over allegations Roca made baseless weight-loss claims for its products, misrepresented that one of its promotional websites was an objective information website, and failed to disclose its financial ties to that site and to people who posted positive reviews. The complaint also alleged that the defendants threatened to enforce “gag clause” provisions against consumers to stop them from posting negative reviews and testimonials online.

Under the order imposed by the court, Roca Labs was required to turn over certain funds, which the FTC is using to compensate consumers affected by the defendant’s deceptive claims.

The FTC is sending checks and PayPal payments to 7,481 affected consumers. Check recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. PayPal recipients should redeem their PayPal payments within 30 days.

The FTC is also sending 34 claim forms to consumers who paid for the defendant’s products before October 2015. The deadline to submit a claim is October 7, 2025.

More information about the refund process is available at www.ftc.gov/RocaLabs or by calling the refund administrator, Simpluris, at 1-866-675-3043. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

The Commission’s interactive dashboards for refund data provide a state-by-state breakdown of refunds in FTC cases. In 2024, FTC actions led to more than $339 million in refunds to consumers across the country.

Federal Trade Commission Warns Companies to Comply with “Made in USA” Requirements

Tue, 08 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Today, the Federal Trade Commission sent warning letters to four companies who claim their consumer goods are of U.S. origin, reminding them to comply with the FTC’s “Made in USA” requirements. Additionally, the FTC sent letters to Amazon and Walmart regarding third-party sellers who appear to be making deceptive “Made in USA” claims about their products on those online marketplaces.

“‘Made in the USA’ is not just a slogan – it’s a sign that a product connects us to the workers and businesses that make America great,” said FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson. “Consumers want to have confidence that when they buy something labelled ‘Made in the USA’ they are actually supporting American workers and the American economy. Companies that falsely claim their products are ‘Made in the USA’ can expect to hear from the FTC.”

The FTC sent warning letters to flagpole retailer Americana Liberty, footwear maker Oak Street Manufacturing, LLC, football equipment company Pro Sports Group LLC, and personal care products manufacturer USA Big Mountain Paper Inc.

The warning letters explain that the FTC Act and the Made in USA Labeling Rule require that products advertised as “Made in the USA” must be “all or virtually all” made in the United States. The FTC warned these companies to discontinue such claims or provide substantiation that the products at issue are in fact “all or virtually all” made in the United States. Companies that violate the FTC Act and the MUSA Labeling Rule may be subject to legal action including the issuance of an administrative subpoena, the filing of a federal lawsuit, injunctive relief, and civil penalties or other monetary relief.

The FTC also sent letters to Amazon and Walmart, explaining the FTC’s “Made in USA” requirements and how they apply to online marketplaces. The letters also identify third-party sellers who may be making deceptive U.S.-origin claims on those online marketplaces. In each letter, the FTC points out that such claims may violate the FTC Act and run afoul of the platform’s specific terms of service.

Throughout July, the FTC is highlighting the importance of the FTC’s “Made in USA” requirements to ensure that Americans can trust that products advertised or labeled as “Made in USA” are actually American-made. The FTC offers additional guidance on how to comply with the Made in USA Rule.

FTC Sends More Than $2.9 Million to Consumers Harmed by Home Improvement Financing Firm

Tue, 08 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $2.9 million in payments to consumers harmed by Ygrene Energy Fund, a home-improvement financing company that made false claims about the potential financial impact of its services.

According to the FTC’s October 2022 complaint, Ygrene and its network of door-to-door home-improvement contractors deceptively sold Ygrene’s home-improvement financing program by telling homeowners that the financing program would not interfere with the sale or refinancing of their homes. The complaint also alleged that Ygrene’s contractors used high-pressure sales tactics, even forgery in some cases, to sign up consumers, which resulted in liens being recorded without the homeowner’s express, informed consent.

As part of the settlement, Ygrene agreed to stop its deceptive and unfair practices, to monitor its contractors closely, and to pay $3 million to provide relief to certain consumers whose homes are still subject to the company’s liens. The settlement did not remove Ygrene’s liens, and those liens remain outstanding until paid.

The FTC is sending checks and PayPal payments to 960 affected consumers. Check recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. PayPal recipients should redeem their PayPal payments within 30 days.

Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Analytics Consulting LLC, at 877-412-1816, or visit the FTC website to view frequently asked questions about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

FTC to Host July 9 Workshop on Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices in “Gender-Affirming Care” for Minors

Tue, 08 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

WHAT:	The Federal Trade Commission is hosting a workshop on Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices in “Gender-Affirming Care” for Minors, which will examine whether consumers are being or have been exposed to false or unsupported claims about “gender-affirming care” and potential harms consumers may be experiencing.
WHEN:	Wednesday, July 9, 2025, from 9 a.m.–4:30 p.m. ET
WHERE:	The event can be viewed online through the link found on the event page. In-Person attendance was by invitation only and has reached capacity.
WHO:	The event will feature remarks by FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and Commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Mark R. Meador, as well as six panel discussions featuring doctors, medical ethicists, whistleblowers, detransitioners, and parents of detransitioners.

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson Issues Statement on ‘Made in the USA’ Month

Tue, 01 Jul 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Today, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson issued the following statement proclaiming July 2025 as "Made in the USA" Month:

“In honor of our nation’s independence, the Federal Trade Commission has designated July as ‘Made in the USA’ month. As Chairman of the FTC, I am responsible for enforcing laws that prohibit companies from making false or unsubstantiated claims that a product is ‘Made in the USA.’ It is important to protect Americans from deceptive advertising, and also important because it provides consumers with confidence that when they buy something that says ‘Made in the USA’ they are actually supporting American workers, American manufacturers, and American communities.

In recent poll, 61% of Americans stated that whether a product was Made in the USA played a factor in their purchasing decisions. Americans rightly believe that American-made goods are higher quality and better for the environment than foreign-produced alternatives. Most importantly, Americans want to support their nation’s workers, manufacturers, and communities.

Unfortunately, many products—from everyday household appliances to highly complex tools and machinery—which could be advertised as ‘Made in the USA’ are not. That’s why the FTC has created an easy-to-read online guide for companies who wish to advertise their products as ‘Made in the USA.’ While we want to enforce the law, we also want to help companies showcase that their products are made by American workers and that American manufacturing is an engine of American innovation, job creation, and economic growth.

‘Made in the USA’ is not just a slogan, but a sign that a product truly connects us with the ingenuity, quality craftmanship, and livelihood of our fellow citizens. As we celebrate our nation’s independence this month, let us also remember to celebrate the hard-work, self-reliance, and pioneering spirt of our nation’s workers. When we buy a product that is ‘Made in the USA,’ we keep alive the spirit that won us our independence and has always made our country great.”

The FTC has additional guidance on how to comply with the Made in USA Rule.

Former CEO of Voyager Digital Agrees to Ban and $2.8 Million Payment to Resolve FTC Charges

Fri, 27 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Stephen Ehrlich, the former CEO of crypto platform company Voyager Digital, will pay $2.8 million to resolve the Federal Trade Commission’s charges that he and his company misled consumers. Ehrlich has also agreed to a ban on marketing or selling retail products or services used to buy, sell, deposit, or trade cryptocurrency.

The FTC charged in its October 2023 complaint that Voyager and its CEO Stephen Ehrlich falsely promised that consumers’ deposits were FDIC-insured and would be “as safe with us as at a bank” to convince them to hold and trade cryptocurrency on Voyager. In reality, most funds were not FDIC-insured, and Voyager’s customers lost more than $1 billion in cryptocurrency when the company failed, according to the FTC’s complaint.

The complaint also alleges that when the company failed it blocked consumers from accessing their assets, including their life savings, college tuition funds, and down payments for homes. Consumers were locked out of their cash accounts for more than a month, according to the complaint.

The FTC previously reached a settlement with Voyager Digital, LLC, and its affiliated companies, which the court entered on November 23, 2023.

The proposed settlement requires Ehrlich and his wife, Francine Ehrlich, who is named in the complaint as a relief defendant, to pay $2.8 million. The proposed settlement will also prohibit Stephen Ehrlich from:

marketing or selling retail products or services that can be used to buy, sell, deposit, or trade crypto;
making misrepresentations regarding any product or service;
making false representations to any customer of a financial institution to obtain or attempt to obtain their financial information; and
disclosing nonpublic personal information about consumers without their express consent.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court Judge.

The staff attorneys on this matter are Mark Glassman, Quinn Martin, and Elizabeth Arens of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

FTC Sends More Than $3.5 Million to Consumers Harmed by ‘The Credit Game’ Credit-Repair Scheme

Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $3.5 million in refunds to consumers harmed by a credit-repair scheme called ‘The Credit Game.’

In 2022, the FTC sued the scheme’s operators, Michael and Valerie Rando, and their companies, alleging that their operation illegally charged consumers hundreds and even thousands of dollars for credit-repair services that provided little to no value.

The FTC’s complaint alleged that the defendants:

Lied to consumers about the legality and effectiveness of their products, and whether consumers would receive a refund when requested.
Provided false information to credit-reporting agencies regarding consumers’ credit reports.
Harmed consumers by pitching their customers a supposed business opportunity to create their own bogus credit-repair scheme; and
Encouraged consumers to pay for the bogus services using COVID-19 tax relief funds, in violation of the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act.

The FTC’s action resulted in an order halting the company’s illegal operations and banning Michael and Valerie Rando from the credit-repair industry. The order also required them to turn over assets to provide refunds to consumers harmed by the scam.

The FTC is sending checks and PayPal payments to 9,224 affected consumers. Check recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. PayPal recipients should redeem their PayPal payments within 30 days.

Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Simpluris, at 833-296-0723, or visit the FTC website to view frequently asked questions about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

FTC Releases Agenda for Workshop on Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices in “Gender-Affirming Care” for Minors

Wed, 25 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission released a tentative agenda for its July 9, 2025 workshop on “The Dangers of ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ for Minors.”

The agenda includes doctors, medical ethicists, whistleblowers, detransitioners, and parents of detransitioners, who will share perspectives grounded in research, expertise, and personal experience. Speakers include FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson, FTC Commissioner Melissa Holyoak, psychiatrist Dr. Miriam Grossman, endocrinologist Dr. Michael Laidlaw, and parent advocate Erin Friday.

Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act gives the FTC broad authority to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The workshop will help the FTC to understand whether consumers are being or have been exposed to false or unsupported claims about “gender-affirming care” and to gauge the harms consumers may be experiencing.

The workshop will begin at 9:00 am ET and will take place at the FTC’s Constitution Center building at 400 7th St SW Washington, D.C. 20024. For the safety of participants, in-person attendance at the event will be invitation only. Members of the public or press wishing to attend in person should email [email protected]">[email protected] to indicate interest.

A link to watch the live webcast will be posted the morning of the event to FTC.gov. The livestream will be open to the public and does not require registration.

FTC Sends $126 Million in Refunds to Fortnite Players Who Were Charged for Unwanted Items, Reopens Claims Process

Wed, 25 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission is sending refunds totaling more than $126 million to players of the popular video game Fortnite who were charged for unwanted purchases while playing the game.

The agency also announced it is reopening the process for Fortnite gamers and their parents or guardians to submit a claim for compensation stemming from the agency’s 2023 settlement with Fortnite developer Epic Games. The company agreed to pay $245 million to settle the FTC’s allegations that Epic used deceptive practices to trick players into making unwanted purchases.

Eligible consumers who have not yet submitted a claim will now have until July 9, 2025, to submit one at www.ftc.gov/fortnite.

In December 2024, the FTC issued the first round of refunds, 629,344 payments totaling more than $72 million. As part of this latest round of refunds, the FTC will send 969,173 checks and PayPal payments on June 25 and June 26 to consumers who filed a valid claim.

Today’s announcement brings the total amount of refunds the FTC has issued to consumers related to Epic’s deceptive billing practices to nearly $200 million.

Consumers selected their payment method when they completed their claim form. Check recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. PayPal recipients should redeem their PayPal payments within 30 days.

Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Rust Consulting, Inc, at 1-833-915-0880 or by email at [email protected]" title="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

FTC Sues to Stop Mercury Marketing and Others from Deceptively Advertising Substance Use Disorder Treatment Clinics

Tue, 24 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint today alleging that Mercury Marketing, LLC, and other defendants impersonated substance use disorder treatment clinics in Google search ads to deceptively route consumers trying to call those clinics to defendant clinics.

“These defendants took advantage of consumers searching online for substance use disorder treatment services during one of the most difficult times in their lives,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC will not hesitate to take action to stop such underhanded and illegal conduct.”

The FTC’s complaint filed in federal court names as defendants: Mercury Marketing, LLC; Behavioral Healthcare Group of America, LLC; JLux Consulting, LLC; Malibu Detox, LLC; Malibu Recovery Center, LLC; Aliya Health Group, LLC; Fennaside, LLC; JHEL Holding, LLC; and four individual defendants, Christopher LiVolsi, Dennis Rinker, Robby Stempler, and Jennifer Russ.

The FTC alleges that defendants targeted consumers seeking information about specific substance use disorder treatment clinics not affiliated with the defendants. The complaint alleges:

The defendants used Google search ads to prominently display the names of specific clinics while directing resultant phone calls to a defendant call center instead;
Defendant telemarketers typically posed as representatives of consumers’ searched-for clinics or as employees of a centralized admissions office; and
These telemarketers falsely represented that clinical professionals were recommending Malibu Detox or Malibu Recovery based on an objective assessment of a consumer’s individual history and needs after considering multiple treatment options when, in reality, the telemarketers were working on behalf of those defendant clinics.

The FTC alleges that as a result of these deceptive tactics, many consumers were deterred from seeking admission at the clinics they were actually trying to contact.

The complaint alleges the defendants’ actions violated both the FTC Act and the Opioid Addiction Recovery Fraud Prevention Act, as well as the Commission’s Impersonation Rule, and seeks a court order permanently barring the defendants from such conduct and imposing civil penalties against them.

The Commission vote authorizing staff to file the complaint was 3-0. The FTC filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

The staff attorneys handling this matter are Elizabeth Sanger, Stacy Cammarano, Robert Van Someren Greve, and Tiffany Woo in the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

FTC Sends More Than $8.1 Million to Consumers Harmed by Care.com’s Deceptive Claims About Earnings, Job Listings, and Cancellation Practices

Tue, 24 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission is sending refunds totaling more than $8.1 million to consumers harmed by online child and older adult care gig platform Care.com (Care).

The FTC alleged that Care used deceptive advertising that vastly overstated the number of jobs available on its platform and made unsubstantiated claims about how much job seekers could expect to earn through these jobs. The complaint also alleged that Care used unlawful tactics to prevent consumers—both job posters and job seekers—from canceling their subscriptions.

As a result of the FTC’s action, Care paid more than $8.5 million that the FTC is using to compensate consumers impacted by the company’s deceptive practices. The settlement order also requires Care to make only non-misleading claims related to its earnings and job listings and provide a simple cancellation method.

The FTC is sending checks and PayPal payments to 194,207 affected consumers. Check recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. PayPal recipients should redeem their PayPal payments within 30 days.

Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Epiq Systems, at 888-867-6151, or visit the FTC website to view frequently asked questions about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

FTC Case Leads to Order Banning Ascend Ecom and Its Owners from Business Opportunity Marketing

Mon, 23 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The operators of Ascend Ecom, an online business opportunity that allegedly cost consumers millions of dollars, will be banned from selling business opportunities and required to turn over assets to the Federal Trade Commission under the terms of a proposed court order.

The FTC sued Ascend Ecom and its owners William Michael Basta and Jeremy Kenneth Leung, charging that the operation falsely claimed its “cutting edge” AI-powered tools would help consumers quickly earn thousands of dollars a month in passive income. According to the complaint, the operation defrauded consumers of at least $25 million.

“Consumers looking to start a new business should never have to wade through waves of false information and deceptive promises of easy money,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC is on the lookout for fraudulent actors, and when we find them, we’ll stop them.”

According to the complaint, Ascend charged consumers tens of thousands of dollars to open storefronts through major online retailers, but failed to deliver on the promised income, and attempted to stop the consumers they harmed from filing complaints or reviews about the operation. Ascend operated under several different names, including Ascend Ecom, Ascend Ecommerce, Ascend CapVentures, ACV Partners, ACV, Accelerated eCom Ventures, Ethix Capital by Ascend, and ACV Nexus.

The proposed settlement order would:

permanently ban the defendants from selling or marketing any business opportunity or business coaching products and services;
prohibit them from making any misleading or unsubstantiated earnings claims;
prohibit them from deceiving consumers about any product or service they sell;
prohibit them from including or enforcing any part of a contract that restricts a consumers’ ability to file complaints or reviews; and
require them to turn over assets, including the contents of bank accounts and the proceeds from the sale of real estate properties, which will be used to compensate affected consumers.

The proposed order includes a total monetary judgment of $25 million, which is partially suspended based on the defendants’ inability to pay the full amount. If the defendants are found to have lied to the FTC about their financial status, the full judgment would be immediately payable.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders or injunctions have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The staff attorney on this matter was Elsie Kappler in the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Walmart to Pay $10 Million to Settle FTC Allegations it Allowed Scammers to Obtain Millions from Consumers Using Company’s Wire Transfer Services

Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Walmart will pay $10 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it turned a blind eye to scammers who used its in-store money transfer services to take hundreds of millions of dollars from U.S. consumers.

“Electronic money transfers are one of the most common ways that scammers tell consumers to send them money, because once it’s sent, it’s gone for good,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Companies that provide these services must train their employees to comply with the law and work to protect consumers.”

The FTC’s June 2022 complaint alleged that between 2013 and 2018, Walmart (including in its capacity as an agent of MoneyGram, Western Union, and Ria) allowed its money transfer services to be used by scammers who defrauded consumers out of hundreds of millions of dollars. Walmart failed to implement effective anti-fraud policies and procedures, did not properly train its employees, and failed to warn customers about potential fraud related to money transfers, according to the complaint. In June 2023, the FTC filed an amended complaint adding further details related to the company’s alleged telemarketing violations. In July 2024, the district court dismissed the Commission’s Telemarketing Sales Rule claim for the second time, presenting a significant hurdle for the Commission to obtain monetary relief for consumers in the litigation. In November 2024, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted Walmart permission to appeal certain rulings by the district court.

The stipulated order announced today resolves the FTC’s case against Walmart and is intended to ensure the company does not engage in similar alleged conduct in the future. In addition to imposing the $10 million judgment, the order prohibits Walmart from:

providing money transfer services without taking timely and appropriate action to effectively detect and prevent fraud-induced money transfers;
sending or paying out any money transfer that it knows, or consciously avoids knowing, is a fraud-induced money transfer;
substantially assisting or supporting any seller or telemarketer that it knows, or consciously avoids knowing, is accepting a cash-to-cash money transfer as payment for goods, services or charitable contributions sought through telemarketing; and
substantially assisting or supporting any telemarketer that it knows, or consciously avoids knowing, has asked a consumer to pay in advance for a loan or credit extension.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders or injunctions have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

Operator of Ganadores Ecommerce and Real Estate Business Opportunity Scam Faces Lifetime Ban as a Result of FTC Action

Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Robert Shemin, an operator of the Ganadores scam that made false or unsubstantiated earnings claims in selling real estate and ecommerce business opportunities, will be banned from the industry and required to turn over assets as a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit. The FTC sued Shemin as part of a case against Ganadores, claiming that the operation cost consumers millions of dollars.

According to the complaint, Shemin and Ganadores pitched an “infallible system” that could help consumers replace their day jobs and give their families financial independence. Consumers paid exorbitant amounts—sometimes tens of thousands of dollars—for training and coaching that did not live up to those promises.

“This operation’s deceptive claims about making money in real estate investing and online businesses cost consumers nationwide millions,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Today’s settlement brings this case to a close, but the FTC will remain vigilant for scammers looking to take advantage of consumers seeking financial independence.”

Under the proposed order, Shemin, the last settling defendant in the case, will be:

Permanently banned from marketing or selling any business coaching on ecommerce or real estate;
Required to back up claims he makes about how much consumers can earn using any product or service that he markets or sells; and
Required to turn over funds for refunds to consumers.

The orders contain a total monetary judgment of $20,268,895, which is largely suspended based on Shemin’s inability to pay. If he is found to have lied to the FTC about his financial status, the full judgment will be immediately payable.

The other defendants in the case previously agreed to settlement orders with similar bans and prohibitions that required them to surrender to the FTC more than $6 million in assets for use in consumer refunds.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 2-0-1. Commissioner Melissa Holyoak recused herself from the vote due to work she handled as Solicitor General of Utah. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders or injunctions have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The FTC staff attorneys on this matter were J. Ronald Brooke, Jr. and Virginia Rosa of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

FTC Sends More than $2 Million to Consumers Harmed by Scammers Pitching Bogus Money-Making and Coaching Programs

Wed, 18 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The FTC is sending more than $2 million in refunds to consumers who were harmed by scammers pitching bogus get-rich-quick “kits” and coaching programs at the height of the financial crisis of the 2000s.

In 2009, the FTC sued the so-called “gurus” behind the deceptive kits and programs, John Beck, John Alexander, and Jeff Paul; the marketers behind the scheme, Gary Hewitt and Doug Gravink; and related companies. The FTC charged that the group pitched the kits and coaching systems under several names, including “John Beck’s Free & Clear Real Estate System,” “John Alexander’s Real Estate Riches in 14 Days,” and “Jeff Paul’s Shortcuts to Internet Millions.”

The FTC’s complaint charged that the defendants failed to deliver on the easy-money benefits they promised to consumers. In fact, consumers often lost money after paying for the kits, monthly subscriptions, and expensive coaching programs. After litigation, the court agreed with the FTC and imposed a final judgment ordering the defendants to refund consumers.

The FTC is sending checks to 39,500 affected consumers. Recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Simpluris, at 866-675-3049, or visit the FTC website to view frequently asked questions about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

FTC Provides Guidance on Updated Safeguards Rule

Mon, 16 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Today, the FTC released Frequently Asked Questions that discuss the requirements of the Safeguards Rule, which was mandated by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and how it specifically applies to motor vehicle dealers.

The FTC is committed to providing certainty to the marketplace and ensuring that it administers its regulations in a manner that minimizes burden to legitimate businesses. To that end, the FTC has in the past issued guidance on how to comply with the agency’s Safeguards Rule, which requires non-banking financial institutions, including motor vehicle dealers, to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive security program to keep their customers’ information safe.

In 2021, the FTC amended the Safeguards Rule to provide more specific guidelines for financial institutions and to ensure that the Rule keeps pace with current technology. In 2023, the agency made additional changes to the rule to require financial institutions to report to the FTC certain data breaches and security incidents involving their customer information.

Additional guidance about the Safeguards Rule is available on the FTC’s website.

Paddle Will Pay $5 Million to Settle FTC Allegations of Unfair Payment-Processing Practices and Facilitation of Deceptive Tech-Support Schemes

Mon, 16 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

U.K.-based payment processor, Paddle.com Market Limited, and its subsidiary, Paddle.com, Inc., will pay $5 million and be permanently banned from processing payments for tech-support telemarketers. This settles a Federal Trade Commission action alleging that Paddle abused the U.S. credit-card system and enabled deceptive foreign operators to access it, costing consumers millions of dollars.

In a complaint, the FTC alleged that Paddle and its subsidiary processed payments for deceptive tech-support schemes that targeted U.S. consumers including older adults.

“Paddle provided foreign-based tech-support schemes with access to the U.S. payment system, allowing these companies to harm consumers,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC will hold accountable payment companies that knowingly facilitate payments for scammers or look the other way when faced with red flags about their clients’ conduct.”

The complaint charges that:

Paddle opened merchant accounts claiming to be a “merchant of record” or software “reseller,” then used these accounts to process card payments on behalf of numerous, unrelated third-party merchants.
Paddle enabled overseas schemes to access the credit card system and collect payments from U.S. consumers, and to evade detection by merchant banks and card networks.
Paddle facilitated schemes, like Restoro-Reimage, that allegedly used fake virus alerts and pop-up messages to impersonate familiar brands, such as Microsoft or McAfee.
As the “merchant of record,” Paddle charged consumers for automatically renewing subscriptions without clearly disclosing that consumers would incur recurring charges.

The FTC alleged Paddle violated the FTC Act, the Telemarketing Sales Rule, and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act. In March 2024, Paddle’s client, Restoro-Reimage, paid $26 million to settle the FTC’s charges of violating the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule.

Under the proposed settlement order Paddle will be:

Permanently prohibited from processing payments for tech-support merchants that engage in telemarketing or use pop-up messages about computer security or performance;
Prohibited from assisting deceptive merchants or engaging in any tactic to avoid fraud or risk-monitoring programs established by banks or the card networks;
Required to implement effective client screening and monitoring, and provide periodic reporting about merchant-clients’ transactions to Paddle’s payment-service providers; and
Required to clearly and conspicuously disclose the terms of any subscription it processes, get consumers’ express informed consent to the subscription, and provide consumers with a simple way to cancel and prevent recurring charges.

The $5 million payment Paddle is required to make under the settlement will be used to supplement the redress for consumers harmed by the Restoro-Reimage tech support scheme.

The Commission vote authorizing staff to file the complaint was 3-0. Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson issued a statement joined by Commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Mark R. Meador. The FTC filed the complaint and proposed settlement order in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the named defendants are violating or are about to violate the law and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest.

The FTC staff attorneys on this matter are Sung W. Kim and Russell Deitch of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Phantom Debt Collectors to Face Permanent Ban as a Result of FTC Lawsuit

Mon, 16 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Debt collection operation Blackstone Legal, along with its owners, will face a permanent ban from the debt collection industry as a result of the Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit charging that they deceived and harassed consumers to collect fake debts the consumers did not owe.

Blackstone Legal, its associated companies, and its owners, Ryan and Mitchell Evans, were charged by the FTC in February 2025 with running an operation that convinced consumers to pay fake debts. Consumers were falsely told they were about to be sued, their credit damaged, and their wages garnished. Consumers lost millions of dollars.

“This operation collected on false debt and harassed consumers with fake threats of lawsuits and damaged credit if they refused to pay,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Scams like this cause significant harm to consumers and undermine legitimate debt collection activity, and the FTC will continue to act to stop them.”

The defendants have agreed to a proposed settlement order with the FTC that would:

permanently ban all of the defendants from the debt collection industry;
prohibit the defendants from making any material misrepresentations about any good or service they sell or market;
prohibit the defendants from using false, fictitious, or fraudulent representations to get consumers’ financial information and from impersonating any business; and
require the defendants to turn over substantially all their assets, including the contents of numerous bank and investment accounts.

The order contains a total monetary judgment of $8,254,368, which is partially suspended based on the defendants’ inability to pay the full amount. If the defendants are found to have lied to the FTC about their financial status, the full judgment will be immediately payable.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders or injunctions have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The staff attorneys on this matter were Quinn Martin and Jason Sanders of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Evoke Wellness to Pay $1.9 Million to Settle FTC Claims That They Misled Consumers Seeking Substance Use Disorder Treatment

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The operators of a Florida-based substance use disorder treatment clinic have agreed to pay $1.9 million, settling allegations that they used deceptive Google search ads and telemarketing to impersonate other treatment providers. They also agreed to a ban on impersonating other companies, including other substance use disorder treatment clinics, and other deceptive advertising.

According to the FTC’s January 2025 complaint, Evoke Wellness, LLC, Evoke Health Care Management, LLC, and their officers, Jonathan Moseley and James Hull, targeted consumers searching for specific substance use disorder clinics online. They used the names of other clinics as keywords to masquerade as those clinics in Evoke’s Google ads, which paired those names with the phone number to Evoke’s call center.

When consumers called, Evoke telemarketers typically posed as a centralized admissions office or addiction treatment hotline, rather than a call center associated with Evoke. The telemarketers consistently reinforced the ad’s deception by falsely claiming to have a relationship with the clinic the consumer was trying to contact. The FTC complaint alleged this conduct violated both the FTC Act and the Opioid Addiction Recovery Fraud Prevention Act of 2018.

“Opioids have ravaged American communities, killing well over one hundred Americans per day and ruining the lives of countless others,” said FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson. “Today’s settlement helps consumers affected by opioid addiction navigate their path to recovery by preventing fraudsters from leading them astray. The Commission will continue to take every action it can against those who prey on our nation’s vulnerable in their time of need.”

The proposed order resolves the FTC’s complaint. The order, which must be approved by a federal judge before it goes into effect, will:

ban the defendants from using their rivals’ names in search-engine ads;
prohibit misrepresentations related to substance use disorder treatment services;
prohibit the defendants from impersonating other businesses;
require the defendants to put a compliance program in place to monitor their call centers for misrepresentations; and
require them to take corrective action against agents who violate the order.

Finally, the order imposes a $7 million civil penalty against the defendants, which is partially suspended to $1.9 million because of their inability to pay the full amount. If they are later found to have misrepresented their financial condition to the FTC, the full amount will immediately become due.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

The lead staff attorneys on this matter are Victor DeFrancis and Cassandra Rasmussen in the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders or injunctions have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

FTC Announces Workshop on Exploring Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices in “Gender-Affirming Care” for Minors

Mon, 09 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Today the Federal Trade Commission announced it will host a workshop focusing on unfair or deceptive trade practices in “gender-affirming care” for minors. The workshop, called “The Dangers of ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ for Minors,” will take place on July 9, 2025, in Washington, DC and will be streamed online. A link to watch the webcast will be posted the morning of the event to FTC.gov.

The agenda for the workshop, which will be released prior to the event, will include doctors, medical ethicists, whistleblowers, detransitioners, and parents of detransitioners. These participants will share perspectives grounded in research, expertise, and personal experience.

The workshop is being convened following President Trump’s executive order ending the federal government’s previous support for “gender-affirming care” for minors. The order asserted that “medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex through a series of irreversible medical interventions.”

Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act gives the FTC broad authority to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive acts or practices. This authority could be implicated if there is evidence that medical professionals or others omitted warnings about the risks or made false or unsupported claims about the benefits and effectiveness of gender-affirming care for minors.

The workshop will help the FTC to understand whether consumers are being or have been exposed to false or unsupported claims about “gender-affirming care” and to gauge the harms consumers may be experiencing.

For the safety of participants, in-person attendance at the event will be invitation only. Members of the public or press who wish to attend may email [email protected]">[email protected] to indicate interest.

FTC to Host June 4 Workshop on The Attention Economy: How Big Tech Firms Exploit Children and Hurt Families

Tue, 03 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

WHAT:	The Federal Trade Commission is hosting a workshop on "The Attention Economy: How Big Tech Firms Exploit Children and Hurt Families,” which will examine how Big Tech companies impose addictive design features, erode parental authority, and fail to protect children from exposure to harmful content. It will also explore how the FTC, Congress, state governments, and other organizations can help support parents and protect children online.
WHEN:	Wednesday, June 4, 2025 from 9 a.m.–4 p.m. ET
WHERE:	The event will be held online and in person at the FTC’s Constitution Center building at 400 7th St SW Washington, D.C. 20024. A link to view the webcast can be found on the event page.
WHO:	The event will feature remarks by Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Katie Britt, R-Ala., FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and Commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Mark R. Meador, as well as four panel discussions.
TWITTER:	Follow the discussion on Twitter/X using the hashtag: #FTCProtectKids

FTC Sends Warning Letters to Prescribers Regarding Possible Violations of the Contact Lens Rule

Tue, 03 Jun 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Staff of the Federal Trade Commission sent 37 letters to contact lens prescribers warning them of potential violations of the agency’s Contact Lens Rule. Staff also sent a letter to Spectrum Vision Partners, LLC, stating that the FTC is closing its investigation of the company’s potential violations of the Eyeglass Rule and Contact Lens Rule, but warning Spectrum to remain in compliance with the Rules.

The Contact Lens Rule requires prescribers to give patients a copy of their prescription at the end of a fitting. The Eyeglass Rule requires prescribers to give patients a copy of their prescription after completing any refractive eye examination. Under both rules, prescribers are prohibited from charging additional fees or requiring a signed waiver for releasing prescriptions. The Rules also prohibit prescribers from requiring a patient to buy contact lenses or eyeglasses from them and prohibit refusing to perform an eye exam unless the patient buys contact lenses or eyeglasses from them.

The 37 letters were based on consumer complaints and are not formal determinations that the recipients have violated the Contact Lens Rule or the Eyeglass Rule. The letters informed prescribers of their obligations under the Rules and warned them that violations of either Rule may result in legal action, including the issuance of administrative subpoenas and civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation.

The letter to Spectrum follows an investigation sparked by consumer complaints that vision centers managed by Spectrum were charging patients an additional fee for releasing prescriptions. The fee was not charged if patients had a refractive exam but did not want a copy of their prescription.

Prescribers may charge fees for refractive eye exams. However, if they are performing refractive eye exams and charging fees only to patients who want their prescriptions, that amounts to charging for prescriptions and is a violation of the Eyeglass Rule.

The FTC has staff guidance to assist prescribers in complying with the Rules. See: The Contact Lens Rule: A Guide for Prescribers and Sellers and Complying with the Eyeglass Rule. In addition, the FTC has information to help consumers understand their rights under federal law. See: Buying Prescription Glasses or Contact Lenses, Your Rights.

The lead staff attorney on this matter is Alysa Bernstein in the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Student Loan Debt Relief Scam Operators Agree to be Permanently Banned from Industry, Turn Over Assets to Resolve FTC Charges

Thu, 22 May 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The operators of an alleged transnational student loan debt relief scam have agreed to be permanently banned from the debt relief industry and to turn over more than $1 million in assets to resolve Federal Trade Commission charges that the operation bilked millions out of struggling student loan borrowers.

“It is illegal for debt relief companies to make false promises and use fake reviews and testimonials to promote a business,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC will not hesitate to enforce the law against bad actors.”

In July 2024, the FTC alleged that two companies, Florida-based Start Connecting LLC and Colombia-based Start Connecting SAS (doing business as USA Student Debt Relief (USASDR), and their owners and operators Douglas Goodman, Doris Gallon-Goodman, and Juan Rojas:

pretended to be affiliated with the Department of Education and its loan servicers to lure student loan borrowers seeking debt relief;
made false promises of low, permanently fixed monthly payments and complete loan forgiveness;
illegally called tens of thousands of consumers on the Do Not Call Registry;
extracted more than $7.3 million in illegal advance fees and payments for nonexistent debt relief services; and
promoted fake consumer reviews and testimonials on social media and their website.

The defendants falsely promised to apply consumers’ monthly payments to their loan balances, but in reality, they pocketed borrowers’ hard-earned money and sent much of the funds to their call center in Colombia.

To settle the FTC’s charges, the proposed order prohibits the settling defendants from:

misrepresenting affiliation with any person, corporation, or government entity;
falsely promising to enroll consumers in programs that guarantee permanent low, fixed monthly payments and lump-sum loan forgiveness of remaining balance;
charging consumers illegal advance fees;
falsely marketing their services with fake testimonials and reviews online;
engaging in debt relief activities and unlawful telemarketing and making any misrepresentations about other products or services.

The proposed order also imposes a partially suspended monetary judgment of $7.3 million and requires the settling defendants to turn over more than $1 million in personal and business assets. If any of the settling defendants are found to have materially misrepresented their finances, the full amount of the monetary judgment would become immediately due from that defendant.

The FTC has resources on how to avoid student loan debt relief scams at ftc.gov/StudentLoans. Consumers can get assistance with their student loans for free at StudentAid.gov.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court Judge.

The lead staff attorneys on this matter were Nathan Nash and D’Laney Gielow of the FTC’s Midwest Region.

FTC Finalizes Order with GoDaddy over Data Security Failures

Wed, 21 May 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission has finalized an order with GoDaddy settling allegations that the webhosting provider misled consumers by failing to implement data security protections, which led to several data breaches.

The FTC alleged in January 2025 that despite claiming it provides “award-winning security,” GoDaddy failed to implement standard data security tools and practices to protect customers’ websites and data. For example, it failed to use multi-factor authentication, monitor for security threats, and secure connections to its consumer data. These failures led to several data breaches that allowed bad actors to gain unauthorized access to customers’ websites and data. The FTC also alleged that the company deceived users about its compliance with the EU-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks.

Under the order finalized by the Commission, GoDaddy is:

Prohibited from making misrepresentations about its security and the extent to which it complies with any privacy or security program sponsored by a government, self-regulatory, or standard-setting organization;
Required to establish and implement a comprehensive information-security program that protects the security, confidentiality, and integrity of its website-hosting services; and
Required to hire an independent third-party assessor to conduct reviews of its information-security program.

After receiving three comments, the Commission voted 3-0 to finalize the order and send responses to the commenters. Commissioner Melissa Holyoak concurred, but dissented on Count III in the complaint.

FTC Releases Tentative Agenda for Attention Economy Workshop on June 4

Mon, 19 May 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission has released the tentative agenda for its June 4, 2025 workshop on "The Attention Economy: How Big Tech Firms Exploit Children and Hurt Families."

The workshop, which will take place in person and online, will examine how Big Tech companies impose addictive design features, erode parental authority, and fail to protect children from exposure to harmful content. The event will include remarks from Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Katie Britt, R-Ala., as well as FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and Commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Mark R. Meador.

The event will also feature panel discussions on:

Dangers facing children online;
Steps the FTC can take to protect children online;
Age verification requirements; and
What local communities can do to protect children.

The workshop will begin at 9:00 am ET and will take place at the FTC’s Constitution Center building at 400 7th St SW Washington, D.C. 20024. It will also be streamed online at FTC.gov. A link to watch the webcast will be posted the morning of the event to FTC.gov.

Registration is required for those wishing to attend in person. Additional information about the workshop can be found on the event page.

FTC Adds Defendants in Case Against Growth Cave Scam

Mon, 19 May 2025 08:00:00 -0400

The Federal Trade Commission has filed an amended complaint in its case against the Growth Cave business opportunity and credit repair scam. The amendment adds two defendants based on information the FTC learned after the original filing.

The amended complaint names LLT Research as a new defendant in the case, alleging that the company served as the corporate structure behind the operation’s PassiveApps product, which defendant Lucas Lee-Tyson started selling in 2024. The amended complaint also adds as a relief defendant Friendly Solar, Inc., an alleged shell company for one of the individual defendant’s earnings that provided no services in exchange for the assets it received.

The FTC sued Growth Cave in February 2025, alleging that the operation and its owners and officers had taken nearly $50 million from consumers using false promises of significant income. A federal court issued a temporary restraining order freezing the defendants’ funds and halting its operations while the case continues.

According to the complaint, the Growth Cave scam has operated numerous business opportunities, all of which have regularly failed to deliver on the income they promised consumers while costing those consumers thousands of dollars to purchase.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the amended complaint was 3-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The staff attorneys on this matter are Maris Snell and Adrienne Jenkins of the FTC’s East Central Region and Miles Freeman of the FTC’s Western Region Los Angeles.

Student Loan Fraudsters Permanently Banned From Debt Relief Industry And Required to Turn Over All Assets as Result of FTC Action

Thu, 15 May 2025 08:00:00 -0400

As a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit, a fraudulent student loan debt relief operation and its owners are permanently banned from the debt relief industry and required to turn over all assets to resolve allegations that they misled consumers.

“Consumers looking to pay off their student loan debt should not have to worry about being scammed,” said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC will continue to hold fraudsters that pocket Americans’ hard-earned money accountable.”

The FTC alleged Panda Benefit Services (also doing business as Prosperity Benefit Services), its affiliates, and its operators (collectively, defendants):

targeted consumers burdened with student loan debt and tricked them into paying hundreds to thousands of dollars in illegal fees toward fake student loan forgiveness;
falsely claimed that consumers who paid for defendants’ program were guaranteed loan forgiveness and that the program would reduce their loan payments;
pretended to be affiliated with the U.S. Department of Education, telling consumers they would take over servicing of their loans while actually pocketing consumers’ money; and
swindled more than $16.7 million in unlawful advance fees from students seeking debt relief.

On May 14, 2025, the court entered a stipulated order with Select Student Services and Eduardo Martinez. At the FTC’s request, the court entered a default judgment against Public Processing Services, Quick Start Services, and Signature Processing Services on May 6, 2025. Previously on October 2, 2024, the court entered stipulated orders with Panda Benefit Services, Pacific Quest Services, Prosperity Loan Services, Emiliano Salinas, and Melissa Salinas and with Clarity Support Services and Christopher Hanson.

The final orders ban defendants from the debt relief industry. The orders against Select Student Services and Eduardo Martinez and Public Processing Services, Quick Start Services, and Signature Processing Services also ban them from telemarketing. In addition, the orders prohibit the defendants from:

making any misrepresentations about other products or services;
using false statements to collect consumers’ financial information; and
impersonating any other people or government entities

Finally, the order as to Student Services and Martinez impose a monetary judgment of nearly $16.8 million, which, in the case of the stipulated orders, is mostly suspended due to an inability to pay. Those defendants are required to turn over millions in personal and business assets. If either of those defendants are found to have materially misrepresented their finances, the full amount of the monetary judgment would become immediately due from that defendant.

The FTC has resources on how to avoid student loan debt relief scams at ftc.gov/StudentLoans. Consumers can get assistance with their student loans for free at StudentAid.gov.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order with Select Student Services and Eduardo Martinez was 3-0. The Commission votes approving the stipulated final orders with Panda Benefit Services, Pacific Quest Services, Prosperity Loan Services, Emiliano Salinas, and Melissa Salinas and with Clarity Support Services and Christopher Hanson were 5-0. The FTC filed the orders in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The staff attorneys on this matter are Gregory Ashe and Sally Tieu of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

FTC Chairman Testifies Before House Appropriations Committee on Agency’s Budget

Thu, 15 May 2025 08:00:00 -0400

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson today appeared before the House Appropriations Committee’s Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee to discuss the agency's Fiscal Year 2025 operations, Fiscal Year 2026 priorities and ongoing work to protect consumers and promote competition.

Testifying on behalf of the Commission, Chairman Ferguson emphasized the value the FTC provides to U.S. taxpayers. For example, in FY 2024, the agency returned more than $333 million to consumers, equivalent to nearly two-thirds of the agency’s annual budget.

The testimony highlighted the FTC’s commitment to using agency resources efficiently and meeting President Trump’s goal of reducing the size of the federal government. In recent months, the FTC has reduced the size of its workforce and cut other costs while still executing on the agency’s priorities – protecting the American people from scams, fraud and other unfair or deceptive practices as well as from harmful collusion and consolidation. The testimony also noted the importance of retaining adequate staffing to maintain the agency’s high level of performance.

As part of the agency’s mission to protect consumers, the FTC is working to prevent illegal telemarketing calls; fraud targeting older Americans and servicemembers; deceptive billing and cancellation practices; unlawful ticket practices; and unlawful data security and privacy practices. On the competition side, the FTC is focused on targeting the root causes of anticompetitive conduct and tackling the most significant harms across markets, particularly by dominant firms whose business practices affect many Americans.

The Commission vote to approve the testimony was 3-0.