Skip to main content
Date

Overview

When consumers consider joining a multi-level marketing program (“MLM”) to make extra income, they should be able to rely on the claims that are made about how much money they stand to make as a participant. However, in many cases those recruiting for MLMs make claims about income that they can’t back up.

The Federal Trade Commission is asking the public to weigh in on whether new rules are needed to prevent consumers from being harmed by deceptive earnings and related claims and to give the Commission the authority to seek refunds in federal court for injured consumers.

Proposals

In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”), the Commission is proposing an “Earnings Claim Rule Regarding Multi-Level Marketing” that would prohibit the following conduct in connection with the offering of MLMs:

  • misleading earnings claims
  • making earnings claims without having substantiation (or a reasonable basis) for those claims
  • misrepresenting the opportunity to become an MLM participant as an employment opportunity; and
  • making any misrepresentation or unsubstantiated claim to prevent consumers from benefiting from truthful information about earnings.

The proposed Rule would also require MLMs to provide their substantiation to anyone upon request, in the language of the earnings claim. It would require sellers to maintain records of the substantiation, and would prohibit providing participants with recruitment materials containing deceptive earnings claims. The Commission also proposes revising the Business Opportunity Rule to exempt MLM sellers.

The Commission has also issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, to seek comment on whether its proposed Earnings Claim Rule Regarding Multi-Level Marketing should contain additional prohibitions to further deter deceptive or unfair earnings claims, such as a required earnings disclosure, or a waiting or cooling off period, and whether it should address additional unfair or deceptive practices in the multi-level marketing industry, including making misrepresentations concerning benefits and expenses, making deceptive refund claims, and using non-disparagement clauses in contracts with multi-level marketing participants.

Submit a Comment on the NPRM

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking asks a series of questions about the proposed rule. The topic areas and the questions are listed below. Anyone from the public can submit a comment weighing in on the rulemaking, the general topics, or a specific question.

  • Does the proposed Rule further the Commission’s goal of protecting consumers from deceptive or unfair acts or practices involving earning claims in the marketing of MLM opportunities? Why or why not?
  • Should the Commission adopt the proposed Rule as a final rule? Why or why not? How, if at all, should the Commission change the proposed Rule in promulgating a final rule?
  • Please provide comment, including relevant data, statistics, consumer complaint information, or any other evidence, on each different provision of the proposed Rule. Regarding each provision, please include answers to the following questions:
    • How prevalent is the act or practice the provision seeks to address?
    • What would the provision’s impact (including any benefits and costs), if any, be on consumers and businesses, including existing businesses and those yet to be started? Are there changes that could be made to lessen any such burdens without significantly reducing the benefits?
    • Would the proposed Rule, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? If so, how could it be modified to avoid a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?
    • What alternative proposals should the Commission consider?
  • Is the proposed Rule adequate and appropriate to address the harm caused to consumers by misleading or unsubstantiated earnings or job claims concerning MLMs? Why or why not? How can the proposal be improved?
  • Are there any unfair or deceptive acts or practices not addressed by the proposed Rule that should be?
  • Are there any alternatives to the proposed Rule that the Commission should consider? For each, provide all evidence that supports your answer, including any evidence that quantifies the benefits to consumers, and the costs to businesses, and in particular small businesses.
  • In the cases the Commission has brought, we have repeatedly seen circumstances where earnings claims convey the impression that the represented earnings are typical. Are there circumstances where they do not? If so, describe such circumstances in detail. Provide all evidence that supports your answer.

Submit a Comment on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

The Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking asks a series of questions about potential additional rule provisions to address deceptive earnings claims regarding MLMs, other potentially deceptive or unfair practices used by those offering MLMs, and potential new rule provisions to address those other practices. The topic areas and the questions are listed below. Anyone from the public can submit a comment weighing in on the rulemaking, the general topics, or a specific question.

  • Should the Commission propose additional requirements prescribed for the purpose of preventing misleading and unsubstantiated earnings claims in the MLM industry? If so, describe the requirements. What are the benefits to consumers, and costs to businesses, and in particular small businesses, from such requirements? Would the requirement benefit competition? Provide all evidence that supports your answer, including any evidence that quantifies the benefits to consumers and the costs to businesses, and in particular small businesses.
  • To the extent the Commission proposes any additional rule provisions to deter MLMs, MLM participants, or other MLM sellers from making deceptive or unsubstantiated earnings claims, should any MLMs be exempted from these requirements? Why or why not? If so, how should the proposal define such an exemption, how many MLMs would qualify for this exemption, and how would the exemption impact consumers? Provide all evidence that supports your answer, including any evidence that quantifies the benefits to consumers and competition, and the costs to businesses, and in particular small businesses.
  • What alternatives to regulations should the Commission consider to deter MLMs, MLM participants, or other MLM sellers from making misleading or unsubstantiated earnings claims? Would those alternatives obviate the need for regulation? Why or why not? Provide all evidence that supports your answer.