In re Amway Corp.

''In re Amway Corp.'' (93 F.T.C. 618; full name ''In the Matter of Amway Corporation, Inc., et al.'') is a 1979 ruling by the United States Federal Trade Commission concerning the business practices of Amway, a multi-level marketing (MLM) company. The FTC ruled that Amway was not an illegal pyramid scheme according strictly to the statutory definition of a pyramid scheme, but ordered Amway to cease price fixing and cease misrepresenting to its distributors (participants) the average participant's likelihood of financial security and material success.

Complaint

The FTC filed a complaint on March 25, 1975, alleging five counts of violating Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act:''In the Matter of Amway Corporation, Inc., et al.'' (93 F.T.C. 618)
from FTC website. Accessed 2016-03-08.
*Count I of the complaint alleged that Amway engaged in resale price maintenance.
*Count II alleged that Amway allocated customers among distributors and restricted the distributors' source of supply as well as the retail outlets through which they may resell;
*Count III alleged that Amway restricted the distributors' advertising.
*Count IV alleged that Amway misrepresented that substantial income may be obtained from geometrical increases in the number of distributors in the chain recruiting operation of the Amway distribution plan.
*Count V alleged that Amway misrepresented the profitability of a distributorship and the potential for recruiting new distributors and failed to disclose the substantial business expense involved and the high turnover of distributors.

Oral arguments were heard on June 6, 1978.

Results

The FTC stated Amway was not an illegal pyramid scheme since the Amway system is based on retail sales to consumers. Amway has avoided the abuses of pyramid schemes by:
*not requiring an entry ("headhunting") fee;93 F.T.C. 618: Opinion, page 716
*making product sales a precondition to receiving the performance bonus;93 F.T.C. 618: Initial Decision, page 646
*requiring the buying back of excessive inventory; and
*requiring that products be sold to retail consumers.

The administrative law judge also found that "Amway is not in business to sell distributorships and is not a pyramid distribution scheme."

In the opinion section of the ruling, Commissioner Robert Pitofsky stated:

The administrative law judge found, and the FTC opinion agreed, that Amway engaged in:
* resale price maintenance, through explicit agreements on wholesale prices and through practices "designed to insure adherence" to its suggested retail prices even though former explicit agreements on retail prices had been discontinued;93 F.T.C. 618: Opinion, pages 717–718 and
* misleading sales and earning claims.93 F.T.C. 618: Opinion, page 735

In the Final Order, issued on May 8, 1979, Amway and its representatives were ordered to:
* cease allocating customers among their distributors;
* cease retail price fixing;93 F.T.C. 618: Final Order, pages 736-737
* print a specific disclaimer on any suggested retail price list; and
* cease misrepresenting profits, earnings, or sales; and stop implying other than average results, unless the average results or the percentage of distributors actually reaching those figures is also conspicuously disclosed.93 F.T.C. 618: Final Order, pages 736–738

Later actions

In 1986, Amway agreed to pay a $100,000 penalty in a consent decree for violating the 1979 ruling, after Amway placed ads that represented higher-than-average distributor earnings without stating the actual average results or percentage of distributors who actually met the represented claims.

References

{{reflist

External links

In re Amway Corp. decision (.pdf format)
from FTC website

May 13, 1998

Amway
Amway
1979 in United States case law