UnapologeticallyDahling
Sourced essays · Every claim footnotedNo. 125 · Thursday, 5 November 2026

Business and Money · 4 min · 9 sources · 8 primary · Verified 5 November 2026 · Sources re-checked 5 November 2026

Did Amway's affiliates tell recruits they could earn $40,000 a year when, the FTC alleges, most recent recruits spent more than they received?

The FTC and Washington say Amway authorized $40,000 income claims while the median IBO bonus in 2023 was $139. The complaint and the proposed $225 million order show what is alleged, what is agreed, and what no court has decided.

The claimFederal Trade Commission and Washington State Attorney General, complaint and proposed stipulated order in FTC and State of Washington v. Amway Corp., World Wide Group, L.L.C., and Leadership Team Development, Inc., U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington, filed September 17, 2026

“The FTC and Washington State allege that Amway and two affiliated "Approved Provider" groups, World Wide Group and Leadership Team Development, told recruits to expect $40,000 or more a year, or income that could replace a full-time job. They allege that most recent recruits of those groups spent more than they received. They also allege that more than three quarters of Amway's U.S. product volume went to its own IBOs, and that leaders told IBOs to report fake customer sales. Under a proposed stipulated order, the defendants would pay $225 million, a 70 percent customer-sales threshold would be built into the compensation plan, and an independent auditor would review sales records.”

The short answer

The FTC and Washington allege, in a complaint filed September 17, 2026, that Amway authorized its Approved Providers to tell recruits they could earn more than $40,000 a year, while the median IBO bonus in 2023 was $139 before expenses. The allegation that most recruits spent more than they received covers those who joined World Wide Group or Leadership Team Development after 2020. The defendants neither admit nor deny the allegations, and the $225 million order is proposed until a judge signs it.

On September 17, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission and the State of Washington filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against Amway Corp. and two affiliated Approved Providers, World Wide Group and Leadership Team Development.1 They allege the companies told recruits, known as Independent Business Owners, that they were likely to earn more than $40,000 a year, or enough to replace a full-time job or retire early.7 They also allege that among IBOs who joined World Wide Group or Leadership Team Development between 2020 and 2023, average and median bonuses were lower than average and median spending on training. The FTC's release describes this as most of those recruits spending more on Amway products and training than they received from Amway.7 The same day, the FTC announced that the defendants would pay $225 million to resolve the allegations.6 Washington brought its claims under the state Consumer Protection Act.8

The complaint backs the claim with specific figures, but it remains a complaint. No court has tested it, and the defendants neither admit nor deny the allegations. The order is only proposed until a judge signs it. Once entered, Section IX.B says the complaint's facts would be taken as true in later FTC or Washington proceedings to enforce the order, including in bankruptcy.4 The allegation that recruits spent more than they received covers people who joined the two affiliates after 2020. It does not cover every Amway IBO.7

Where does the $40,000 figure come from?

Paragraph 47 of the complaint alleges that Amway authorized the Approved Providers to claim that IBOs can make more than $40,000 or more than $50,000 a year, depending on the year. According to the complaint, only about 1 percent of IBOs, fewer than 1,600 of more than 241,000, received $40,000 or more in bonuses from Amway in 2023.2 The complaint says the authorized figures appeared in slides, and it alleges that leaders often stated higher amounts aloud.2 The complaint names Amway as the company that authorized the figures. It names leaders of World Wide Group and Leadership Team Development as the people who presented them.1

What did IBOs actually receive?

The complaint puts the median total bonus for IBOs in 2023 at $139, before expenses.1 It says IBOs often spend more on training bought from the Approved Providers than they receive in bonuses.1 The complaint looks at IBOs who joined World Wide Group and Leadership Team Development from 2020 to 2023, with results tracked through March 2024. For that group, it alleges that both the average and the median bonus were lower than the average and median spending on training.1

The FTC's release goes further. It says most of those post-2020 recruits spent more on Amway products and training combined than they received from Amway.7 Washington's release makes the same statement.8 That comparison counts product purchases as spending. The documents examined here do not say how much of that product the IBOs used themselves or resold.

Who was buying the product?

The complaint alleges that in recent years Amway has sold more than three quarters of its U.S. products to its own IBOs.3 Paragraph 32 says Amway's data indicated IBOs purchased 77 percent of the products Amway sold in 2023.3 The complaint also alleges that group leaders told members to report fake customer sales or false resales.3 That describes alleged conduct by leaders. It is not an admitted or proven practice.3

What does the 70 percent rule say?

The filed version of the proposed order, Case No. 2:26-cv-3474, is dated October 15, 2026.4 It states: "The Marketing Plan requires that each Participant’s Eligible Customer Sales constitute at least seventy (70) percent of the Participant’s Monthly Product Volume."4 If a participant falls short, the participant's benefits are reduced. The reduction formula is in Appendix A, which was not examined here.4

The order does not say in those words that each IBO must resell 70 percent of purchases. It sets a threshold inside the compensation plan, and the stated consequence of missing it is smaller benefits.4 Sections I.A, I.B, I.D and I.E take effect nine months after the order is entered.4

Who checks the sales records?

Section VII of the order provides for an auditor. The FTC and Amway choose the auditor by agreement, and Amway pays.5 The auditor must collect data from Amway each year "sufficient to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of Eligible Customer Sales and Eligible Customer registrations."5 The order does not name the auditor.5

Where does the $225 million go?

Section VIII sets out the following judgments:5

  • $154.7 million against Amway
  • $39.78 million against World Wide Group
  • $26.52 million against Leadership Team Development
  • $4 million to Washington

Together these total $225 million.5 The FTC says details on refunds to affected IBOs will come later.7 As of the version examined, the FTC's case page lists the matter as pending and does not say whether the judge has entered the order.6 This piece relies on the October 15 filed order. It has not been compared with the version announced on September 17.4

1Complaint for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, Civil Penalty Judgment, and Other Relief, FTC and State of Washington v. Amway Corp., World Wide Group, L.L.C., and Leadership Team Development, Inc.primary · Court filing · 2026-09-17Limitation: A complaint is the plaintiffs' allegations, not findings of fact. The text I read was cut off after about paragraph 73 of roughly 61,000 characters, so I did not read the counts or the prayer for relief. The $40,000 figure is alleged to be authorized by Amway and used by WWG and LTD leaders. Bonus and expense figures cover IBOs who joined WWG and LTD from 2020 to 2023, through March 2024.
7FTC Takes Historic Action Against Multilevel Marketing Operator Amway for Unfair and Deceptive Business Practicesprimary · Agency page · 2026-09-17Limitation: This is the agency's own press release, so it states the FTC's position, not a court finding. It gives the post-2020 'spent more than received' comparison only for IBOs who joined WWG or LTD, not for all Amway IBOs. It describes the order as 'proposed' and says redress details will come later.
6FTC case page: Amway (FTC v. Amway)primary · Agency page · 2026-09-17Limitation: The page lists the complaint (Sept. 17) and the stipulated order filed Oct. 15. It shows case status as 'Pending'. It is a docket-style summary by the plaintiff agency, not a court docket, and it does not say whether the judge has entered the order.
8WA, FTC reach $225M settlement with Amway for unfair and deceptive business practicesprimary · Agency page · 2026-09-17Limitation: This is a state press release by a co-plaintiff, so it carries its own framing. The '1%' figure is the complaint's allegation about 2023 bonuses. The release summarises the proposed order, not final entered terms. It confirms Washington is suing under the state Consumer Protection Act.
4Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, and Other Relief (filed version, Case No. 2:26-cv-3474)primary · Court order · 2026-10-15Limitation: This is a proposed stipulated order, binding only once the judge approves and signs it. I read the filed version dated October 15 and did not compare it with the September 17 version. The text read was cut off before the appendices, including Appendix A (the reduction formula) and the compliance sections. Defendants 'neither admit nor deny' the allegations. The 70% rule is built into the compensation plan: a participant's Eligible Customer Sales must be at least 70% of Monthly Product Volume, and benefits shrink if not. Sections I.A and I.B take effect nine months after entry. The order does not state a duty for each IBO to 'resell' 70% in those words.
2Complaint, ¶ 47: earnings figures Amway authorized Approved Providers to presentprimary · Court filing · 2026-09-17Limitation: This is the same complaint as the previous entry, cited for a different paragraph. It alleges that Amway authorized the $40,000 and $50,000 claims in slides. It says leaders often state higher amounts orally. It is an allegation, not an adjudicated fact.
3Complaint, ¶¶ 5–6: sales to IBOs and fake customer-sale reportsprimary · Court filing · 2026-09-17Limitation: This is the same complaint, cited for the product-volume and fabricated-sales allegations. ¶ 32 puts the IBO share at 77 percent for 2023, per Amway's own data. 'Three-quarters' is the complaint's characterisation of 'recent years' in the U.S. only. The report-falsification claim is alleged conduct by group leaders, not an admitted or proven practice.
5Stipulated Order, Section VII (Auditor) and Section VIII (Monetary Judgment)primary · Court order · 2026-10-15Limitation: This is the same proposed order, cited for the auditor and money terms. The auditor is chosen by agreement between the FTC and Amway and is paid by Amway. Judgments are $154.7M against Amway, $39.78M against WWG and $26.52M against LTD. Washington gets $4M against Defendants. These sum to $225M. The order does not name who the auditor will be.
The Dahling verdictPartly holds

Partly, and only as an allegation. The complaint filed September 17, 2026 says Amway authorized its Approved Providers to tell recruits they could make more than $40,000 a year. It also says about 1 percent of IBOs reached that level and the median bonus in 2023 was $139. The claim that most recruits spent more than they received applies to people who joined World Wide Group or Leadership Team Development after 2020, not to all IBOs. No court has found any of it true, the defendants neither admit nor deny it, and the $225 million order remains proposed until a judge signs it.

Dahling

Sources and limitations

  1. 1
    Complaint for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, Civil Penalty Judgment, and Other Relief, FTC and State of Washington v. Amway Corp., World Wide Group, L.L.C., and Leadership Team Development, Inc.U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (posted by FTC), 2026-09-17primary · Court filingLimitation: A complaint is the plaintiffs' allegations, not findings of fact. The text I read was cut off after about paragraph 73 of roughly 61,000 characters, so I did not read the counts or the prayer for relief. The $40,000 figure is alleged to be authorized by Amway and used by WWG and LTD leaders. Bonus and expense figures cover IBOs who joined WWG and LTD from 2020 to 2023, through March 2024.↩
  2. 2
    Complaint, ¶ 47: earnings figures Amway authorized Approved Providers to presentU.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (posted by FTC), 2026-09-17primary · Court filingLimitation: This is the same complaint as the previous entry, cited for a different paragraph. It alleges that Amway authorized the $40,000 and $50,000 claims in slides. It says leaders often state higher amounts orally. It is an allegation, not an adjudicated fact.↩
  3. 3
    Complaint, ¶¶ 5–6: sales to IBOs and fake customer-sale reportsU.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (posted by FTC), 2026-09-17primary · Court filingLimitation: This is the same complaint, cited for the product-volume and fabricated-sales allegations. ¶ 32 puts the IBO share at 77 percent for 2023, per Amway's own data. 'Three-quarters' is the complaint's characterisation of 'recent years' in the U.S. only. The report-falsification claim is alleged conduct by group leaders, not an admitted or proven practice.↩
  4. 4
    Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Judgment, and Other Relief (filed version, Case No. 2:26-cv-3474)U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (posted by FTC), 2026-10-15primary · Court orderLimitation: This is a proposed stipulated order, binding only once the judge approves and signs it. I read the filed version dated October 15 and did not compare it with the September 17 version. The text read was cut off before the appendices, including Appendix A (the reduction formula) and the compliance sections. Defendants 'neither admit nor deny' the allegations. The 70% rule is built into the compensation plan: a participant's Eligible Customer Sales must be at least 70% of Monthly Product Volume, and benefits shrink if not. Sections I.A and I.B take effect nine months after entry. The order does not state a duty for each IBO to 'resell' 70% in those words.↩
  5. 5
    Stipulated Order, Section VII (Auditor) and Section VIII (Monetary Judgment)U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (posted by FTC), 2026-10-15primary · Court orderLimitation: This is the same proposed order, cited for the auditor and money terms. The auditor is chosen by agreement between the FTC and Amway and is paid by Amway. Judgments are $154.7M against Amway, $39.78M against WWG and $26.52M against LTD. Washington gets $4M against Defendants. These sum to $225M. The order does not name who the auditor will be.↩
  6. 6
    FTC case page: Amway (FTC v. Amway)Federal Trade Commission, 2026-09-17primary · Agency pageLimitation: The page lists the complaint (Sept. 17) and the stipulated order filed Oct. 15. It shows case status as 'Pending'. It is a docket-style summary by the plaintiff agency, not a court docket, and it does not say whether the judge has entered the order.↩
  7. 7
    FTC Takes Historic Action Against Multilevel Marketing Operator Amway for Unfair and Deceptive Business PracticesFederal Trade Commission, 2026-09-17primary · Agency pageLimitation: This is the agency's own press release, so it states the FTC's position, not a court finding. It gives the post-2020 'spent more than received' comparison only for IBOs who joined WWG or LTD, not for all Amway IBOs. It describes the order as 'proposed' and says redress details will come later.↩
  8. 8
    WA, FTC reach $225M settlement with Amway for unfair and deceptive business practicesWashington State Office of the Attorney General, 2026-09-17primary · Agency pageLimitation: This is a state press release by a co-plaintiff, so it carries its own framing. The '1%' figure is the complaint's allegation about 2023 bonuses. The release summarises the proposed order, not final entered terms. It confirms Washington is suing under the state Consumer Protection Act.↩
  9. 9
    Amway to Pay $225 Million Over Alleged False Earnings Claims and Fabricated SalesFrankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC (Advertising Law Updates), 2026-09-18secondary · News reportLimitation: This is a law-firm client alert written for advertisers, not a primary record. It paraphrases the complaint and order and says IBOs 'must resell at least 70 percent', which is looser than the order's own wording about compensation-plan thresholds. Use it only to confirm how the legal trade read the case. Rely on the complaint and order for the terms.

Alicia Dahling directed, edited and approved this essay. It was researched and drafted with AI tools, checked against every cited source, and nothing publishes without her review. How we work: Editorial Standards.

More in Business and Money

122Business and MoneyDoes J&J's $5.5 billion talc offer cost less than the bankruptcy plans it replaced?Partly holds05 Nov120Business and MoneyWill the SEC's optional semiannual reporting save companies money?Unproven05 Nov