Penalty Amount
$12,000,000
The FTC alleged that payment processor Humboldt Merchant Services knowingly processed payments for more than 1,000 shell merchant entities serving as fronts for fraudulent companies engaged in unauthorized billing scams, despite red flags including chargeback rates nearly 10 times higher than card-brand thresholds. Under the proposed stipulated order filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Humboldt will pay $12 million for consumer redress and is permanently banned from processing payments for merchants with a heightened risk of potential fraud.
Humboldt must pay $12 million for consumer redress and is permanently banned from: engaging in or assisting credit card laundering; processing payments for four high-risk merchant categories (straw companies, merchants on the Mastercard MATCH list for excessive chargebacks/laundering/fraud, merchants subject to law enforcement action, and certain e-commerce entities using third-party mailbox providers that use negative option billing or lack processing history); making or assisting false or misleading statements to obtain payment processing; and engaging in tactics to evade fraud and risk monitoring, including load balancing.
In-house teams should review merchant services agreements, payment processing/gateway contracts, acquirer and bank sponsorship agreements, and any affiliate arrangements for payment routing. Key clauses to scrutinize include merchant underwriting and KYC representations, chargeback monitoring thresholds and termination triggers, express prohibitions on credit card laundering and load balancing (including routing transactions through affiliated or lower-risk BINs), restrictions on negative option billing, use-of-proceeds and pass-through account restrictions, representations that the entity is not a shell or straw company, and indemnification for chargebacks and fraud losses. Companies operating as payment facilitators or aggregators should also review onboarding diligence obligations, ongoing monitoring and audit rights over sub-merchants, termination rights tied to MATCH list placement or law enforcement action, and compliance-with-card-network-rules covenants, since the FTC's order effectively makes these risk controls a regulatory expectation for the payments industry.
Entity
Humboldt Merchant Services
Industry
Financial ServicesOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/09/ftc-takes-action-against-payment-processor-humboldt-merchant-services-knowingly-facilitating-payment
Humboldt Complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Humboldt-Complaint.pdf
Humboldt StipulatedOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Humboldt-StipulatedOrder.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Payment processing company Humboldt Merchant Services will pay $12 million and be permanently banned from processing payments for merchants with a heightened risk of potential fraud to settle allegations that Humboldt processed payments for merchants that defrauded consumers."
"In addition to paying $12 million for consumer redress"
"September 8, 2026"
"Under proposed order, defendant will be required to pay $12 million, stop payment processing for certain categories of merchants"
"shell entities that served as fronts or pass-throughs for fraudulent companies engaged in unauthorized billing scams"
"Humboldt was processing payments for companies despite red flags indicating they were scamming consumers"
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.
The FTC issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking seeking public comment on whether ad-optimization tools offered by online platforms may help scammers impersonate businesses and government agencies. This is a proposed regulatory inquiry, not an enforcement action against a named company; no penalty or remedy was imposed.
$2.5B
A federal court approved a revised order in the FTC's Amazon Prime case under which Amazon will accelerate and expand redress payments under the September 2025 $2.5 billion settlement, which resolved allegations that Amazon enrolled millions of consumers in Prime subscriptions without their consent and knowingly made cancellation difficult. More consumers now qualify for refunds, the maximum payment cap rises from $51 to $200, and all future payments will be distributed automatically starting October 1, 2026, with potential supplemental $149 payments by April 2027. Amazon has already issued more than $845 million in redress payments as of September 2026.
$225.0M
The FTC and the state of Washington filed a joint complaint and proposed stipulated order requiring Amway Corp. and two affiliates—World Wide Group, L.L.C. (WWG) and Leadership Team Development Inc. (LTD)—to pay a $225 million judgment, the largest monetary recovery ever obtained from an MLM in an FTC action, over allegations that they used deceptive earnings claims and unfair tactics to recruit Independent Business Owners. The complaint alleges the companies falsely promised substantial income and recruitment success, pressured IBOs to buy products they could not resell, and instructed IBOs to falsely report sales. Nearly all of the judgment will be used as redress for IBOs who lost money, and the proposed order imposes structural reforms including a 70% resale requirement, independent audits of sales records, and a ban on approved providers charging new IBOs for first-year training.
$100.0M
FleetCor Technologies Inc. (now Corpay Inc.) and its CEO Ronald Clarke agreed to pay $100 million to settle an FTC administrative action alleging the company charged small business customers hidden and unauthorized fees for fuel cards and misrepresented gas savings, fraud-control features, and fees. A federal district court granted the FTC summary judgment on all counts in 2023, and a federal appeals court upheld that judgment and the permanent injunction in 2026. The settlement funds will be used to provide redress to harmed business customers.
FTC staff published FAQs on price transparency to help the automobile industry comply with the FTC Act, reiterating that an advertised vehicle price must be the actual price any consumer can pay, excluding only government-required charges. The guidance follows warning letters the FTC sent to 97 auto dealership groups earlier in 2026 and signals continued litigation against dealers that advertise one price but charge more through undisclosed fees. No specific entity was charged and no penalty was imposed.