New: a trial court in 1 of every 10 U.S. counties. Read the post
Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementHigh Risk

Publishing.com to Pay $1.5 Million for Misleading Consumers about How Much Income They Could Earn Using the Company’s Products and Services

Publishing.com LLCApril 13, 2026Federal Trade Commission

Penalty Amount

$1,500,000

Summary

The FTC alleged that Publishing.com LLC and its principals misled consumers with unsubstantiated earnings claims about their self-publishing programs, failed to disclose material connections with testimonial writers, and imposed hidden conditions on refund requests. The company agreed to pay a $1.5 million penalty and is subject to a proposed consent order prohibiting deceptive earnings claims, misrepresentations about refunds, and undisclosed endorsements. The consent agreement is subject to a 30-day public comment period before becoming final.

Remedy

Publishing.com LLC and its principals must pay a $1.5 million civil penalty. The proposed consent order prohibits the company and individuals from making unsubstantiated or misleading earnings claims, deceptive misrepresentations about products or services, failing to disclose refund policy terms, and making misrepresentations about endorsements. The order also requires full disclosure of any material connections with endorsers or incentives for positive reviews, and mandates prompt honor of valid refund requests per company policy.

Monetary PenaltyInjunction

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review customer-facing terms of service and refund policies to ensure all refund conditions are clearly disclosed upfront, avoiding buried fine print that restricts consumers’ ability to obtain refunds as required by the FTC’s order. Marketing and influencer vendor agreements must include clauses mandating disclosure of material connections (e.g., employment, familial ties, financial incentives) and prohibiting undisclosed incentivized testimonials. Employee agreements should be updated to ban staff from providing biased, undisclosed testimonials for the company’s products. All marketing vendor contracts should require representations and warranties that earnings claims are substantiated, non-misleading, and have a reasonable basis, with indemnification for deceptive advertising violations.

Contract Search Terms

earnings claims substantiationtestimonial disclosurematerial connection disclosurerefund policy termsincentivized reviewscancellation policyendorsement misrepresentationhidden refund conditions

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

Publishing.com LLC

Industry

Education

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"Publishing.com LLC"
Fine Amount
"$1.5 million"
Event Date
"April 13, 2026"
Summary
"the company and its operators misled consumers about how much money they were likely to earn using their products"
Summary
"failed to disclose when reviews were written by company employees or other people, including relatives of the Mikkelsens, who might be biased by their connection to the company"
Remedy Types
"will pay $1.5 million"

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

Publishing.com LLC

$1.5M

The FTC finalized an order against Publishing.com LLC and its principals for misleading consumers about potential earnings from self-publishing products. The company will pay $1.5 million and must substantiate future earnings claims, and is prohibited from making misrepresentations about refunds and endorsements.

FTC

REPS & Company Inc.

The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.

FTC

Digital Forensics Corporation LLC

The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.

FTC

Greenway Auto Group

The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.

FTC

24 healthcare services companies (not individually named)

The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.

FTC

Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC

$1.9M

The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.