Ascend Ecom and Owners are Banned from Business Opportunity Marketing in $25M FTC Enforcement Action

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has taken another strong step in its crackdown on deceptive business opportunity schemes, this time targeting Ascend Ecom, an ecommerce coaching operation accused of using false AI income claims and coercive contracts to defraud consumers. Under a proposed court order announced June 23, 2025, Ascend Ecom and its owners will be permanently banned from marketing business opportunities, and must turn over substantial assets to aid consumer refunds.
The FTC alleges the operation scammed at least $25 million from consumers hoping to start online storefronts, promising high earnings with minimal effort, powered by so-called “cutting edge AI tools.” In reality, most customers saw little to no return and were allegedly pressured into silence through restrictive contracts and intimidation tactics.
What Happened: AI Hype, False Income Claims, and $25K+ Price Tags
According to the FTC complaint, Ascend Ecom and its operators, William Michael Basta and Jeremy Kenneth Leung, marketed ecommerce startup services under a wide range of names:
Consumers were lured with promises of hands-free income, AI-powered tools, and expert coaching. Many paid tens of thousands of dollars for these services, expecting automated profits through Amazon and other retail platforms.
However, the FTC found that:
The FTC’s proposed settlement includes strict behavioral bans and financial penalties that signal heightened scrutiny for high-ticket coaching models. The order would:
The settlement includes a $25 million judgment, suspended in part due to the defendants’ claimed inability to pay. As in many FTC cases, if the defendants are found to have misrepresented their financial status, the full amount becomes immediately due.
The Ascend Ecom enforcement sends yet another unmistakable signal: business opportunity fraud is a top priority for regulators, and the FTC is showing zero tolerance for deceptive income marketing, AI hype, and gag clauses.
1. AI-Powered = FTC-Scrutinized.
If you’re advertising artificial intelligence as part of your product value, expect regulators to demand proof. Hype without substance will be treated as deception.
2. Income Claims Must Be Typical, Truthful, and Backed by Data.
The FTC continues to target any marketing that implies “easy money,” especially when selling high-cost services to financially vulnerable consumers.
3. Non-Disparagement Clauses May Be Illegal.
Restricting consumers from filing reviews or complaints can be a direct violation of the Consumer Review Fairness Act. If such terms are buried in your contracts, you’re likely inviting regulatory risk.
4. Multiple Business Entities Won’t Shield Liability.
Ascend Ecom operated under a string of brand names and shell entities, but that didn’t prevent enforcement.
Final Thought: The Enforcement Wave Continues
The Ascend Ecom case is part of a broader FTC trend targeting misleading entrepreneurial service providers, particularly those exploiting tech jargon, aggressive marketing, and inflated income promises. The agency is ramping up both monetary penalties and industry bans, signaling that compliance failures are no longer just costly, they can be career-ending.
If your organization sells business opportunities, AI-powered tools, or startup services in any form, now is the time to conduct a comprehensive compliance audit of your marketing, contracts, and claims.
Need help reviewing your income claims, contract language, or affiliate oversight practices? We offer tailored compliance briefings, audit tools, and policy frameworks for risk and legal teams navigating FTC scrutiny in our CLIClaw Marketing Compliance Library.

(Image Credit: iStock Photo)

This article is for information purposes only. It is not intended to be and should not be relied on as legal advice for any particular matter.