Onpassive: The 'AI-Powered' MLM the FTC and SEC Say Was Built on Recruiting Fees, Not Technology

Onpassive LLC, a Florida-based company that marketed itself as an artificial intelligence-powered business platform, faced simultaneous enforcement actions from the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission alleging that the company operated as an illegal pyramid scheme — collecting hundreds of millions of dollars from participants who were told they would earn income from AI marketing tools and products that were never delivered as promised.DOCUMENTED

The parallel FTC and SEC actions reflected both the consumer protection dimensions of the alleged scheme — the FTC's focus — and the securities law implications of selling investment-like participations that promised returns based on the efforts of others — the SEC's focus. The combination of agencies pursuing the same company signaled the regulators' view that Onpassive's conduct fell across multiple legal frameworks simultaneously.

What Onpassive Promised

Onpassive's marketing described the company as a next-generation business platform that would provide subscribers with a suite of AI-powered marketing, communication, and business management tools. Participants were told they would not need to actively sell products or recruit others — the AI technology would generate business and income automatically. Marketing materials featured testimonials from participants describing substantial passive income and the promise that the platform's technology would work on the participant's behalf even without active involvement.REVIEWED

In practice, the FTC's complaint alleged, income within Onpassive was overwhelmingly dependent on recruiting new participants rather than on the sale of any actual product or service to end consumers. Participants paid upfront fees — described as founder positions or founder memberships — and received the right to recruit others and earn commissions on their recruits' fees. The company was recruiting in countries around the world, and the total sum collected from participants reached into the hundreds of millions of dollars globally, with a substantial portion from U.S.-based participants.DOCUMENTED

The Pyramid Structure

A pyramid scheme, in the regulatory framework the FTC applies, is an arrangement in which participants' earnings derive primarily from recruiting new participants rather than from the sale of legitimate products or services to genuine retail consumers. The mathematical inevitability of pyramids is that growth requires an ever-expanding base of participants — most of whom will ultimately find that the pool of recruitable participants has been exhausted before they can earn back their investment, meaning that the later participants inevitably lose while the early participants extract most of the available value.REVIEWED

Onpassive's AI branding added a contemporary veneer to this classic structure. By framing the scheme around technology that promised passive income — a promise that resonates particularly strongly in an environment where AI's capabilities are widely discussed — the company was able to attract participants who might have been more skeptical of a straightforwardly described recruiting commission structure. The AI claims also added complexity that made the product pitch harder to evaluate, since participants could not readily verify whether the promised tools would perform as described.REVIEWED

Adding artificial intelligence to a pyramid scheme does not make it a technology company. It makes it a more contemporary fraud.

The SEC's Securities Theory

The SEC's parallel enforcement action rested on the theory that Onpassive's founder positions were securities under federal law — specifically, investment contracts under the Howey test, which asks whether an investment involves money placed into a common enterprise with the expectation of profit from the efforts of others. Founder memberships that promise passive income generated by the company's AI technology satisfy these criteria: the participant commits money, the expected returns are generated by the company's operations and the recruitment of others, and the participant exercises no meaningful control over the outcome.DOCUMENTED

Because Onpassive did not register its offerings with the SEC before selling them, the company violated the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933. Unregistered securities offerings deprive investors of the disclosure protections that registration is designed to provide — including the right to receive audited financial statements, information about the company's business and management, and the documentation needed to evaluate the investment's actual risks. Participants in Onpassive's scheme had none of these protections.

Geographic Reach and Participant Demographics

Onpassive operated globally, with a significant participant base in countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, Middle Eastern countries, and parts of Asia. The scheme's marketing was conducted extensively through social media, video platforms, and online webinars, allowing it to reach potential participants in multiple countries simultaneously without the geographic constraints that limited earlier generations of pyramid schemes. International participants face additional challenges in enforcement contexts: the collection of participant fees across borders creates jurisdictional complexity, and the distribution of any recovered funds to participants in multiple countries creates administrative challenges that can reduce the practical restitution available to any individual participant.REVIEWED

Within the U.S. participant population, the scheme attracted a range of individuals — many of them small business owners, entrepreneurs, or individuals looking for additional income streams — who were genuinely drawn to the promise of passive income from AI-powered tools. The sophistication of Onpassive's marketing, including professional-quality video content, international conferences, and the appearance of a substantial and growing community of participants, made the scheme plausible to people who might have been appropriately skeptical of a more obviously traditional multi-level marketing pitch.

What the Enforcement Actions Sought

The FTC and SEC jointly sought to halt the scheme, freeze the assets of Onpassive and its principals, and ultimately achieve as much restitution as possible for participants who paid fees into the scheme. These types of enforcement actions face the persistent challenge that in a successful pyramid scheme, the money paid by later participants has typically been paid out as commissions to earlier participants or spent by the scheme's operators — leaving less available for recovery than the total amount collected. The agencies worked to identify and freeze assets before they could be further dissipated, and to disgorge as much of the principals' ill-gotten gains as the available asset pool permitted.DOCUMENTED

Have documents relevant to this story? Reach us through our tips channel.