US Federal

Does the FTC have authority to seek monetary relief for consumers harmed by fraud?

2021
AMG decision year
$0
FTC restitution post-AMG
§ 45(a)
Core FTC authority
Equitable relie
Permitted remedies
The Short Answer

Yes, the FTC has authority to seek monetary relief for consumers harmed by fraud under certain conditions, but that authority was significantly limited by the Supreme Court's 2021 decision in AMG Capital Management v. FTC.

What the Law Says

The Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act) gives the FTC broad authority to prevent unfair or deceptive acts or practices—but its power to obtain money for harmed consumers has been interpreted narrowly by courts.

Section 45(a) of the FTC Act declares it 'unlawful' for any person to use 'unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.' The Commission may bring enforcement actions in federal court under Section 45(b), but the statute does not explicitly authorize monetary remedies like restitution or disgorgement.

Instead, Section 45(l) authorizes the FTC to seek 'such relief as the court finds necessary to redress injury to consumers,' but only 'in proper cases' and 'pursuant to the provisions of section 53(b).' That section permits the FTC to seek 'a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction'—and 'a permanent injunction'—but says nothing about monetary awards.

Statutory Text

Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful.

15 U.S.C. § 45(a) — Unfair methods of competition unlawful; prevention by Commission
Statutory Text

In proper cases the Commission may seek, and after proper proof, the court may issue, a permanent injunction.

15 U.S.C. § 45(b) — Unfair methods of competition unlawful; prevention by Commission

What Courts Have Said

The Supreme Court unanimously held in AMG Capital Management v. FTC that Section 13(b) of the FTC Act does not authorize the Commission to seek equitable monetary relief such as restitution or disgorgement.

AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission
U.S. Supreme Court · 2021

The Court ruled 9–0 that Section 13(b)’s authorization of 'injunctive relief' does not include monetary awards, overturning decades of lower-court precedent that had allowed the FTC to routinely obtain billions in consumer redress.

What to Do

1

If you’re a consumer harmed by fraud: File a complaint with the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

2

If you’re a business facing an FTC action: Consult counsel immediately—monetary demands based solely on Section 13(b) are no longer legally supportable.

3

For ongoing redress: The FTC must now rely on administrative proceedings (under Section 5) followed by federal court enforcement of cease-and-desist orders—which may allow monetary relief if expressly authorized by the order and consistent with due process.

4

Monitor proposed legislation: Congress has considered bills (e.g., the AMG Act) to restore the FTC’s ability to seek monetary relief directly in court.

Sources

Not legal advice. This article is general information based on publicly available sources, written for educational purposes. Laws change and individual situations vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything you read here. Last reviewed: 2026-06-08.