Paying taxes won't make Amway a legitimate business house

Paying taxes won't make Amway a legitimate business house
It seems that some people think that paying taxes to the government makes their business legitimate. They are not doing a favour to the country. By paying taxes they are just fulfilling their duty.
Many GoldQuest independent owners openly claimed that they have been paying income tax and their business was legitimate. Once Corporate Frauds Watch filed criminal cases against them and their bosses, they realised that it was a crime. Now a sizable number of them are facing criminal cases.
Now Amway adherents claim that they have been paying taxes to the government whichever country they are in. In fact, I have established earlier that no IBO gives a receipt to any retail customer if he has one. That means he is not paying sales tax to the government.
The question is whether their business model is legal or not. Amway India is trying its best to postpone the trial and also trying to bring undue influence on the bureaucrats and others. Still, there are a number of honest people in India and it is wrong on the part of Amay to think it could buy off everybody.
Now, simply go to Amway India website, which tells that a member could earn Rs. 56, 500 every month if he could enrol 102 members or complete one leg. That itself is a money circulation scheme and it was proved in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. When we are talking of legitimacy of the business, these crooks talk of something else all the time.
The government officer I have referred to in my earlier blog is the project director of rural development in a district in Andhra Pradesh who told me that rural people became cleverer and they do not fall for this type of money circulation schemes.

One million defrauded by Amway mob
Shyam
It is important for your free-thinking readers to be aware that 'Amway UK Ltd' is a 'privately-controlled limited-liability commercial-company' which has never declared an annual trading profit, or paid UK corporation tax, since its creation in the early 1970s.
Recently, the following, irrefutable facts have all become public knowledge: - For 35 years, 'Amway UK Ltd.' has been secretly kept afloat by regular multi-million dollar cash injections from overseas. - 'Amway UK Ltd.' has secretly produced a near 100% overall loss rate for its non-salaried commission agents (many of whom have have been victims of a secondary advanced fee fraud which itself has secretly generated hundreds of millions of dollars for an handful of racketeers in the USA), because the so-called 'Proven Business Plan' which the company operated for 35 years is a counterfeit, maliciously designed to produce insufficient external revenue. - 'Amway UK Ltd.' survived a public interest petition (filed by the UK Minister for Business Enterprises and Regulatory Reform) to be closed under UK trading schemes and lottery regulations, by promising a UK High Court Judge that (amongst other things) it would publish annually the derisory average (gross) monthly income payments to its non-salaried commission agents, which, in fact, represent net-loss payments. - The annual net-loss payments were posted on 'Amway UK's' Website at the beginning of this week.
The document was arbitrarily defined as an 'Earnings Disclosure.' The figures appear in a typically complex, and unverified, format which are (effectively) impossible for a casual observer to comprehend. - Although 'Amway UK Ltd.' published a blanket assurance as to the validity of its published 'Earnings Disclosure,' no clear explanation was offered as to how the information the document contained was obtained or by whom it was verified. One company official has subsequently stated that : 'Amway's Earnings Disclosure Statement must be accurate, because it was compiled by a council comprising lawyers.' (She was, in fact, referring to 'Amway UK's' own lawyers) - The corporate officers of 'Amway UK' now arbitrarily define the company's non-salaried commission agents in the UK using 3 reality-inverting categories: 'Retail Consultants'; 'Certified Retail Consultants' ; 'Business consultants.' - 'Amway UK Ltd.' currently claims almost
'10 000 Retail Consultants', but of these, less than 50% are claimed to have received any form of payment (arbitrarily defined as 'Customer Volume Rebate') during the previous 12 months. Of the 4000 or so who have been declared to have received at least one monthly income payment from 'Amway UK' during the previous 12 months, the average (gross) payment was just £43.
However, if this already pathetic figure is recalculated to include all persons in this category (and not just those claimed to have received at least one monthly payment), then the real average monthly income figure is truly derisory. - When the document first appeared, no where in 'Amway's' annual 'Earnings Disclosure' was it clearly explained that all the figures it contained were gross payments (i.e. before operating expenses were deducted). - 'Amway UK' currently declares '3 211 Certified Retail Consultants' .
However, no clear explanation was offered as to what is the difference between this category and the first category. Of these persons, around 60% are declared to have received at least one monthly payment from 'Amway UK' averaging only £126. Again, if this figure is recalculated to include all persons in this category, then the real average (gross) monthly payment is pathetic. - 'Amway UK' currently claims only 36 persons arbitrarily defined as 'Business Consultants' (i.e. persons occupying positons known as 'Pin Levels' in the pyramid). This means that, according to 'Amway's' own unverified figures, 60 so-called 'Successful Amway Businesses' have, in fact , vanished in the UK during the previous 12 months, whilst only 3 new 'Business Consultants' were created. - After 35 years, only one UK 'Diamond' couple are claimed to have entered the 'Amway' Utopia. - To date, more than one million individuals in the UK have been defrauded by the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob.


A day of coincidences for the Amway accused
November 12 could be described as the Day of Coincidences. Mr William Pinckney, the managing director of Amway India and other accused in the money circulation scheme criminal case did not attend the court. The Magistrate who became serious when they did not attend the court last time, surprisingly has taken leave of absence. It is not clear whether the magistrate has taken leave knowing that the accused who are currently out of the State or country might not attend the trial or the accused did not attend the court knowing that the magistrate went on leave.
Meanwhile, the Corporate Frauds Watch filed an implead petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the writ petition filed by Amway India appealing the State's highest court to quash the Government Order which restrained it from advertising in the media. The visibly shaken counsels of Amway India pleaded the Division Bench to refer the writ petition to a larger bench.
The Division Bench happilyagreed to refer the writ petition to a larger bench. Anyway, it is a blessing in disguise for Corporate Frauds Watch as it got an opportunity to present their case before a larger bench.
Meanwhile, the spineless bureaucrats and the police remain mute spectators as the Amway India continues its advertisement spree.
A brighter point is the CID police have agreed in principle to include the names of other distributors of Amway in the money circulation scheme after some more investigation.


Apple FMCG business model is illegal: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court in its wonderful judgement wayback in 2005 has given a blow to the business of Apple FMCG Marketing (Pvt) Ltd. This is introduction. Another judgement of the same High Court on V-Can Network would appear later.
Apple FMCG Marketing (Pvt) Ltd filed writ petitions No. 22674 and 27411 of 2004 in the Madras High Court in the State of Tamil Nadu. And the Madras High Court delivered its judgement on January 7, 2005 giving a blow to its business model. Judge A K Rajan delivering his judgment held that "It is true that several companies including multinational companies carry on the business of the 'Multilevel Marketing' and it is also true that the Executive and the law enforcing authorities keep a blind eye on such activities. This also does not make an illegal act legal. It is alwlays a fact that the law enforcing authroitiey would try to close the table only after the horse had escaped." (Para 22).
In this part of India, people are gullible and fall an easy prey to the tall promises made through the media. That was the reason why the lottery tickets were sold in large numbers in the State. Many companies want to exploit this attitude of people and float many schemes and lure the people to join the schemes. The petitioner (Apple FMCG) is not entitled for direction for prohibiting the authorities from ;keeping surveillance over any meeting. Sec 7 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act confers the right on the police officer to enter any premises, where has got a reason to suspect that the premises are being used for purposes connected with the promotion of conduct of any prize chit or money circulation scheme in contravention of the provision of the Act. (Para 33).

An unoriginal scripted defence by Amway apologists
Shyam
Again, one has to laugh at the unoriginal, scripted defence of 'Amway' apologists.
No matter how much he squawks his complete innocence, Lord Haw Haw Steadson is, self-evidently, the grotesque, Internet manifestation of the billionaire 'Amway' bosses' centrally-controlled, mis-information dispersal system. At all times, the 'Nazi'-style filth who operate this system are attempting to stop 'Amway' victims, and casual observers, from using their critical, and evaluative, faculties. In reality, the 'Amway' bosses live in fear and dread of millions of their victims around the world who could all potentially file criminal complaints against them with law enforcement agencies. The 'Amway' mis-information sytem is, thus, an obvious obstruction of justice and a violation of the US federal Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970.
Sadly, for Lord Haw Haw Steadson, the recent publication of the latest net-loss payments to 'Amway' victims in the UK, arbitrarily (and laughably) defined as an 'Earnings Disclosure,' reveals many more of the thought-stopping techniques used by the 'Amway' mob. Essentially the same trick is pulled by all financial charlatans. Namely, present something that on casual inspection seems really simple to follow and beneficial to participants, which then gradually becomes so complex that, eventually, it is totally impossible to understand, but steadfastlty pretend that anyone who can't understand it must be stupid, financially illiterate, etc.
Whilst 'Amway' vicims and casual observers remain focused on the fancy hocus-pocus parrotted by 'Amway' apologists, they will never twig what is actually happening. Yet, the underlying explanation of the primary 'Amway' fraud is blindingly obvious. The centrally-controlled price and quality of the 'Amway' products renders them (effectively) unsaleable to outsiders. Thus, the 'Amway Business Opportunity' is a premeditated closed-market swindle, because it has been maliciously designed to produce insufficient external revenue to generate an overall material benefit for the overwhelming majority of its contributing participants. The tiny few who make profits in 'Amway,' are merely schills who are there to attract more victims into the trap.
Bernie Madoff also ran a premeditated closed-market swindle using schills, but he steadfastly pretended that he was an infallible financial expert who was operating 'the world's 'largest hedge fund.'
If anyone asked Madoff how he achieved his unequalled success in the markets, his standard reply was that he followed 'Split Strike Conversion Strategy'. Most people hadn't a clue what Madoff was talking about, but they didn't want to admit their ignorance. In general, the more educated enquirers were: the easier they were to fool. As we all know now, Madoff's arrogant explanations were complex and meaningless drivel designed to shut down the critical, and evaluative, faculties of persons who might file criminal complaints against him.
Sadly, Bernie Madoff avoided prison for 20 years.


Madras High Court finds Apple FMCG business model illegal
Let us have a look at the second part of the judgement of the Madras High Court.

When a person purchases any product from the company, he has to make an application which contains the price list of Rs. 550 Plan and Rs. 1000 Plan and others. It contains six products namely Nutrimalt, coffee, tea soap, shampoo and pickles. The maximum retail price and the distributor's price are also given. The sum of maximum retail price of all these six products comes to Rs. 497. The total amount for which it is sold to the distributors is Rs. 372.
Admittedly, for these products, the so-called distributor pays a sum of Rs. 550 whereas the distributor's price is only Rs. 372. Therefore Rs. 178 is charged extra from the distributors. This amount, the distributor pays to the company because he is made to believe that when he sells these goods to others and enrol others in the scheme, he gets commission from the petitioner company. Such commission depends upon the total volume of business that he generates by enrolling new distributors, it progresses like a chain; the amount of commission depends on the subsequent 'distributors' who is made to join by the petitioner (Apple FMCG) or a purchaser through him. The promise of the possible commission is the reason for one's enrolment. The form requires to be filled up with three 'distributors' names through whom the new entrant get into the scheme and their placement.
One has to purchase one or more starter kits by paying the money as stated above; he must sell the product to two other persons and get their application form filled up and sent to the company; those two persons in turn have to purchase starter kits from the company and in turn they must sell and enroll two other persons each. Each new entrant shall purchase the starter kit from the company and in turn sell enrol two other persons. Like this, every new purchase from whom the new entrant purchases shall enter the three names of his predecessors in the chain. Like this the chain progresses. The three names filled up by each and every new distributor depending upon upon the rank of placement and volume of the business, everyone in the chain gets the commission. If a person gets started with five starter kits, he will sell it to ten persons and that ten will become twenty at the next stage and twenty will become forty and so on. When it goes up to ten stages in this manner, the person who sold first will get a commission.
This is the business model of Apple FMCG which the Madras High Court held illegal. A glance at reveals that it is no different from Amway India's business model. The Order of the Madras High Court would appear later.