TheFBAMachine Inc.

The rebrand is the story

This entry exists mainly to record one pattern, because it is the pattern buyers are least equipped to spot.

According to the FTC, Bratislav Rozenfeld, who also goes by Steven Rozenfeld and Steven Rozen, ran this scheme from 2021 under the name Passive Scaling. When Passive Scaling failed to deliver what it promised and buyers began demanding refunds and filing lawsuits, he rebranded it as FBA Machine in 2023 and, per the FTC, reused the marketing materials with “AI-powered” language added.

Same operator, same offer, new name, and a clean search history for anyone checking the new one.

What was alleged

The FTC filed suit on 3 June 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, case number 2:24-cv-06635-JXN-LDW.

The complaint alleges the defendants used deceptive earnings claims to persuade buyers to pay tens of thousands of dollars each for what was presented as a sure-thing business opportunity powered by artificial intelligence, generating passive income from stores on platforms such as Amazon and Walmart. In reality, the complaint says, the promised gains never materialised and buyers were left with depleted accounts and credit card debt.

Alleged violations: Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, the Business Opportunity Rule (16 C.F.R. Part 437), and the Consumer Review Fairness Act.

The court issued an order temporarily halting the scheme and placing it under a receiver.

On the figures

The original complaint alleged the scheme had defrauded consumers of at least $11.1 million. By the FTC’s September 2024 announcement the figure stated was more than $15.9 million, and the eventual judgment was more than $15.7 million, partially suspended on claimed inability to pay and subject to reinstatement if those financial representations prove false.

Different figures at different stages of a case are normal as discovery proceeds. Both are recorded here rather than picking the largest.

Outcome

In July 2025 the FTC announced Rozenfeld will be permanently banned from selling business opportunities, barred from unsubstantiated earnings claims and from contract terms restricting honest reviews, and required to turn over financial accounts and property sale proceeds for consumer redress. His spouse, Amanda Peremen, was named a relief defendant and required to surrender funds she received, on the basis that she profited from the scheme without being directly involved in it.

What is not established

A complaint states the government’s case rather than a finding of fact, and a settlement resolves allegations without admission of wrongdoing.

We have not yet contacted the named parties for comment. When we do, the attempt and any response will appear on this entry.