Delaware House Bill 162 did not advance after industry and lawmaker engagement. DSA framed the outcome as unfinished work on stronger consumer protection that still distinguishes ethical direct selling from unlawful pyramid schemes.
What the bill would have required According to Direct Selling News (Jul 8, 2026), the bill as opposed by the industry included:
- Disclosure mandates not seen anywhere else in the US
- A three-month right of rescission, far longer than the usual three-day rule
- A 90% inventory buyback requirement with no time limit
- Coverage of every company regardless of size, structure, or compliance history
- No recognition of the industry's existing self-regulation
How it got here The Delaware House passed the bill 27 to 11 in June 2025. DSA then led a coalition of companies and distributors that worked with the Delaware Senate on amendments. Several DSA member companies helped shape changes to the enforcement framework, and the disclosure rules were updated for electronic business. DSA said it still had significant concerns, mainly that the bill tied compensation to recruitment rather than retail product sales. The bill then failed to advance from committee.
DSA also pointed to lawmakers' recognition that member companies follow the DSA Code of Ethics and the Direct Selling Self-Regulatory Council. DSA expects to return to the topic in the next legislative session.
Why party plan should watch this Party-plan brands should watch state disclosure, rescission, and buyback proposals. They often land hardest on show-and-hostess models with inventory and booking cycles. A three-month rescission window, for example, would reach well past a typical show and its follow-up orders. Know how your current return and buyback policy reads before a similar bill shows up in your state.
Sources