FTC sues GovAssist and Entry over passport ads that allegedly impersonated the government

Estimated reading time: 11 minutes.

Key facts

• What happened: The Federal Trade Commission sued GovAssist LLC, Entry LLC and their owner, Scott Zuckerman, on October 22, 2026, alleging they used Google search ads and look-alike websites to make travelers think they were dealing with the U.S. government when buying passport services.
• The case: Federal Trade Commission v. GovAssist LLC, et al., No. 3:26-cv-01675, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico.
• The websites named: IVS.us, Entry.com and GovAssist.com, plus quickpassport.com, travelassist.us.com, usvisaconnection.com, tvspassports.com and invitationletter.com.
• The money involved: The FTC alleges the companies collected at least $40 million from more than 300,000 consumers in the three years before the suit, charging about $145 per customer on average and as much as $499 per application.
• What the FTC wants: A permanent court order, refunds or other money for consumers, and changes to or cancellation of customer contracts.
• Status: These are allegations. No court has ruled, the defendants had not responded publicly or in court when we reviewed the record, and there is no refund program yet.

In this article

• What the FTC says happened
• Who the parties are
• How getting a passport actually works
• How the ads and websites worked according to the complaint
• The price and speed promises
• The Trustpilot reviews
• The laws the FTC is using
• Timeline
• Who may be affected and what you can do now
• What remains unresolved
• What happens next
• Frequently asked questions

What the FTC says happened

Only one agency has authority to issue a U.S. passport: the State Department. Its application forms are free, and its fees are paid directly to the government.

According to the FTC's 31-page complaint, GovAssist and Entry bought paid Google ads that appeared at or near the top of search results for phrases such as "apply for a new passport," "get a new passport," "how can I renew my passport," "passport renewal" and "passport renewal online." The ads often appeared above the State Department's own site. Clicking them took people to application pages on IVS.us and Entry.com that, the FTC says, used flags, seals and official-sounding language to suggest a government connection.

The FTC alleges that customers paid for what they thought was a passport application, then found out they had bought a private paperwork service. In many cases, the complaint says, people received only a filled-in copy of a State Department form they could have downloaded for free, and still had to apply to the government themselves and pay the government's fees on top.

"Using paid Google search ads and landing pages to impersonate the government and target American travelers is illegal," Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in the agency's announcement.

What changed this week The FTC has asked a federal court to stop the alleged practices and order money returned to consumers. Filing a complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing; the court will decide the case.

Who the parties are

The Federal Trade Commission. The FTC is the federal agency that enforces laws against unfair and deceptive business practices. It can sue in federal court to stop practices it believes are illegal and to seek refunds for consumers. The Commission voted 2-0 to authorize this lawsuit, according to the FTC.

GovAssist LLC. A Puerto Rico limited liability company. The complaint lists registered addresses in San Juan and Carolina, Puerto Rico, and says it currently does business from an office in Guaynabo. The FTC alleges that GovAssist.com listed a K Street address in Washington, D.C., instead of its Puerto Rico operating address, which the agency says further suggested a federal connection. The FTC also notes that the GovAssist.com homepage describes "AI-powered document processing at scale," but says people who clicked the ads were sent to passport pages rather than that homepage.

Entry LLC. A Wyoming limited liability company that, according to the complaint, shares GovAssist's San Juan address and Guaynabo office. The complaint says Zuckerman has described GovAssist as a "doing business as" name of Entry. The FTC treats the two companies as a "common enterprise," a legal term meaning that companies sharing ownership, staff, offices and money can each be held responsible for what the group did.

Scott Zuckerman. The complaint describes him as the sole member and 100% owner of both companies, an authorized signer on their bank and merchant accounts, and a resident of Puerto Rico. The FTC sued him personally and as an officer of both companies. The FTC says he ran this business while already under an FTC order from a prior, unrelated case, Support King LLC, which involved stalkerware (apps that secretly monitor another person's phone) and ended with an administrative order addressing data privacy.

Google and Trustpilot. Neither is a defendant. Google is the search engine where the ads ran. Trustpilot is an online review platform. The complaint says Trustpilot identified and removed fake reviews of the defendants' sites.

How getting a passport actually works

Understanding the official process explains why the FTC says the defendants' promises could not be true. The complaint summarizes State Department guidance this way:

• First-time passports. Adults must apply in person at an acceptance facility, such as a post office, court or library. They bring a free State Department form, proof of citizenship, photo ID and a passport photo. They pay a $130 application fee to the State Department and a $35 acceptance fee. Routine processing typically takes eight to ten weeks in total, including mailing.
• Faster options. Expedited service costs an extra $60 and takes two to three weeks, not counting mail. Urgent and life-or-death emergency appointments exist for people traveling within roughly two to three weeks or facing a family emergency abroad.
• Online renewal. Some people can renew online. The form is free, takes about 10 minutes, and costs the $130 government fee. The only official place to renew online is opr.travel.state.gov, and applicants must sign and submit the renewal themselves.
• Couriers. Private couriers can register with the State Department to drop off applications and pick up passports. The State Department says using a courier will not get a passport faster than applying directly. The FTC says the defendants are not registered couriers and have no connection to the State Department.

The complaint also notes that the State Department warns people to avoid unofficial renewal sites and to check that a site ends in .gov, even if a company has "Gov" in its name.

How the ads and websites worked according to the complaint

These are the FTC's allegations, supported by screenshots in the complaint. The defendants have not responded in court.

1. The search ad. The ads used stock images of passports and flags, wording matching the State Department's own search listing (both used "Renew Your Passport Online"), links like "Apply for Passport Online," and a badge reading "IVS" with the web address apply.ivs.us. The FTC argues "IVS" recalls "INS," the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, and that a .us address suggests government ties. One ad, captured September 16, 2026, said "Get your passport delivered in as little as 3 days."
2. The disclaimer. Since at least April 2026, some ads included the words "Not a government website." The FTC says that line appeared in smaller black type above larger, eye-catching blue headlines such as "US Passport Online 2026."
3. The landing page. People who clicked were sent straight to passport application pages showing a chart listing the "Issuing Agency" as "U.S. Department of State," an American flag seal beside a Statue of Liberty image, and a large blue "Get My Passport" button. Disclaimers on these pages, the FTC says, were placed in footers, in small type or hard-to-read colors.
4. After payment. A confirmation screen said "Your passport application has been submitted," although nothing had been sent to the State Department. Customers were then asked for "a fresh photo of your face taken now," and sent to a "My Passport" portal stating that their application "has been submitted for processing" and that "your passport will be mailed to this address." The FTC says these pages had no disclaimers.

The FTC also points to the names themselves: "Gov" in GovAssist, ".us" in IVS.us, and "Entry," which it says is reminiscent of Global Entry, a U.S. Customs and Border Protection program.

A disclaimer is not automatically a defense The FTC's position is that small or hidden "not a government website" notices do not cure an overall impression of government affiliation. The defendants may argue their disclosures were adequate. A court has not decided.

The price and speed promises

Price. The complaint says Entry.com advertised services "starting at $89" in April 2026, but the lowest tier on the application pages was $119 plus a $29 shipping fee, or $148. Other tiers were $169, $349 and $499 in service fees. A small gray note said the State Department's $165 fee for a new passport must be paid separately, and the FTC says some customers did not understand they would have to pay again. It also notes the $169 tier sat close to the government's $165 total.

Speed. The sites offered delivery in 3 to 6 weeks, 6 to 10 business days, or 3 to 4 business days, and promised "priority queue placement" and "white-glove handling." The FTC says the two fastest promises were impossible because the quickest official option is about 14 days and only in specific circumstances not available through third parties. At checkout, the complaint says, the sites estimated 31 to 49 days to delivery, yet in some cases customers received only application forms 23 days after paying. Even if they then applied in person that day, the FTC says, the State Department's standard eight-to-ten-week process would put a passport about a month past the estimate.

The FTC alleges that no customer got a passport without taking further steps of their own, that customers paid at least twice what applying directly would have cost, and that some missed planned trips.

The Trustpilot reviews

The FTC says Entry.com displayed an "Excellent" rating "Based on 11,000+ reviews" on Trustpilot in May 2026, alongside five-star quotes presented as typical. According to the complaint, Trustpilot independently identified hundreds of the defendants' positive reviews as fabricated, using review content, IP addresses, device data and location, and removed them. Trustpilot notified the defendants in May 2025 that it had found and removed abnormally high numbers of fake reviews, and the FTC says they did not dispute it.

The laws the FTC is using

The complaint has five counts:

• Counts I to III, FTC Act Section 5. This federal law bans "unfair or deceptive acts or practices." The FTC alleges three kinds of deception: posing as or implying affiliation with the government (Count I), false claims about passport delivery, process and price (Count II), and presenting fabricated reviews as real (Count III).
• Count IV, the Impersonation Rule. The FTC's Trade Regulation Rule on Impersonation of Government and Businesses took effect on April 1, 2024. It bans materially and falsely posing as a government entity or misrepresenting affiliation with one. "Materially" means likely to affect a person's choices. Rule violations matter because the FTC Act lets a court order refunds and contract cancellations for them. This count covers conduct on or after April 1, 2024.
• Count V, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Better known for bank privacy rules, Section 521 of this 1999 law also bans using false statements to get someone's financial account information. The FTC says the defendants used their misrepresentations to obtain customers' payment details.

What the FTC is asking the court to order A permanent injunction, money for consumers including refunds and changes to or cancellation of contracts, and any other relief the court finds proper. No dollar amount has been ordered.

According to a client alert from the law firm BakerHostetler, the FTC is separately seeking public comment on whether to update the Impersonation Rule, including whether platforms should do more to keep impersonation ads from being shown.

Timeline

Who may be affected and what you can do now

The FTC's figures point to more than 300,000 customers in the three years before the suit. You may have used these services if you paid IVS.us, Entry.com, GovAssist.com or one of the other listed sites for passport or visa help, especially after clicking a sponsored search result.

There is no claim form or refund program. Refunds would come only if the court orders them or the parties settle, and any distribution process would be announced at that time. The complaint says many customers sought refunds or started chargebacks after realizing they had not applied with the government. The FTC asks people to report fraud and bad business practices at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

For official passport services, the FTC's complaint points to travel.state.gov, and to opr.travel.state.gov for online renewal.

For cases you can act on now, see our list of class action cases you can join.

What remains unresolved

• The defendants' side. We found no public response from GovAssist, Entry or Zuckerman, and no court filing by them.
• The judge and schedule. The public materials we reviewed did not identify an assigned judge or hearing date.
• Whether temporary relief is sought. The complaint asks for permanent relief. We did not see a request for an immediate temporary restraining order in the materials reviewed.
• Ad status today. We did not independently test whether the ads or sites look the same now.
• The prior order. The FTC says Zuckerman was under a prior FTC order. The complaint does not bring a separate claim for violating that order.

This article is for information only and is not legal advice. The FTC's allegations have not been proven in court.

What happens next

The defendants will be served and given time to answer or move to dismiss. The case could end in a negotiated court order, a ruling after litigation, or a trial. If money is recovered, the court order or settlement would set how eligible customers are identified and paid. We will update this story as the case moves forward.

Frequently asked questions

What is the FTC GovAssist lawsuit about?

The FTC says GovAssist, Entry and owner Scott Zuckerman used Google ads and official-looking websites to make passport applicants think they were dealing with the U.S. government, then overcharged them for services that did not deliver passports as promised.

Are IVS.us and Entry.com government websites?

No. The FTC says neither the companies nor their sites are part of or affiliated with the State Department. Official passport information is at travel.state.gov, and online renewal is only at opr.travel.state.gov.

Can I get a refund from GovAssist or Entry?

Not through this case yet. Refunds would depend on a court order or settlement, and any refund process would be announced then. You can report your experience at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.

How much did customers pay?

The FTC says the average charge was about $145, the highest tier was $499, and the advertised "$89" starting price was not available. Customers also had to pay the State Department's own fees separately.

Can a private company speed up my passport?

The complaint says the State Department's fastest service is about 14 days in specific circumstances and that third-party help does not speed up government processing. Registered couriers can deliver applications but cannot make processing faster.

Who is Scott Zuckerman?

He is the owner and sole member of GovAssist and Entry, according to the FTC. The agency says he was already under an FTC order from an earlier case, Support King LLC, involving stalkerware.