Reebok International has entered a settlement with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission that will see it paying out $25 million in refunds to U.S. customers who bought its toning footwear. Reebok claimed that the shoes helped tone and strengthen glutes by 28 percent more than conventional footwear and hamstrings and calves by 11 percent, but the company was accused of deceptive advertising. Serving as a warning to advertisers, it is described as the largest settlement of the kind.

Reebok maintained that it doesn't agree with the FTC's conclusions and that it stands behind its EasyTone technology, but decided to settle to avoid a long legal battle in the courts. The FTC said that the refunds will be made either directly or through a court-approved class action lawsuit. It is uncertain whether customers will get back the full amount they paid or just a portion. The settlement also precludes Reebok from claiming that its toning shoes and apparel will help tone or strengthen muscles to any degree, or have any health effects, unless the claims are true and backed by scientific evidence; and it is forbidden to misrepresent any kind of testing or research about the products.

David Vladeck, the director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, did note that Reebok pulled the questionable advertising sometime in 2010, in the middle of the agency's investigation. In addition, the company stopped selling the shoes in boxes that featured the claims, and stopped circulating any related merchandising materials. The agency did not conclude that Reebok broke any laws.

Reebok's first EasyTone shoes were sold in the U.S. in early 2009. The FTC noted that, in 2008, toning shoes in general had $17 million in sales in the U.S.; for 2009, that figure leapt to $145 million. They reached their high point in 2010, with revenues nearing $1 billion. Reebok and Skechers were the biggest sellers of the shoes, though many other brands joined the bandwagon. The FTC had no comment about claims against any brands besides Reebok, such as those pending against Skechers and New Balance.

Reebok was evidently singled out because it made a very specific statistical claim that was apparently based on insufficient evidence.