Network marketing has opened the door to success for millions of Americans. No matter what your previous background, financial position or social status may have been, it gave you the chance to soar with the eagles – until now. But, if some people have their way, that door may soon slam shut, and many network marketers who have labored long and hard to build a flourishing business may see the fruits of their labor destroyed.

And where is this threat to network marketing coming from?

Surprisingly, it is not some new action by the Food and Drug Administration or the Federal Trade Commission. Nor is it some new law passed by Congress or dictate from State government. In fact, it doesn’t even originate on our shores.

No, the threat comes from people thousands of miles away and has received virtually no attention here at home. But it is nonetheless real. It comes in the form of a draconian set of regulations recently enacted by the European Union.

How, you might well ask, could something being done in Europe have such a devastating potential here at home? After all, you might argue, we didn’t elect anyone over there. They have no authority over us. What they do is their business. You might argue those points, but on the last one, you would be wrong – dangerously wrong!

But what exactly do these European rules do, and why should we be concerned? The answer lies in the often murky arena of world trade and how it is regulated.

In 1995, the United States, along with 134 other nations entered into the World Trade Organization Agreement, or WTO as it is called. The ostensible purpose of the WTO was to make trade between nations easier by eliminating barriers to commerce and simplifying trade rules. The fact that the original document establishing the WTO ran more than 22,000 pages should have been a hint that the reality of the treaty would be far different from its intent.

Buried in the 22,000-page mass of bureaucratic jargon that created the WTO was a seemingly innocuous provision that required all member nations to have consistent regulations governing commerce. This was to be achieved through a process called “harmonization.” The reason for seeking consistency was that many nations were using their regulations to create what were called “non-tariff barriers” so as to gain an unfair advantage in international trade. If a country failed to “harmonize” its regulations and another country felt it put them at a competitive disadvantage, they could go to a WTO Dispute Resolution Panel and force a change.

It all sounded very high-minded and efficient. But there was more to the story.

These Dispute Resolution Panels are made up of faceless WTO bureaucrats and meet in strict secrecy. Neither the media nor the public is permitted to attend their sessions. Their decisions have the force of law in member-nations and must be enforced. What is truly astonishing, though, is that there is no appeal from these decisions. Once the WTO bureaucrats issue a fiat, the member-nation must comply — period!

You might think it couldn’t happen here. The WTO couldn’t force the U.S. to alter a law passed by Congress or a rule enacted by a federal agency. As with their lack of authority, you might think that, but again, you would be wrong – dangerously wrong!

Over the past several years, U.S. laws on subjects ranging from air pollution to protecting endangered species have been overturned as a result of WTO Dispute Resolution Panel decisions. In every case WE HAD NO CHOICE!

For instance, when the U.S. imposed regulations on tuna fishing boats operating in our waters requiring that they have nets that would not trap tuna, foreign countries operating some of the fleets complained to the WTO. They ordered us to change the rules, and we did.

When Venezuelan refiners complained to the WTO that cleaning up their gasoline to meet U.S. air pollution standards was too expensive, and we were forced to give them an exemption.

When foreign shrimp fishing boats operating in the Gulf of Mexico complained that our rules on protecting endangered sea turtles discriminated against them, the WTO agreed and we had to give them an exemption as well.

How does all this affect network marketing?

In the United States, network marketers derive anywhere from 40% to 60% of their income from the sale of vitamins, minerals and other dietary supplements. Indeed, for many network marketers, sales of these products provide a guaranteed minimum level of sales required to qualify for additional incentives and bonuses under many commission structures. But if the EU rules were applied in the United States, such sales would be prohibited – that’s right, prohibited!

What are they and why are they being issued?

The move to ban supplement sales came out of Big Pharma’s concern over inroads by dietary supplements in key markets. Herbal remedies like St. John’s Wort, Melatonin and Red Rice Yeast were giving their pharmaceutical competitors a run for their money. More and more Baby Boomers were looking to vitamins, minerals and other products to improve their health, further shrinking the market for drugs. Big Pharma wanted them gone, and gone now!

Their first attempt was through another international body, the Codex Alimentarius, or simply, Codex, a multi-national commission governed by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Its purpose is to standardize medical and health regulations among nations. The standards proposed by the Codex would have made all dietary supplements, including vitamins and minerals prescription items, limited their potency and prohibited all health claims. A last-minute barrage of consumer activism kept the rule from being passed, but Big Pharma was not about to be denied. They turned to the EU’s bureaucrats to do their dirty work.

In part two of “What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You,” learn what the European Union’s bureaucrats came up with, and why it endangers your business.