Is it legal to remove negative reviews?

The short version, method by method

The rest of this guide explains each row.

What the FTC's review rule bans

The Trade Regulation Rule on Consumer Reviews and Testimonials took effect on October 21, 2024. Section 465.7 is headed "Review suppression". It makes it a violation for anyone to use:

• an unfounded or groundless legal threat
• a physical threat
• intimidation
• a public false accusation, made knowing it is false or with reckless disregard for the truth

in an attempt to stop a review being written or to cause a review to be removed.

The same section bans a business from hiding negative reviews on its own website while presenting the rest as representative. It lists fair reasons to hold a review back, such as personal information, abuse or a reasonable belief that the review is fake. Those reasons must apply to every review regardless of sentiment.

Each violation can carry a civil penalty of up to $53,088.

What the rule leaves alone

The FTC's questions and answers on the rule say it does not stop a business from asking a platform to remove a review. The platform has its own guidelines and makes its own decision. That is the legal footing for every legitimate removal service, and for a business that flags on its own. Our page on reporting Google reviews that break a policy shows how that works on Google.

The guidance also says the rule applies to those who act for a business, and it names reputation management companies. A vendor's methods are your legal risk as well as theirs.

The law on gag clauses

The Consumer Review Fairness Act deals with contracts. It voids any term in a form contract that bars a customer from reviewing the business, fines them for it, or takes ownership of what they write. Offering a contract with such a term is itself a violation. The FTC and state attorneys general enforce it.

So a clause such as "the customer agrees not to post negative reviews" protects nobody. It is void, and using it is unlawful. Our guide to the Consumer Review Fairness Act covers what the Act allows and what it does not.

Why paying the reviewer is the dangerous shortcut

In July 2025 the FTC announced a case against the telehealth company NextMed. It said the company "suppressed negative reviews on Trustpilot" in three ways: selectively challenging critical reviews, offering Amazon gift cards to consumers to remove or change negative reviews, and making refunds depend on consumers agreeing to remove reviews. The final order, in December 2025, included a payment of $150,000.

Trustpilot's own rules point the same way. Its Guidelines for Businesses ban incentives for writing or editing reviews and say a business must never pressure or threaten a reviewer to write, edit or delete a review. Its Action We Take policy treats offers tied to edits or removal as misuse.

The safe order of events is simple. Fix the customer's problem because it needs fixing. Reply in public. Say nothing about the review. Some customers update it on their own.

Can you pay Trustpilot?

No. Trustpilot does not sell removal. Any business with a claimed profile can flag for free. Trustpilot says it treats all reviews equally whether or not the business subscribes to a paid plan, and its detection technology does not consider plan status.

A vendor that claims a paid relationship with Trustpilot, or a contact inside it, is describing something Trustpilot says does not exist. Our guide on spotting a removal scam lists this among the warning signs.

When the law can remove a review

Defamation law applies to a false statement of fact that harms a reputation. Opinions, even harsh ones, are generally protected. A review site is usually not liable for what its users write, under Section 230. So a lawsuit is normally against the reviewer, not the platform.

That route is slow and costly, and it fits few reviews. Yelp, for one, wants a court order for a defamation claim. Our guides to Yelp, Glassdoor and other review sites quote each site's own rules. Our guide on whether you can sue over a bad review covers when it makes sense, and our page on flagging or a lawyer compares the two routes.

What this means for health brands

Health brands carry one more legal limit. A public reply that confirms someone is a patient can be a disclosure of protected health information. HHS settled a case over exactly that in 2023. Our reply guide covers the wording.

Regulators also read these profiles. The NextMed case began with a GLP-1 telehealth brand's Trustpilot conduct. The GLP-1 page sets the alleged conduct next to the compliant alternative.

How we stay inside these rules

We flag only reviews that break one of Trustpilot's five flagging reasons, through the official tool in your account, at a slow pace, across star ratings. We do not contact reviewers, pay anyone, draft threats or write reviews. The main Trustpilot review removal page explains the process, and the free audit shows which of your reviews qualify.

We do this work for clients through our Trustpilot review removal service, and the price per removed review is published.

A reputation management company may sell more than removal, so ask which parts it does.

This guide is general information, not legal advice.