According to the Black Market and Certain Other Social Offenses and Punishment Act, 2032, no businessperson can take more than 20 percent of profit as per the custom of goods and trade. Taking more profit automatically attracts the Black Market Act.

 And, for the crime of black market, the businessman can be punished with imprisonment up to one year or a fine of up to 250,000 rupees or both. But the networking companies opened in the name of direct sale of goods have taken up to 42 percent of the profit from the sale of goods to the general public. 

According to Rajan Poudel, Director General of Commercial Supply and Consumer Protection Department, it is mentioned that 42 percent profit can be taken from the purchase in the direct sale of goods. But by saying that the regulation states that they can take profit up to 42 percent of sales, they are thinking of making more profit by amending the law, regulation and guidelines. 

'On the one hand, 42 percent profit has been kept against the black market law. On top of that, when it is up to 42 percent of the selling price, consumers are even more cheated," said an official of the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supply. There is a demand to change the law after the rules and guidelines conflict.' 

Due to pressure from businessmen, the ministry is collecting suggestions to amend the law on direct sale of goods. According to the decision of the secretary level dated 8th November 2081, suggestions are being collected for the timely amendment of the laws (laws, rules, guidelines and instructions) related to direct sale of goods. For that, a 5-member suggestion collection committee has been formed under the coordination of Ministry Deputy Secretary Nimesh Mishra.  Balram Subedi has been nominated as an expert on behalf of businessmen in the

committee. Subedi is the director of U-Turn International Pvt. It is alleged that U-Turn is conducting a campaign in the village and networking. However, experts say that if Subedi, the owner of U-Turn, is appointed as an expert, the suggestion will be in favor of the businessmen. 

The ministry had given a mandate till October 26 to submit the suggestions. The time was extended by 15 days. The Commercial Supply and Consumer Protection Department has said that preparations are being made to submit the suggestion to the Ministry in the next two to three days. The subject of the amendment of the Act was in the budget of the current financial year. The rules and guidelines about the profits taken by businessmen conflicted. Now the profit is given on the basis of the purchase price," said Paudel, director general of the department, "but the businessmen have asked for a profit of up to 42 percent on the basis of sales. But the department purchase price 

is in favor.'

Along with this, e-commerce bill has also been made. Director General Paudel said that after the e-commerce Act, the relevance of the Direct Sale of Goods Act, software and regulation issues have also been included. Paudel said that the committee consisting of 3 members from the department will submit suggestions in two to three days. "Suggestions have come from businessmen and consumer rights activists. "I have received information that a report with suggestions will be submitted to the secretary in the next few days," Director General Paudel said, "After that, he will discuss the issues raised and proceed." 

 Now 24 companies have got permission in the name of direct sale of goods. Most companies are networking in a pyramid style. They are more concentrated outside along the valley. They are the ones who have been pressuring that profit should be made in the selling price by amending the law. Madhav Timilsina, President of the Consumer Rights Research Forum, says that the law should be repealed as the networking business is running under the guise of direct sale of

goods. All the committees that should be active according to the law are inactive. Even though there is fraud everywhere, there is no regulation,' he said, 'now the amendment is being prepared under the pressure of the ministry, that is also in favor of the businessmen.' 

According to Timilsina, the department has been publishing information time and time again and asking not to network. Point 11 of the 20-point directive issued on January 26, 2079 states, "Direct sale of goods or networking or 

Any other action  Not to perform any job responsibility or role as a direct or indirect branch or operation of any

ing foreign company.

Complete ban on direct or indirect branches or operations of foreign companies. 

But he has been working against his own instructions. An example of this is a renewal certificate. 

Department at the time of renewing the company, the trademark and certificate of origin of the goods to be sold and distributed is mandatory  was asked to submit a

. Although the businessman could not submit the trademark and certificate of origin, he renewed it against his own instructions by calling it 'Grace Mark'. President Timilsina says that this has raised doubts about the relationship between the business department and the ministry. 

Many foreign goods are being sold in the name of Swadeshi. Agents of foreign companies are also licensed. In the name of the Direct Sale of Goods Act, 2074 and the Direct Sale of Goods Regulations, 2076, licenses have been given to agents of foreign companies,' said Timilsina, 'the renewal has also been done on the basis of fraud.' He said that after the coming of the Act, there is no justification for the Direct Sale of Goods Act. According to the Black Market Act, more than 20 percent profit cannot be taken, so it cannot be taken more than that. The forum has also suggested 9 points regarding the amendment of the Act. Acts, rules and guidelines on direct selling of goods are inconsistent and conflicting with each other. It seems that the provisions made by the Act have been arranged in the rules in a more professional way,'' the suggestion says, 'It seems that the provisions of the rules have been arranged in the guidelines in a way that is more relaxed. Good regulation, clean market and consumer welfare cannot be expected from laws issued only for commercial interests. It seems that the law itself needs to be reviewed.'