Introduction

This is the first installment of a four part series analyzing the trends in SEC enforcement during the third calendar quarter of 2023. The series will focus on the number of cases brought during the period and the types of actions filed.

When the data from this third quarter of the year is compared to that from other quarters and periods it can help assess the overall direction of SEC enforcement. Considering the direction of SEC enforcement can aid those involved with regulated entities, such as brokers and investment advisers, as well as others who deal with the Commission periodically.

The series has four segments: 1) Basic statistics; 2) examples of cases in each of the leading areas; 3) examples of significant cases not in the leading categories; and 4) the conclusion.

The Statistics

The number of new cases filed during each period, and the areas in which they are brought, are always key statistics. While the numbers are not determinative in and of themselves, when considered in context they can reveal matters such as focus, areas of concentration and other significant information. When placed in the large context of other time periods even more information about the enforcement program can be garnered.

During the third quarter of 2023 SEC enforcement filed 144 new enforcement actions. Well over half of the cases filed during the period were civil injunctive actions – 81 – while the balance –63 – were administrative proceedings.

By any measure, the number of new cases filed during the third quarter of the year is impressive, particularly when compared to other periods. For example, when the number cases filed during 3Q23 is compared to that for the first quarter of each of the last three years, the number dwarfs that from other periods: In 1Q23 80 new cases were filed while in 1Q 22 only 48 new while the same number as filed in 1Q21.

Only when the number of new cases filed in 3Q23 is compared to that from earlier years in the third quarter of the year are the numbers comparable. In 3Q22 a total of 129 new cases were filed. In 3Q 21, however, a total number was 144. The numbers are comparable because traditionally the agency focuses on filing large numbers of cases in the third quarter of the year which is the end of the government fiscal year when performance statistics are finalized and complied for Congressional hears and other, similar purposes.

The largest groups of cases brought in the third quarter were as follows:

Offering frauds    25%

Insider trading    9%

Crypto assets     5.5%

Manipulation     4.8%

Misrepresentation   4.8%

These statistics demonstrate that over 34% of the cases filed during 3Q23 were either offering frauds or involved insider trading. Thus, despite the large number of cases initiated during the period the percentages reflect the fact that that the cases were concentrated in two typical areas in which actions are brought. Perhaps more importantly, the concentration into the offering fraud and insider trading areas in 3Q23 essentially mirrors that of the prior quarter when the top two categories were also offering frauds at, but at 29%, and insider trading at 9% for a total of over 36% of cases filed during the period. This at least suggests that that the focus of enforcement may be narrowing compared to earlier periods, a question that will be revisited at the conclusion of the series.

Next: Part II (Tuesday Jan. 6, 2024) – Examples of cases filed in each of the largest five categories for 3Q23.

Tagged with: , , ,

As the year drew to a close the Commission continued to file enforcement actions. Specifically, the agency filed actions centered on a misappropriation, policies and procedures and an offering frauds.

SEC

Whistleblowers: The SEC awarded over $28 million to seven whistleblowers, accordingly to a December 22, 2023 release.

Be careful, be safe this week.

SEC Enforcement – Filed and Settled Actions

Statistics: This week the Commission filed 3 new civil injunctive actions and 2 new administrative proceedings, excluding tag-along actions and those that present a conflict for the author.

Misappropriation: In the Matter of Chingyuan “Gary” Chang, Adm. Proc. File No. 3-21820 (December 26, 2023) is a proceeding which names the registered investment adviser at a large financial institution as Respondent. The Order alleges that from September 2021 through June 2022, Respondent misappropriated about $58,560 from four customers and/or clients of the firm where he was employed. He did this largely through the unauthorized use of the Automated Clearing House disbursement. The Order alleges violations of Exchange Act Section 10(b) and Advisers Act Sections 206(a) and 206(2). To resolve the matter Respondent consented to the entry of a cease-and-desist order based on the Sections cited in the order. He is also barred from the securities business and from participating in any penny stock offering. In addition, Respondent will pay a penalty of $58,560.00.

Policy & procedures: In the Matter of OEP Capital Advisors, LP, Adm. Proc. File No. 3-21819 (December 26, 2023) names the registered investment adviser as Respondent. The Order alleges that over a three year period, beginning in 2019, the firm failed to effectively implement policies and procedures to prevent the misuse of material non-public information regarding mergers, although the firm had policies on the subject. Similarly, during the same period the firm’s policies and procedures also prohibited the use of Fund asset and securities holdings valuations other than as authorized by the firm’s valuation committee. Nevertheless, senior personnel repeatedly violated the policies by, among other things, sending certain communications to current investors and industry contacts. The Order alleges violations of Advisers Act Sections 204A and 206(4) and Rule 206(4)-7. To resolve the matter Respondent consented to the entry of a cease-and-desist order based on the Sections and Rule cited and to a censure. Respondent also agreed to pay a penalty of $4 million,

Offering fraud: SEC v. Fernandez, Civil Action No. 5:23-cv-00372 (N.D.W.Va. Filed December 21, 2023) is an action which names as defendant Diana Mae Fernandez, the founding member of Diana Mac K., LLC and Self-Made Success. Over a two-year period, beginning in 2018, she raised about $364,000 from investors. Investors were told that she was a successful businesswoman and would invest their funds in no-risk investments. To the contrary, she misappropriated their funds for herself. The complaint alleges violations of Securities Act Section 17(a) and Exchange Act Section 10(b). The case is in litigation. See Lit. Rel. No. 25918 (December 28, 2023).

Offering fraud: SEC v. Perryman, Civil Action No. 1:230-cv-010985 (S.D.N.Y. Filed December 19, 2023) is an action which names as defendant Laura Tyler Perryman, the co-founder of Stimwave Technologies, Inc., a privately held medical device startup co-founded by Defendant. During a Series D funding round Ms. Perryman made false statements about the firm’s key product, a neurostimulation device system or PNS Device. Specifically, Ms. Perryman told investors the device functioned and had FDA approval. In fact, it was a sham and did not work. In November 2019 Ms. Perryman resigned as CEO of the company when her role in the transaction emerged. Subsequently, the company instituted a voluntary recall of the product. The complaint alleges violations of Securities Act Section 17(a) and Exchange Act Section 10(b). The case is in litigation. See Lit. Rel. No. 25916 (December 19, 2023).

Offering fraud: SEC v. Banye, Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-10928 (S.D.N.Y. Filed December 18, 2023) is an action which names as defendants: Mmobuosi Odogwu Banye; Tingo Group, Inc; AgriFintech Holdings, Inc; and Tingo International Holdings, Inc. This action centers on an ongoing fraud being conducted by Defendant Banye through three entities, Tingo International Holdings, Agri-Fintech Holdings and Tingo Group. Since 2019 Defendants have booked billions of dollars of fictitious transactions through two Nigerian subsidiary companies. As a result, the Tingo Group’s FY 2022 Form 10-K for March 2023 reports cash and cash equivalents of $461.7 million. In fact, the account should have reflected a balance of about $50. The fraud traces back years to one based largely on Tingo Mobile, PLC, a private company Defendant Banye founded which was based on false financial documents and forged records. While that company claimed to be worth millions, in reality it had no meaningful operations in 2019 and a bank account with a balance of $15. In early 2023 Defendant Banye replicated the Tingo Mobile fraud with a new and fraudulent venture, Tingo Foods. While it was sold to Tingo Group for over $200 million, in fact it was largely worthless as a research analyst reported in a June 6, 2023. The complaint alleges violations of Securities Act Sections 17(a)(1) & (3) and Exchange Act Sections 10(b), 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B) and the related rules. The case is pending. See Lit. Rel. No. 25915 (December 19, 2023).

Offering fraud/manipulation: SEC v. Larmore, Civil Action No. 2:23-cv02470 (D.Az. Filed November 28, 2023) is an action which names as defendants: Jonathan Larmore and his wife controlled CSL Investments LLC which directly or indirectly controlled the AcciTerra companies; ArcoTerra Companies, LLC; ArciTerra Note Advisors II, LLC; ArciTerra Strategic Retail Advisors, LLC; and Cole Capital Funds, LLC whose CEO is Defendant Larmore. Beginning in at least January 2017 Defendant Larmore engaged in a scheme through which he misappropriated millions of dollars from the Funds by using Defendant ArciTerra Strategic Retail Advisors for his personal use. By September 2023 he supposedly abdicated direct control over ArciTerra but began implementing a new scheme centered on manipulating the shares of WeWork, Inc., an unrelated company. On November 3, 2023 Defendant Larmore circulated a statement about an imminent Cole Capital tender offer for We Work shares. Because he mistimed the announcement his options for WeWork shares expired shortly prior to the large price increase in WeWork shares. The complaint alleges violations of Advisers Act Sections 206(1) and 206(4) and Exchange Act Sections 10(b) and 14(e). See Lit. Rel. No. 25917 (December 26, 2023). The case is in litigation.

FinCEN

Rules: The regulator issue its final rule regarding access to beneficial ownership information, according to a release dated December 21, 2023 (here).

ESMA

Fund names: The European Securities and Market Authority issued a proposal to change and update the timeline for its guidance on funds’ names, as detailed in a release dated December 14, 2023 (here).

UK

Proposed rules: The Financial Conduct Authority or FCA issued proposed rules on December 20, 2023 designed to encourage issuers to register in the U.K. (here).

3

Tagged with: , , ,