Ico And Defi Scam Prosecutions
1. SEC v. Munchee Inc. (2017)
Fake ICO Offering
Background: Munchee, a startup, planned an ICO for a food review app and tried to sell tokens promising future profits.
Charges: SEC charged Munchee with conducting an unregistered securities offering.
Legal Issue: Were the tokens securities under federal law, triggering registration and disclosure requirements?
Outcome: Munchee canceled its ICO, settled with the SEC, and agreed to register future token offerings.
Significance: Early case clarifying tokens could be securities, and ICOs must comply with securities laws.
2. SEC v. BitConnect (2021)
Ponzi Scheme Disguised as Lending Platform
Background: BitConnect ran a DeFi lending platform promising high returns paid with new investors’ money.
Charges: Securities fraud and Ponzi scheme.
Legal Issue: BitConnect operated a fraudulent investment scheme using cryptocurrency.
Outcome: BitConnect shut down after SEC and other authorities cracked down; founders faced charges and some arrests.
Significance: Highlighted the dangers of Ponzi scams in DeFi and crypto lending.
3. United States v. Homero Joshua Garza (GAW Miners) (2016)
Cryptocurrency Mining Ponzi Scheme
Background: Garza raised millions from investors claiming profits from crypto mining hardware sales and cloud mining contracts.
Charges: Wire fraud and securities fraud.
Outcome: Garza pleaded guilty and was sentenced to prison.
Significance: One of the first criminal convictions involving ICO-style fundraising scams.
4. SEC v. PlexCorps (2017)
ICO Fraud Scheme
Background: PlexCorps promised investors massive returns from a token sale but failed to deliver a working product.
Charges: Fraud and unregistered securities offering.
Outcome: Founder was arrested and charged; SEC froze assets.
Significance: Reinforced SEC’s authority to act quickly to stop fraudulent ICOs.
5. SEC v. My Big Coin Pay Inc. (2018)
Fake Cryptocurrency
Background: My Big Coin Pay sold fake digital tokens, misleading investors about value and usage.
Charges: Fraudulent ICO and unregistered securities offering.
Outcome: Company founder ordered to pay penalties and cease operations.
Significance: Showed enforcement against fake coins posing as legitimate investments.
6. CFTC v. BitMEX (2021)
DeFi Derivatives Trading Platform Charges
Background: BitMEX operated a cryptocurrency derivatives exchange with alleged poor anti-money laundering controls.
Charges: Violations of the Commodity Exchange Act, failing to register as a futures commission merchant.
Outcome: BitMEX founders charged; settlements reached including fines.
Significance: Enforced regulatory compliance in DeFi derivatives trading.
Summary Table
| Case | Key Issue | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Munchee Inc. (2017) | Unregistered ICO securities | ICO canceled, compliance settled |
| BitConnect (2021) | Ponzi scheme disguised as DeFi | Shutdown, arrests |
| Homero Garza (2016) | Mining Ponzi scheme | Guilty plea, prison |
| PlexCorps (2017) | Fraudulent ICO | Arrest, asset freeze |
| My Big Coin Pay (2018) | Fake cryptocurrency | Penalties, cease operations |
| BitMEX (2021) | Unregistered crypto derivatives | Fines, charges |
Quick Recap
ICOs and DeFi platforms must comply with securities laws; failing to do so risks prosecution.
Many prosecutions involve fraud, Ponzi schemes, and unregistered offerings.
Enforcement agencies like the SEC and CFTC have actively pursued cases to protect investors.
Early crypto scams focused on fake ICOs, while newer cases tackle complex DeFi platforms and derivatives.
RELATED Blog
0 comments