CFTC v. Bailey, Hudspeth, PMC Strategy (ponzi schemes, 2013)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 3, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (cftc-defendants-pmc-ponzi-schemes-2013) by email

In April 2013 the CFTC announced federal court orders in the Western District of North Carolina against Timothy Bailey, Michael Hudspeth and PMC Strategy, LLC over a forex Ponzi scheme that raised at least $669,000. The orders carry about $429,700 in restitution and civil penalties of $560,000 on PMC and $420,000 on each individual, $1.4 million in all.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$1.4m

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$1.4m

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

A default judgment against PMC and Bailey (October 2012) and a summary judgment against Hudspeth (April 2013) find fraudulent solicitation, misappropriation and false monthly profit checks. PMC claimed profits for early 2008 although it was not formed until June 2008 and traded at a loss in most months. The defendants are permanently banned from trading and registration.

The record had entered $560,000, the penalty on PMC alone; the three penalties total $1.4 million. The headline figure of over $1.8 million adds the restitution.

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the document describes payments to earlier participants made from later participants' money. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Ponzi schemes — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2013-04-17 CFTC release published

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• CFTC release

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.