CFTC v. Anuj C. Singhal (spoofing, 2018)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 2, 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-floor-broker-anuj-c-singhal-spoofing-2018) by email

In 2018, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued an order settling charges against Anuj C. Singhal. The order finds Singhal, a Dallas floor broker, spoofed wheat futures by hand between March and June 2016, with a $150,000 penalty and a four-month trading ban. The release records a civil penalty of $150,000.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$150k

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$150k

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

the Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced this matter on April 9, 2018 as release 7709-18. The respondent named is Anuj C. Singhal (1 individual, 0 entities).

This library tags the matter as spoofing, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The order finds Singhal, a Dallas floor broker, spoofed wheat futures by hand between March and June 2016, with a $150,000 penalty and a four-month trading ban.

The conduct is recorded against futures, with CBOT, CME identified in the release.

The relief recorded in our data is a civil monetary penalty of $150,000. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2018-04-09 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.