CFTC v. Roman Banoczay Jr., Roman Banoczay Sr. and BAZUR Spol. S.R.O. (spoofing, 2020)

Settled

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 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-slovakian-men-spoofing-2020) by email

In September 2020 the CFTC sued Slovakian trader Roman Banoczay Jr., Roman Banoczay Sr. and BAZUR over spoofing in crude oil futures. On 7 December 2021 the Northern District of Illinois entered a consent order with a US$750,000 penalty against Banoczay Jr. and two-year trading and registration bans on all three defendants.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$750k

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$750k

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 September 29, 2020 as release 8261-20. The respondents named are Roman Banoczay Jr., Roman Banoczay Sr. and BAZUR Spol. S.R.O. (2 individuals, 1 entity).

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 CFTC filed a civil complaint alleging the father, son and their Slovak company spoofed and ran a manipulative scheme in crude oil futures. The matter is an allegation at this stage; the 2021 record shows its resolution.

The conduct is recorded against commodities and futures, with CME, NYMEX identified in the release.

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.

Outcome. The CFTC's release 8467-21 says the court entered a consent order on 7 December 2021 resolving the complaint. It imposes a US$750,000 civil penalty on Banoczay Jr., bans all three defendants from trading commodity interests and registering with the CFTC for two years, and orders them to stop violating the spoofing and manipulative-scheme prohibitions. The order, which the CFTC links, finds that over four weeks in early 2018 Banoczay Jr. placed thousands of orders he meant to cancel, and that Banoczay Sr. and BAZUR are liable because he acted as their agent.

The consent order assesses the penalty against Banoczay Jr. only. The release does not mention restitution, disgorgement or a criminal case.

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. 2020-09-29 CFTC release published
2. 2021-12-07 Consent order entered; US$750,000 penalty against Banoczay Jr. (CFTC release 8467-21)

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
• CFTC order or complaint
• CFTC release 8467-21
• Consent order, Banoczay Jr. et al. (7 December 2021)

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.

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

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

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.