SEC v. Carlos Eduardo Reyes Alvarez (wash trading, 2023)
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.
In April 2023, a New York federal court entered a final consent judgment against Florida trader Carlos Eduardo Reyes Alvarez over microcap manipulation involving unauthorised press releases and, in at least four companies, wash trading, ordering US$368,045 in disgorgement, US$76,843 in interest and a US$160,000 penalty.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-25703 |
| Date filed | 2023-05-01 |
| Date resolved | 2023-05-01 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Venue | OTC |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Carlos Eduardo Reyes Alvarez |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Exchange Act s.9(a)(1) ; Exchange Act s.9(a)(2) ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques | Wash trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $160k
- Disgorgement
- $368k
- Prejudgment interest
- $76.8k
- Total relief
- $605k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on May 1, 2023 as release LR-25703. The respondents named are Carlos Eduardo Reyes Alvarez (1 individual, 0 entities).
The SEC alleged that Reyes manipulated microcap stocks by causing the issuance of press releases the companies had not authorised, and in at least four companies also wash traded to create the appearance of an active market and lift the price, profiting by $368,045.
This library tags the matter as wash trading, 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.
Disgorgement of $368,045, prejudgment interest of $76,843, and a civil penalty of $160,000, plus officer-and-director and penny stock bars and a promotion bar.
The court entered the judgment by consent, without admission or denial of the allegations.
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.
- Wash trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2023-05-01 Litigation 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.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.