SEC v. Celsius Network Limited and Alexander "Alex" Mashinsky (price manipulation, 2023)

Alleged — pending

These are allegations. SEC has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.

✓ 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 (sec-celsius-network-mashinsky-price-manipulation-2023) by email

In 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed an action against Celsius Network Limited and its founder Alexander "Alex" Mashinsky, alleging conduct this library classifies as price manipulation, along with unregistered securities offerings and fraud. No monetary relief has been recorded at this stage; the matter is an allegation and remains unproven as to the manipulation claim.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

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 Securities and Exchange Commission filed this matter on July 13, 2023 in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (No. 1:23-cv-06005); the release announcing it is dated July 14, 2023 (release LR-25779). The respondents named are Celsius Network Limited and Alexander "Alex" Mashinsky, its founder and former CEO.

Alongside unregistered-offering and misrepresentation claims about Celsius's Earn Interest Program, the complaint alleges that starting in at least 2020, Celsius and Mashinsky engaged in a fraud to artificially increase and support the price of Celsius's own crypto asset security, CEL, through manipulative buybacks of CEL far in excess of the company's publicly disclosed purchases. Mashinsky, alleged to be the single largest holder of CEL other than Celsius itself, is alleged to have structured the scheme to have the greatest market impact and to induce others to buy CEL, to his and Celsius's benefit.

This library tags the matter as price manipulation, based on the conduct the regulator describes: undisclosed buybacks intended to produce a price that does not reflect genuine supply and demand. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names; here the SEC's complaint charges violations of Securities Act Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) and Exchange Act Sections 9(a)(2) and 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.

The conduct is recorded against crypto.

The release references a parallel criminal proceeding: the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced charges against Mashinsky (and a non-prosecution agreement with Celsius itself), and the CFTC separately charged Celsius and Mashinsky over the Earn Interest Program, though the CFTC's own complaint does not allege CEL price manipulation. Where a criminal case exists, the civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.

This matter is at the allegation stage as to the civil claim recorded here. Nothing in the regulator's filing has been proven, and the respondents are entitled to the presumption that it has not been. This page will be updated if the matter is resolved, dismissed or withdrawn.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2023-07-13 Complaint filed (S.D.N.Y., No. 1:23-cv-06005)
2. 2023-07-14 SEC 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.

• SEC litigation 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 October 1, 2026. If this matter has since resolved, been withdrawn or been dismissed, we want to know: submit a correction.