SEC v. Edward T. Farmer (undisclosed control blocks, 2015)

Settled

✓ 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 (sec-edward-t-farmer-undisclosed-control-blocks-2015) by email

In April 2015 the SEC settled administrative proceedings against Edward Farmer, finding that as the named sole officer of We Sell for U Corp. he let it file registration papers that hid its undisclosed controlling promoters. He was ordered to disgorge $35,000.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

$35k

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$35k

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 instituted and settled this proceeding on April 16, 2015 as Securities Act release 9747, without admission or denial by Farmer.

Farmer was the named president, sole director and majority shareholder of We Sell for U, a Florida shell that registered a $40,000 offering in 2008. The order finds the filings misrepresented that he had capitalized and controlled the company, when at least two undisclosed parents and promoters did, and that its stated eBay-services business plan was never pursued, making it an undisclosed blank-check company. He was to be paid a flat fee on its sale, and control changed hands in December 2008.

This library tags the matter as undisclosed control blocks because the order finds that the shell was controlled by persons its filings never named. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The order requires Farmer to cease and desist from the antifraud and reporting provisions and bars him from serving as an officer or director of a public reporting company and from penny-stock offerings. Disgorgement of $35,000 is payable; prejudgment interest of $7,816.50 was waived on his sworn statement of financial condition.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2015-04-16 Administrative proceeding instituted (cease-and-desist)

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 order

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.