SEC v. Harold Minsky (matched orders, 2019)
Settled
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 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission published a release announcing a settlement of findings of a matched-trade and broker-kickback scheme to manipulate two microcap stocks. This library classifies the conduct as matched orders and price manipulation.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 3-19520 |
| Date filed | 2019-09-25 |
| Date resolved | 2019-09-25 |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | equities |
| Venue | OTC |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Harold Minsky |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Exchange Act s.9(a)(1) ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques | Matched orders , Price manipulation |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on September 25, 2019 as release 3-19520. The respondents named are Harold Minsky (1 individual, 0 entities).
The order finds that the respondent planned and carried out matched trades and a 40 percent broker-kickback arrangement to manipulate WGE Holdings stock and a second microcap. A third party's undisclosed control of another issuer is mentioned as background; no paid promotion is charged, so the paid-promotion and control-block tags have been removed.
This library tags the matter as matched orders and price manipulation, 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 conduct is recorded against equities, with OTC 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.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with 2 techniques 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.
- Matched orders — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
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.