SEC v. Jason Dodd Bullard, Angela Romero-Bullard, and Bullard Enterprises LLC (ponzi schemes, 2021)

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 (sec-jason-dodd-bullard-angela-romero-bullard-ponzi-schemes-2021) by email

In September 2021 the SEC charged Jason Bullard, Angela Romero-Bullard and Bullard Enterprises over an alleged $17.6 million currency-fund Ponzi scheme in Minnesota. On February 25, 2025 the court entered a judgment, incorporating the defendants' consents, with injunctions, $1,167,542 in joint disgorgement plus interest deemed satisfied by criminal restitution, and a $230,464 penalty on Romero-Bullard.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$230k

Disgorgement

$1.2m

Prejudgment interest

$239k

Total relief

$1.6m

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 SEC announced the receiver on September 16, 2021 (LR-25208); the order was entered August 30 in a case filed August 27. The release states no sums.

the status is filed and the three are listed separately.

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the document describes it as a scheme paying earlier investors with later investors' money. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

Outcome. The District of Minnesota's judgment of February 25, 2025 (Doc. 137) permanently enjoins the defendants from violating the antifraud provisions of the Exchange Act and Securities Act, and incorporates the three defendants' consents. It makes them jointly liable for disgorgement of $1,167,542 plus prejudgment interest of $238,660.66, $1,406,202.66 in total, which it deems satisfied by the $3,108,312.24 criminal restitution order in United States v. Bullard (No. 23-cr-117, D. Minn.). Romero-Bullard must pay a civil penalty of $230,464; the penalty against Jason Bullard is waived because of the prison sentence imposed on him in the criminal case, and none is imposed on the defunct company. The judgment document does not give the length of his sentence, and the allegations in the complaint were not tried. The SEC's whistleblower notice dates the qualifying judgment to the same day. The record previously marked no parallel criminal case; the judgment shows one.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2021-09-16 Litigation release published
2. 2025-02-25 Judgment entered incorporating defendants' consents

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
• Judgment in a civil case (D. Minn., Doc. 137)
• SEC whistleblower notice 2025-127

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.