SEC v. Jonathan P. Maroney, Et. Al (ponzi schemes, 2021)
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 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.
In April 2021 the SEC obtained a restraining order and asset freeze against Florida resident Jonathan Maroney, Harbor City Capital and other entities he controls over an alleged Ponzi scheme that raised at least $17.1 million from over 100 investors in lead-generation offerings, with at least $4.48 million misappropriated.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-25082 |
| Date filed | 2021-04-27 |
| Status | filed |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Jonathan P. Maroney ; Harbor City Capital Corp |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Securities Act s.5 |
| Techniques | Ponzi schemes |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The SEC announced the case on April 27, 2021 (LR-25082) in the Middle District of Florida, filed April 20. Investors were promised 10 to 60% returns from reselling business leads, but little went to that business.
The record named the defendants as "Jonathan P. Maroney, Et. Al" and showed the status as unknown; the status is filed and the lead defendants are named.
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.
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
- 2021-04-27 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.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Mark D. Hanf and Hoai-Nam Chu Phan (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Ponzi Schemes | — | settled |
| SEC v. Leor Moshe, Jacob Goldman, Isaac Odes (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-13 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |
| CFTC v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher Delgado (ponzi schemes, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-11 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |
| SEC v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher A. Delgado (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |
| SEC v. Aras Investment Business Group S.A.P.I. de C.V. and others (ponzi schemes, 2026) | SEC | 2026-07-24 | Ponzi Schemes | $449k | judgment |
| CFTC v. Trevor L. Vernon and Argent Capital Management LLC (ponzi schemes, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-07-07 | Ponzi Schemes | — | filed |