SEC v. Matthew L. Egna (undisclosed control blocks, 2017)

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-matthew-l-egna-undisclosed-control-blocks-2017) by email

In June 2017 the SEC settled administrative proceedings against Matthew Egna, finding that the shell Changing Technologies, Inc. filed registration papers that hid its undisclosed controlling promoters. He agreed to $10,000 disgorgement, $927.92 interest and a $10,000 penalty.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$10k

Disgorgement

$10k

Prejudgment interest

$928

Total relief

$20.9k

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 June 29, 2017 as Securities Act release 10377, without admission or denial by Egna.

Egna was the named sole officer, director and majority shareholder of Changing Technologies, a Florida shell that registered a 3,000,000-share offering in 2013. The order finds the company had at least one undisclosed parent, promoter and control person until control changed hands in June 2014, and that its filings misstated who controlled it. He was ordered to cease and desist from the antifraud and related provisions and barred from penny-stock offerings.

This library tags the matter as undisclosed control blocks because the order finds 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.

He was ordered to pay disgorgement of $10,000, prejudgment interest of $927.92 and a $10,000 civil penalty in instalments over a year. The record had shown only the penalty.

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. 2017-06-29 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.