SEC v. Michael Staisil (ponzi schemes, 2020)

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-michael-staisil-ponzi-schemes-2020) by email

In September 2020 the SEC sued Michael Staisil over a Ponzi-type scheme. On 9 May 2022 the District of Maryland entered a consent final judgment with injunctions, US$383,888 in disgorgement, US$39,055 in interest and a US$200,000 civil penalty.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$200k

Disgorgement

$384k

Prejudgment interest

$39.1k

Total relief

$623k

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 announced this matter on September 30, 2020 as release LR-24933. The respondents named are Michael Staisil (1 individual, 0 entities).

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes, 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 release references a parallel criminal proceeding. Where a criminal case exists, the civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.

Outcome. The final judgment signed on 9 May 2022 records Staisil's consent without admitting or denying the allegations. It enjoins him from violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 and from acting as an unregistered broker under Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act, and orders disgorgement of US$383,888, prejudgment interest of US$39,055 and a civil penalty of US$200,000. The disgorgement and interest, US$422,943 in total, are to be paid to the receiver appointed in a related Maryland case, SEC v. Merrill.

The allegations in the complaint were not tried. The document does not mention a criminal case.

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. 2020-09-30 Litigation release published
2. 2022-05-09 Final consent judgment entered

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
• Final judgment as to Michael Staisil (9 May 2022)

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.