SEC v. SeeThruEquity, LLC et al. (newsletter scalping, 2018)

Judgment entered

✓ 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-seethruequity-llc-et-al-analyst-manipulation-2018) by email

In November 2018 the SEC sued SeeThruEquity and brothers Ajay and Amit Tandon over allegedly paid-for research reports presented as unbiased and scalping. After consent injunctions, the Southern District of New York entered a final judgment on 21 January 2022 imposing civil penalties of $270,000 and $250,000 and five-year penny stock and officer-and-director bars.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$520k

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$520k

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 November 8, 2018 as release LR-24341. The respondents named are SeeThruEquity, LLC et al. (0 individuals, 1 entity).

This library tags the matter as newsletter scalping and paid stock promotion, 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.

Non-monetary relief recorded: conduct-based injunction, penny stock bar.

A later SEC litigation release shows how the case ended. The Tandons and the firm had first consented, without admitting or denying the allegations, to injunctions. After the SEC moved for additional remedies, the court entered a final judgment on 21 January 2022 that orders a $270,000 civil penalty against Ajay Tandon and a $250,000 civil penalty against Amit Tandon, which total the $520,000 recorded here. It also prohibits both from promoting any issuer or being paid for promotion, and bars each for five years from penny stock offerings and from serving as an officer or director. The release states no disgorgement and does not describe a judgment against SeeThruEquity, LLC itself, so the firm's outcome beyond its earlier consent injunction is not shown.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 3 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.

• Analyst manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Newsletter scalping — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Paid stock promotion — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2018-11-08 Litigation release published
2. 2022-01-21 Final judgment entered against Ajay and Amit Tandon ($270,000 and $250,000 penalties, five-year bars)

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
• SEC litigation release LR-25321 (final judgment)

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.

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.