SEC v. Small Business Capital Corp. and Mark Feathers (ponzi schemes, 2018)
Judgment entered
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 May 2018 the SEC reported that Mark Feathers, who ran Small Business Capital Corp. and two mortgage funds, was sentenced to 33 months in prison and $5.7 million in restitution, in the conduct the SEC sued over in 2012 as a Ponzi-like scheme. A 2013 judgment ordered $7,782,961 in disgorgement and a $10,000 penalty.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-24128 |
| Date filed | 2018-05-02 |
| Date resolved | 2018-05-02 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California |
| Status | judgment |
| Criminal parallel | Yes: sentenced (Mark Feathers), U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2018-03-07 |
| Sentence | 2y 9m |
| Defendants | Small Business Capital Corp. ; Mark Feathers ; Investors Prime Fund, LLC ; SBC Portfolio Fund, LLC |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques | Ponzi schemes |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $10k
- Disgorgement
- $7.8m
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- $7.8m
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The SEC's 2012 complaint alleged more than 400 investors were drawn in by 7.5 percent returns, with payments coming partly from fund profits and partly from other investors. Summary judgment against Feathers came in August 2013 and a final judgment in November 2013. He pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud in December 2017.
The record held the $10,000 penalty but not the disgorgement or the sentence.
This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the document describes payments to earlier participants made from later participants' 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
- 2018-05-02 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 |