SEC v. Sparkster, Ltd. and Sajjad Daya (unregistered distributions, 2022)

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-sparkster-ltd-and-sajjad-daya-unregistered-distributions-2022) by email

In 2022 the SEC settled an administrative order against Sparkster, Ltd. and its founder Sajjad Daya over an unregistered SPRK token offering that raised about $30 million. Sparkster agreed to pay $30 million of disgorgement, about $4.6 million of interest and a $500,000 penalty; Daya agreed to a $250,000 penalty.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$750k

Disgorgement

$30m

Prejudgment interest

$4.6m

Total relief

$35.4m

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

On September 19, 2022 the SEC accepted settlements with Sparkster, Ltd. and its founder Sajjad Daya. The order finds they sold SPRK tokens in 2018 with no registration statement, raising about $30 million from nearly 4,000 investors, in violation of Securities Act Sections 5(a) and 5(c).

The disgorgement equals the amount raised because the order sets it at that figure. Sparkster owes $30,000,000 of disgorgement, $4,624,754.23 of prejudgment interest and a $500,000 penalty; Daya owes a separate $250,000 penalty, so the recorded penalty total is $750,000.

This library tags the matter as unregistered distributions, based on the conduct the document describes. 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.

• Unregistered distributions — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2022-09-19 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.