SEC v. Suyun Gu, et al. (wash trading, 2021)
Settled
Checked against the primary document on October 2, 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 September 2021, the SEC charged Florida resident Suyun Gu and his friend Yong Lee with wash trading put options on "meme stocks" in 2021 to collect exchange liquidity rebates; Lee agreed to settle, with US$51,334 in disgorgement and a US$25,000 penalty, while the case against Gu continued.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-25224 |
| Date filed | 2021-09-27 |
| Date resolved | 2021-09-27 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | options |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Suyun Gu ; Yong Lee |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques | Wash trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $25k
- Disgorgement
- $51.3k
- Prejudgment interest
- $515
- Total relief
- $76.8k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on September 27, 2021 as release LR-25224. The respondents named are Suyun Gu and Yong Lee (2 individuals, 0 entities).
The complaint alleges that Gu executed about 11,400 trades with himself, collecting at least $668,671 in liquidity rebates, and that Lee executed about 2,300 trades with himself for $51,334, using multiple accounts and virtual private networks, which distorted option volume and drew in other traders.
This library tags the matter as wash trading, 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.
Lee consented to a judgment, subject to court approval, requiring disgorgement of $51,334 with $515 of interest and a $25,000 civil penalty. The $51,334 is Lee's alone; the case against Gu was continuing.
Lee agreed to settle without admitting or denying the allegations, subject to court approval. The allegations against Gu had not been proven in this 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.
- Wash trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2021-09-27 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.