If the SEC has served a subpoena or the FBI has appeared at your office, the government already has your bank records, your investor list, and your marketing materials. Ponzi and investment fraud cases are built quietly and charged late. This page is for people and firms accused of running one. We defend the accused. We do not represent investors seeking to recover losses.
AMC Defense Law defends people and companies accused of investment fraud. Fund managers, principals, general partners, chief financial officers, sales agents, and the entities they ran. If the SEC has opened a formal investigation, if a grand jury subpoena has landed, or if the FBI has asked for an interview, that is the situation this practice is built for.
We do not represent investors pursuing losses. Investors should contact the receiver or trustee appointed in the underlying case, the SEC's investor complaint program, or a civil securities litigation firm.
Federal law contains no offense called operating a Ponzi scheme. What prosecutors charge is the conduct underneath the label.
The core count is usually securities fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1348, which carries up to 25 years per count and requires no proof that the instrument was registered or that the defendant was a licensed broker. Alongside it come Exchange Act fraud under 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b) and 78ff with SEC Rule 10b-5, punishable by up to 20 years and a $5 million fine per count for an individual, and Securities Act fraud under 15 U.S.C. §§ 77q(a) and 77x for misstatements in the offer or sale.
Then the general fraud statutes get added. Wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 carry 20 years per count and require only a scheme to defraud plus a communication in furtherance of it. Every subscription agreement emailed, every investor update sent, every wire transfer received is a candidate count. Conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 1349 brings in everyone who raised money or moved it. Money laundering under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956 and 1957 follows the proceeds into every account they touched.
The practical result is that a single fund can produce a twenty-count indictment before the government has proven anything about the underlying investments.
Three elements decide these cases, and each is contested ground.
A material misrepresentation or omission. The statement has to matter to a reasonable investor. Puffery, forward-looking projections, and disclosed risk factors are not the same as a lie about where the money went. Offering documents, private placement memoranda, and subscription agreements often disclose far more than the indictment acknowledges. We read them line by line against the charged statements.
In connection with the purchase or sale of a security. Not every investment is a security. Whether a particular arrangement qualifies runs through the SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. investment contract analysis: an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profits derived from the efforts of others. Real estate joint ventures, revenue-share agreements, equipment leasing programs, and some digital asset arrangements do not automatically clear that bar.
Scienter, meaning intent to deceive. This is where most investment fraud defenses are won. Prosecutors reconstruct intent from account statements, from the timing of distributions, and from the gap between what investors were told and what the trading records show. Good faith is a defense. So is reliance on accountants, auditors, fund administrators, and securities counsel who blessed the structure. So is the ordinary reality that a manager believed the strategy would recover.
Most investment fraud cases start with the SEC, not the FBI. The pattern is consistent.
Enforcement staff opens a matter under inquiry, then obtains a formal order of investigation that authorizes subpoenas for documents and testimony. Bank records, brokerage statements, and email are pulled first. Investor witnesses are interviewed. Then the principals are called for on-the-record testimony.
SEC Form 1662 accompanies every subpoena, and it says the quiet part out loud. The Commission routinely provides the information it gathers to the Department of Justice, to state regulators, and to self-regulatory organizations. There is no confidential lane. Testimony given to the SEC in the belief that only a civil case is possible has ended more than one defendant's ability to contest the criminal case.
The Wells notice is the pivot point. When staff decides to recommend an enforcement action, it issues a Wells notice and invites a written response. The response can narrow the charges or stop them. It can also hand prosecutors a signed roadmap of the defense theory. That calculation has to be made with the criminal exposure in view, not the civil case alone.
Asset freezes come early. Under 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d) the SEC can obtain a temporary restraining order freezing accounts and the appointment of a receiver over the entities. For a defendant, that often means losing access to the funds needed to mount a defense before any charge has been filed. Moving quickly on carve-outs for living expenses and legal fees is part of the first week of work.
If a case resolves, the sentence is set by the guidelines, and in fraud cases the guidelines are set by U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1. The loss table dominates everything else: more than $550,000 in loss adds 14 offense levels, more than $1.5 million adds 16, more than $3.5 million adds 18, and more than $9.5 million adds 20. Enhancements follow for the number of victims, for substantial financial hardship to victims, for sophisticated means, for abuse of a position of trust, and for a leadership role under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1.
In Ponzi cases the loss calculation is genuinely contestable, and the difference is measured in years.
Credit for money returned. The guidelines reduce loss by the value of money and property returned to victims before the offense was detected. Prosecutors frequently start from gross amounts raised. Distributions to investors, principal repaid, and assets recovered by a receiver all belong in the calculation.
Fictitious profits versus principal. Investors who withdrew more than they put in are net winners, not victims, for loss purposes. Sorting the investor pool into net losers and net winners changes both the loss figure and the victim count.
Intended loss versus actual loss. Where the government argues intended loss rather than what investors actually lost, it must prove the defendant purposefully sought that harm. Whether the guidelines commentary can expand loss beyond actual loss at all is unsettled across the circuits, and the Eleventh Circuit has not resolved it the way the Third Circuit has. That makes it worth preserving and litigating.
We get in before the indictment. The highest-value window in an investment fraud case is the period between the SEC subpoena and the charging decision. Document production can be scoped. Testimony can be prepared or declined on an informed basis. In some cases the matter resolves civilly and the criminal referral never happens.
We separate the failed fund from the fraudulent one. Auditors, administrators, and trading records tell a story that the indictment narrative flattens. We rebuild the timeline, quarter by quarter, to show where the strategy was real and where the losses came from.
We attack the scienter proof. Reliance on counsel, on accountants, and on fund administrators is a defense to specific intent. So is the absence of personal enrichment. We develop that record early, before the government fixes its theory.
We manage the parallel proceedings as one problem. A concession in the SEC case is a concession in the criminal case. Stays, protective orders, and coordinated strategy across both tracks are handled together, not separately.
We fight the loss calculation with numbers. Forensic accounting on the investor ledger is not a formality. It is where sentences get shortened.
If you have received an SEC subpoena, a Wells notice, a grand jury subpoena, or a target letter concerning an investment fund or offering, call Aaron M. Cohen, 24 hours a day to get help.
South Florida is now first in the nation in white collar caseload. What the U.S. Attorney's 144-person hiring wave means if you think you are on the radar.
DOJ's Fraud Division put its target list in writing on August 13, 2026. If you bill Medicare or hold a federal contract in Florida, read it as a charging map.
Federal financial crime investigations employ sophisticated tactics that can lead to decades in prison. Understanding FBI methods, legal frameworks, and enforcement priorities is crucial for anyone facing scrutiny.
Elder fraud carries federal prison time under 18 U.S.C. § 2326 with sentencing enhancements for targeting seniors. Here's how the three main schemes work and what a defense looks like.
DOJ dropped a $722 million crypto fraud case weeks before trial. What that policy shift means if you are under federal investigation in Florida right now.
Wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 is one of the most frequently charged federal crimes, and one of the most flexible tools in a federal prosecutor's toolkit. Any scheme to defraud that uses a wire communication crosses into federal jurisdiction. The penalty is up to 20 years per count.
Federal money laundering charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1956 carry up to 20 years per count. When federal prosecutors target financial transactions in South Florida, you need defense counsel who knows exactly how they build these cases, and how to dismantle them.
A target letter from a United States Attorney's Office means the government has already decided you are someone it wants to prosecute. The investigation is not beginning. It is ending.
Most federal cases are resolved at sentencing, not at trial — making it the single biggest opportunity to change a client's outcome. We bring a dedicated, in-house sentencing strategy to that stage.