Market Manipulation. Search

SEC v. Jack Brewer (insider trading, 2025)

Alleged — pending

These are allegations. SEC has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.

Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.

In 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action against Jack Brewer, alleging conduct this library classifies as insider trading. No monetary relief has been recorded at this stage; the matter is an allegation and remains unproven.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency SEC
Release number LR-26322
Date filed 2025-06-10
Court U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Status filed
Criminal parallel No
Defendants Jack Brewer (individual)
Techniques Insider trading

What was ordered

Civil penalty
Disgorgement
Prejudgment interest
Total relief
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 June 10, 2025 as release LR-26322. The respondents named are Jack Brewer (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.

This library tags the matter as insider 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.

This matter is at the allegation stage. Nothing in the regulator's filing has been proven, and the respondents are entitled to the presumption that it has not been. This page will be updated if the matter is resolved, dismissed or withdrawn.

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.

Timeline

  1. 2025-06-10 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.

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.

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

Action Agency Filed Technique Penalty Status
SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-09-04 Insider Trading judgment
CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) CFTC 2026-08-28 Insider Trading $65k judgment
SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-21 Insider Trading unknown
SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-21 Insider Trading filed
SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-11 Insider Trading judgment
SEC v. Jamal (“Jimmy”) Chammout and others (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-07-17 Insider Trading $497k judgment

Record added September 8, 2026. If this matter has since resolved, been withdrawn or been dismissed, we want to know: submit a correction.