The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has charged a Cypress, Texas, man with orchestrating a crypto-focused investment fraud that drew roughly $12.3 million from about 150 investors by falsely claiming to operate AI-powered trading bots capable of delivering guaranteed gains. The SEC’s complaint—filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas—names Nathan Fuller and his entities Privvy Investments, LLC, and Gateway Digital Investments, alleging a multi-year scheme that spanned at least October 2022 to mid-2024.

According to the SEC, Fuller promised investors returns of 40% to 50% within 30 to 45 days, with some pushes suggesting guarantees of profits exceeding 100% in as little as 21 days. He purportedly backed these claims by asserting that investor funds were secured by a surety bond, insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and protected by a professional liability policy. The SEC contends that none of these assurances were true, and that the marketing hinged on exaggerated, misleading assurances rather than verifiable trading performance.

Key takeaways

• Approximately $12.3 million was raised from about 150 investors through Privvy Investments and Gateway Digital Investments, according to the SEC complaint.
• Fuller allegedly promised outsized short-term returns—40% to 50% in 30–45 days, with some investors told they could secure more than 100% profits in as little as 21 days—based on AI-driven trading bots that allegedly did not function as claimed.
• The marketer claimed funds were secured by a surety bond, FDIC insurance, and professional liability coverage; the SEC alleges these representations were false.
• More than half of the raised funds—at least $6.2 million—were allegedly used for Fuller’s personal expenses, with about $5.5 million diverted to make Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors.
• Investors received fake account statements and fabricated correspondence from fictitious entities to sustain the illusion of activity and profitability.

What the SEC alleges Fuller did and did not deliver

The core of the SEC’s case rests on a pattern of misrepresentation surrounding the use of artificial intelligence in trading. Fuller pitched proprietary AI-based bots that would conduct high-frequency arbitrage across crypto platforms. The complaint asserts that “Fuller’s bots did not function as represented,” undermining the central claim of guaranteed, AI-generated profits. By coupling the purported technology with promised protections like a surety bond and FDIC backing, the scheme sought to reassure risk-averse investors while masking its true operational status.

As described in the complaint, the marketing material allegedly painted an image of automated, professional-grade trading that could produce reliable returns even in volatile markets. The SEC contends that this marketing was designed to obscure the lack of any verifiable trading track record and to maintain liquidity in the scheme as new investors funded the payouts to earlier participants.

Financial flows and investor deception

From a financial perspective, the scheme’s cash movements paint a telling picture of its inner workings. Of the total $12.3 million raised, the SEC says Fuller misappropriated at least $6.2 million for personal use. An additional roughly $5.5 million reportedly went toward Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors, a classic feature used to prop up the illusion of steady returns and to prolong the lifecycle of the scheme. To maintain credibility, Fuller is alleged to have issued fake account statements and created correspondence from non-existent entities, enabling him to present a veneer of legitimacy to unsuspecting participants.

The allegations suggest a deliberate attempt to replicate the quasi-professional aura of legitimate asset management operations while exploiting the credibility of AI branding to entice retail investors. The use of fabricated documents and fictitious entities underscores a broader issue in crypto fraud: the ease with which persuasive presentation can mask actual performance that never materialized.

Regulatory context and what comes next

The Fuller case sits within a broader pattern of enforcement activity at the intersection of AI branding, crypto, and securities-like promises. Earlier this year, the SEC charged three purported crypto asset trading platforms and four investment clubs in a separate $14 million scheme that also leaned on AI branding to lure retail investors, with fraudsters using messaging apps to tout supposed AI-generated trading tips. The concurrent wave of actions illustrates the agency’s heightened focus on AI-enabled misrepresentations within crypto-adjacent investment strategies.

The SEC has signaled a more nuanced approach to crypto enforcement, acknowledging in its enforcement results that some actions over the past years did not always align cleanly with investor harm or traditional securities-law interpretations. In a 2025 update on enforcement, the agency noted that it had brought 95 actions and secured about $2.3 billion in penalties for issues like book-and-record violations that, in some cases, didn’t directly translate into demonstrable investor harm or protection. The regulator’s stance remains in flux as the crypto landscape evolves, particularly with the increasing convergence of AI and digital assets.

In Fuller’s case, the SEC is seeking permanent injunctions, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and civil penalties. The action underscores the agency’s willingness to pursue individuals who leverage AI narratives and crypto-like instruments to extract funds from retail investors under false pretenses. The case also serves as a cautionary tale for vendors, brokers, and social platforms that amplify or amplify-signal fraudulent schemes by enabling marketing claims that may misrepresent actual capabilities or protections.

What investors should watch next

As the SEC pursues its case, readers should monitor developments around investor restitution, the timeline for potential settlements or judgments, and the status of Fuller’s operational entities. The broader takeaway for investors is the importance of scrutinizing claims around AI-driven strategies, guarantees of short-term returns, and promised insurance or backing. When a seller makes extraordinary promises tied to technology—especially in a relatively new space where verifiable performance data is scarce—investors should demand concrete, auditable performance records, independent custodians, and clear disclosures about risk and liquidity.

Looking ahead, the industry will likely see continued scrutiny of AI branding in crypto-related solicitations, with regulators seeking clearer boundaries between legitimate automated trading tools and deceptive marketing that implies guaranteed results. For traders and users navigating the space, the message remains: verify, verify again, and rely on independently verifiable performance and regulatory compliance rather than promotional narratives built on AI mystique.

Sources: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission complaint filed in the Southern District of Texas, SEC enforcement releases, and related reporting on AI-powered crypto marketing schemes.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sued Texas resident Nathan Fuller, alleging he raised about $12.3 million from roughly 150 investors through a crypto investment scheme built around false claims of AI-powered trading bots, guaranteed returns and insurance protections.

According to a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Fuller operated through Privvy Investments LLC and the assumed business names Privvy Investments and Gateway Digital Investments.

The SEC says he sold passive joint-venture interests in a purported crypto arbitrage trading operation from at least October 2022 through mid-2024.

The agency claims that Fuller told investors that proprietary AI-based trading bots could scan crypto markets, execute high-frequency arbitrage trades and limit losses through stop-loss coding.

The complaint alleges investors were promised returns of 40% to 50% within 30 to 45 days and, in some cases, exceeding 100% in less than a month.

The SEC says those representations were false. According to the complaint, only about $380,000, or roughly 3% of investor funds, was used to purchase cryptocurrency without the involvement of bots. The agency says those trades were conducted without the advertised bots and generated no profits.

Fuller, instead, allegedly misappropriated at least $6.2 million for personal expenses, including the purchase of a home, gambling, travel and vehicles, while using about $5.5 million to make “Ponzi-like payments” to investors.

As withdrawal concerns grew, the complaint says, Fuller created fabricated account statements showing gains, referenced fictitious entities, and used artificial intelligence to generate a letter from a purported auditing firm claiming investor accounts were under review and would later be liquidated into a trust.

The SEC charged Fuller with violating the registration and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws and is seeking permanent injunctions, disgorgement, civil penalties and a ban on participating in securities offerings.

The case follows a separate bankruptcy proceeding in which the Justice Department said Fuller was denied discharge of more than $12.5 million in debt after admitting he operated Privvy as a Ponzi scheme and fabricated documentation, according to court records cited by the DOJ.

Many investors still remember watching XRP explode during past bull runs and feeling they entered too late. That’s why traders are now searching for projects that still look early before the broader market fully heats up again. Some meme coins have already made their biggest move. Others are only starting to build momentum quietly in the background. And in crypto, timing often matters just as much as the project itself. Here are three cryptos traders are watching closely as they hunt for the next major breakout opportunity.

One of the hardest parts of crypto investing is realizing the biggest returns usually happen before everyone agrees a project is real. That realization is part of why Little Pepe (LILPEPE) is beginning to stand out among traders seeking earlier-stage opportunities rather than chasing established meme ecosystems. Unlike many meme projects built purely around attention, Little Pepe is developing its own Layer-2 blockchain focused on ultra-fast transactions, low fees, and infrastructure specifically designed for meme coin activity. LILPEPE is currently priced at $0.0022 in Stage 13, with more than $28 million already raised and the current stage nearing completion. For many investors, the appeal is not just the meme’s branding, but the idea of entering before broader exchange exposure begins. The project has also leaned heavily into community engagement through its ongoing $777,000 giveaway campaign and the Mega Giveaway running between Stages 12 and 17, where both large buyers and random participants remain eligible for rewards exceeding 15 ETH. For traders who missed earlier meme cycles entirely, that feeling of being too late again is exactly what makes projects like Little Pepe difficult to ignore right now.

Pudgy Penguins (PENGU): Can the Momentum Continue After the First Big Rally?

Pudgy Penguins is holding steady at about $0.0102, even after some dips last month.

Pudgy Penguins Price Analysis: TradingView

For many traders, this is where the hesitation begins. Nobody wants to buy the top after watching a token already rally nearly 100% in a short period. But PENGU’s chart is still giving traders something to watch. The recent move toward $0.0118 created a bullish pole-and-flag setup. In simple terms, the strong rally formed the pole, while the current sideways consolidation may simply be the market cooling off before another move higher. The setup only becomes convincing if PENGU cleanly reclaims $0.0104 and breaks above $0.0110 again. If that happens, traders are already watching potential upside targets near $0.0121 and $0.0129. Some projections even point toward $0.0206 if meme coin momentum accelerates again.

Bonk (BONK): Solana’s Meme Economy Is Starting to Heat Up Again

Bonk trades near $0.0000068 and is beginning to attract attention again as activity returns across Solana’s meme ecosystem.

BONK Price Analysis: TradingView

Many traders missed BONK’s first major breakout because they assumed Solana meme coins had already peaked. But recent market activity suggests capital may be slowly rotating back into that sector. The chart is also looking interesting. If BONK closes above that mark, it’s got room to run up to $0.0000093, which would mean a jump of about 33% from where it is now. That may not sound life-changing compared to LILPEPE, but as long as Solana meme activity continues improving, BONK may remain one of the first places meme capital flows back into.

Conclusion

XRP’s previous bull run reminded the market how quickly crypto wealth can be created when momentum, timing, and community align. Now traders are searching for the next wave before it fully arrives. PENGU is trying to prove its first rally still has room left. BONK is benefiting from renewed activity across Solana’s meme ecosystem. And Little Pepe (LILPEPE) is attracting the attention of investors who no longer want to wait until projects become mainstream before investing.

For more information about Little Pepe (LILPEPE) visit the links below:

Website: https://littlepepe.com

Whitepaper: https://littlepepe.com/whitepaper.pdf

Telegram: https://t.me/littlepepetoken

Twitter/X: https://x.com/littlepepetoken

$777k Giveaway: https://littlepepe.com/777k-giveaway/

Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.

The United States has publicly documented a major advance in its sanction regime against Iran, reporting the seizure of about $1 billion in Iranian cryptocurrency assets. Speaking at the Reagan National Economic Forum, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the U.S. has “outright grabbed the wallets,” a maneuver he described as part of a broader financial pressure campaign. Some wallet holders may still be unaware that their funds have been seized, he added in remarks that drew attention to the speed and scale of asset freezes conducted under the administration’s sanctions strategy.

Officials characterized the seizures as a component of Operation Economic Fury, a coordinated effort launched in March 2025 to disrupt Iranian access to funds held in digital assets, as well as traditional financial channels. Bessent framed the operation as a decisive step in tightening the financial noose around Tehran, arguing that the campaign has effectively cut off critical liquidity for the regime. “I think between five and a half to six weeks of an incredibly successful military campaign and Operation Economic Fury, where we have really cut them off. They are at the end of their tether now financially,” he said, underscoring the administration’s posture on Iran’s financial resilience.

Key takeaways

• Approximately $1 billion in Iranian crypto assets have been seized, according to remarks at the Reagan National Economic Forum in which Scott Bessent spoke.
• The seizures are described as part of Operation Economic Fury, a multi-front effort launched in March 2025 to disrupt Iran’s access to crypto and other financial resources.
• Iran’s economic situation, as characterized by the official account, appears dire: inflation above 200%, widespread internet shutdowns, consumer support programs, and significant payroll issues for the armed forces.
• The newly disclosed total markedly exceeds prior public figures, roughly doubling the $500 million previously cited in late April and far above the $344 million in crypto assets frozen after sanctions in April.
• Separately, Iran has signaled interest in monetizing the Strait of Hormuz through a Bitcoin-based insurance framework, a proposal that has been described in state-linked media channels and could redefine how a strategic chokepoint is insured and priced in crypto terms.

Escalating asset seizures and Tehran’s financial squeeze

The claim of a $1 billion crypto seizure arrives as part of a broader narrative presented by U.S. officials about the effectiveness of financial pressure tools against Iran. Bessent’s remarks highlighted the rapid pace at which some crypto wallets were identified and seized, with an emphasis on the notion that “the wallets” could be pulled from holders who may not yet realize the funds have been redirected. The assertion aligns with a continued emphasis on cutting-edge enforcement tools that target digital assets alongside traditional sanctions mechanisms.

While the public cast is blunt about the impact on Iran’s finances, the underlying picture, as outlined by the official account, portrays a regime under stress. Bessent described a scenario in which Iran was siphoning roughly $400 million to $500 million per month, distributing proceeds among about 80 elite figures, before the intervention. The official narrative also paints a bleak macroeconomic environment: inflation surging past 200%, consumer subsidies being issued, the internet intermittently restricted, and a substantial portion of the regular pay for armed forces and security personnel disrupted or withheld.

The statements come as U.S. and allied authorities continue to pursue a multi-pronged approach—blending asset freezes, banking restrictions, and international cooperation—to constrain Tehran’s financial flows. The administration has cited progress across different fronts, including crypto-focused seizures and partnerships with European allies to extend property confiscations tied to illicit activity. Critics, meanwhile, stress the challenge of tracing and freezing decentralized assets and the potential for collateral effects on ordinary users who may hold assets in accounts unrelated to sanctioned entities.

From wallet seizures to Hormuz: Iran’s Bitcoin-based ambitions under scrutiny

Beyond the asset seizures, Iran’s broader geopolitical and economic strategy has included exploratory discussions about monetizing control over the Strait of Hormuz through crypto-enabled mechanisms. Cointelegraph reports that a state document circulated by Fars News Agency—a media outlet with close ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—outlined a platform named “Hormuz Safe.” The concept envisions selling digital marine insurance paid in Bitcoin and settled on the blockchain, with the potential to unlock substantial revenue for the country—projected at over $10 billion in annual terms if enacted at scale.

In related coverage, Iran has been reported to consider a model where ships passing through Hormuz would pay a tariff in Bitcoin—specifically, a $1 per barrel charge—to clear passage. The idea reflects a broader trend of state-backed crypto experimentation and aims to leverage Bitcoin’s settlement properties to simplify cross-border charging and revenue collection for a critical strategic artery. Iran’s government-linked proclamations emphasize that such a framework would be settled on-chain, potentially enabling more transparent and auditable toll collection than traditional approaches.

These discussions come amid ongoing negotiations related to Iran’s broader ties with the U.S. and allied powers, amplified by recent strikes that have targeted regime figures and key infrastructure in the region. The exact status and feasibility of Hormuz Safe remain uncertain, and observers caution that any such program would require robust international coordination, regulatory clarity, and secure settlement rails to avoid unintended consequences for global shipping and finance.

For readers tracking the crypto-policy angle, the Hormuz Safe concept intersects with broader questions about how states might use distributed ledger technologies to capture value from strategic chokepoints. If realized, a BTC-based insurance and settlement model could set a precedent for asset-backed, borderless revenue streams tied to critical maritime corridors. Yet the practicalities—risk management, liquidity, sovereignty concerns, and cross-border fiat integration—remain unresolved and subject to regulatory pushback and geopolitical risk.

Context and what to watch next

By tying crypto seizures to a broader sanctions playbook, U.S. authorities appear intent on signaling that digital assets are not a safe haven for sanctioned entities. The discrepancy between the new $1 billion figure and prior public disclosures—roughly $500 million announced in late April and about $344 million sanctioned in April—suggests a rapid acceleration in enforcement activity and asset identification. Still, the opaque and rapidly evolving nature of blockchain addresses and wallet ownership means that some seizures may unfold quietly over time, with beneficiaries or oblivious wallet holders discovering the losses only later.

Investors and observers should watch for two pivotal developments. First, how the United States and its allies operationalize and expand the “Economic Fury” framework, including potential cross-border asset coordination and the extension of sanctions into new cryptographic asset classes or platforms. Second, the Hormuz Safe proposal and similar state-led crypto initiatives will need to prove viable in a real-world maritime and financial environment. Any movement toward an on-chain toll collection system or insurance mechanism would have to contend with international shipping laws, sanctions compliance, and the volatility inherent in crypto markets.

As market participants digest these developments, several questions remain unsettled. Will more Iranian crypto wallets be identified and frozen, or will enforcement cap at the current level? How will the Hormuz Safe concept evolve—if it moves beyond a policy paper to a concrete program, what safeguards and oversight will be required? And how will financial institutions and crypto platforms adapt to heightened scrutiny around sanctioned jurisdictions and their digital assets?

Further coverage continues to emerge from outlets monitoring the intersection of sanctions policy and crypto markets. Cointelegraph has previously reported on market reactions to related U.S. actions and the broader implications for Bitcoin and crypto markets under geopolitical stress. As the regulatory and enforcement landscape tightens, market participants should treat any official disclosures with caution and consider how these developments might influence liquidity, risk management, and cross-border settlement in the months ahead.

For now, the narrative centers on a clearer message from policymakers: digital assets are increasingly entangled with national security and foreign-policy aims, and the consequences—whether in seized wallets or new insurance frameworks—will ripple through exchanges, custodians, and users worldwide. The next few weeks could reveal whether Tehran’s financial strategy shifts to accommodate tighter controls or whether new, untested crypto-instrument concepts move from talk to policy.

Sources and related context: remarks from the Reagan National Economic Forum and statements around Operation Economic Fury, including prior reporting on crypto seizures and sanctions timelines. Additionally, state-linked reporting on Hormuz Safe and Bitcoin-based tolls for the Strait of Hormuz has been cited in coverage tracing the potential monetization of critical maritime routes through crypto-native mechanisms.