Federal regulators have extended the legal fallout from Celsius’ 2022 collapse by ordering two of the company’s former co-founders to pay more than $6 million to resolve Federal Trade Commission (FTC) allegations that they misrepresented the safety of the crypto lending platform.

On Monday, the FTC announced that Hanoch “Nuke” Goldstein, Celsius’ former chief technology officer, was ordered to pay $2.014 million. Shlomi Daniel Leon, the firm’s former chief strategy officer, was ordered to pay $4.1 million under a separate stipulated order entered on June 29.

Key takeaways

• Goldstein and Leon have been ordered to pay a combined $6.114 million to settle FTC consumer protection allegations tied to Celsius’ failure.
• The orders include marketing and sales bans affecting products or services that could be used to deposit, exchange, invest, or withdraw crypto assets.
• The FTC’s claims focus on alleged misstatements about Celsius’ reserves, insurance coverage, and whether loans were unsecured.
• The settlements build on a separate FTC resolution involving Alex Mashinsky, which already included a $10 million payment and a permanent marketing ban.
• Payments from the co-founders are also set to be credited against the FTC’s consumer-harm judgment tied to the case.

What the FTC says the co-founders got wrong

According to the FTC’s allegations, Celsius made assurances to customers about the platform’s financial safety that were not consistent with the company’s actual position as it moved toward bankruptcy. The regulator said Celsius falsely told customers it maintained sufficient reserves to satisfy withdrawal demands, claimed it had a $750 million insurance policy covering customer deposits, and represented that it did not issue unsecured loans.

The FTC further alleged that these public assurances persisted even shortly before the company’s collapse. As the agency put it in its statement Monday, the promises were allegedly false and “its top executives continued to claim that customers’ deposits were safe days before the company filed for bankruptcy.”

Goldstein and Leon are being held responsible for the misconduct the FTC described in connection with how Celsius marketed its operations during the period leading up to the shutdown.

Court-ordered bans restrict Celsius-related promotion and sales

Beyond the monetary payments, the FTC’s settlement terms also impose restrictions designed to limit future involvement in crypto custody and dealing workflows. The agency said the orders bar Leon from marketing or selling products or services that could be used to deposit, exchange, invest, or withdraw assets.

For Goldstein, the restrictions are similarly broad. The FTC’s statement Monday said Goldstein agreed to a ban on marketing or selling retail products or services that can be used to buy, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute, or trade cryptocurrency.

“Similarly, Goldstein has agreed to a ban on marketing or selling retail products or services that can be used to buy, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute or trade cryptocurrency.”

How the payments fit into the wider Celsius settlements

The settlements add another layer to the ongoing enforcement picture surrounding Celsius’ collapse and its impact on customers. The platform, which the settlement narrative places in a much larger consumer-harm context, held $25 billion in assets at its peak and owed $4.7 billion to users when it filed for bankruptcy in July 2022.

The FTC’s co-founder orders also relate directly to an earlier resolution involving Alex Mashinsky. In April, Mashinsky agreed to an FTC settlement that included a permanent ban from promoting asset-related products and a requirement to pay $10 million, alongside a broader, partially suspended $4.72 billion judgment.

In the current cases, the FTC said that the $2.014 million and $4.1 million payments from Goldstein and Leon, respectively, will be credited against the $4.72 billion judgment. That crediting mechanism is intended to prevent double-counting of consumer-harm-related penalties across related FTC outcomes.

Criminal case developments underscore the regulatory focus

While these are FTC consumer protection resolutions, other enforcement tracks have also advanced. Separately, US prosecutors have pursued criminal charges against Mashinsky. The filing timeline described in the source indicates Mashinsky pleaded guilty to commodities and securities fraud charges and was sentenced to 12 years in prison in May 2025.

Prosecutors, as described in the reporting referenced in the source, said he misled Celsius customers about the company’s profitability, investment risks, and the safety of customer funds. That criminal framing aligns with the FTC’s core theory in the co-founder cases: that customers were allegedly given assurances about safety and risk management that did not match reality.

For investors and industry participants, the practical takeaway is that Celsius-related enforcement is not confined to one executive or one courtroom. The FTC’s added restrictions on future marketing and sales of crypto asset-related products suggest regulators are targeting the ability of former insiders to re-enter similar distribution and promotion channels. Readers should watch whether additional Celsius-linked proceedings—civil or criminal—continue to expand the circle of accountability and how courts treat the scope of the marketing bans as the industry adapts to ongoing compliance demands.

Celsius co-founders Shlomi Daniel Leon and Hanoch “Nuke” Goldstein will pay a combined $6.5 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges tied to the collapsed crypto lender. 

The FTC said Leon will pay $4.1 million, while Goldstein will pay $2.4 million under separate court orders.

The settlements end the FTC cases against the two executives and follow former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky’s $10 million agreement in April. The three co-founders will pay a combined $16.5 million under their respective settlements. The FTC accused them of misleading customers about the safety, availability and management of assets deposited with Celsius.

Leon, Celsius’ former chief strategy officer, must pay $4.1 million under an order entered by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote on June 29. The order also enters a $4.72 billion judgment against him, with most of that amount suspended if he meets the settlement terms and provided accurate financial disclosures to the FTC.

Goldstein, who served as Celsius’ chief technology officer, will pay $2.4 million, according to the FTC’s latest release. Both men also face limits on future business activities. Leon cannot market or sell services used to deposit, exchange, invest or withdraw assets. Goldstein faces a similar ban covering retail crypto products used to buy, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute or trade digital assets.

The orders also prohibit the two executives from making false statements about products or services. They cannot violate provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act by obtaining customer financial information through false or fraudulent representations. Leon also faces restrictions on sharing consumers’ nonpublic personal information without informed consent.

FTC case focused on Celsius safety and reserve claims

The FTC filed its case against Celsius and its executives in July 2023. The regulator alleged that the company presented itself as a safer alternative to traditional banks while making claims about its reserves, lending practices and insurance coverage that were not accurate.

According to the regulator, Celsius told customers they could withdraw deposits at any time and claimed it maintained a $750 million insurance policy covering customer funds. The company also said it held enough reserves to meet customer obligations and did not make unsecured loans. The FTC alleged that Celsius instead made $1.2 billion in unsecured loans by April 2022 and lacked the insurance policy it advertised.

The FTC also accused executives of continuing to reassure customers as Celsius moved closer to bankruptcy. The regulator said they “continued to claim that customers’ deposits were safe days before the company filed for bankruptcy.” Celsius suspended customer withdrawals in June 2022 and filed for bankruptcy the following month.

Mashinsky faces separate bans after $10 million FTC deal

The latest settlements follow the FTC’s April agreement with Mashinsky.The former CEO agreed to pay $10 million and accepted a permanent ban on promoting or offering asset-related products. His order also included a $4.72 billion judgment, although most remains suspended under conditions set by the settlement.

Mashinsky later received another permanent restriction from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. As crypto.news reported in June, a federal court barred him from trading in markets overseen by the CFTC or registering with the agency. That settlement closed the regulator’s civil enforcement case against him and Celsius.

His criminal case remains separate from the FTC settlements. A federal judge sentenced Mashinsky to 12 years in prison in May 2025 after he pleaded guilty to commodities fraud and securities fraud. Prosecutors said he misled customers about Celsius’ financial condition, investment risks and yield-generating activities. The court also ordered him to forfeit more than $48 million.

Celsius creditors continue recovering funds after the collapse

Celsius held about $25 billion in assets at its peak before its business deteriorated during the 2022 crypto market downturn. When the company stopped withdrawals, hundreds of thousands of customers had about $4.7 billion in inaccessible assets on the platform, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

The bankruptcy recovery process has continued separately from the cases against former executives. As previously reported, Celsius began a third creditor distribution worth about $220.6 million in August 2025, bringing total recoveries at the time to nearly 65% of eligible claims.

Another former Celsius executive, Roni Cohen-Pavon, also faced legal action over his role at the company. Crypto.news reported in May that he avoided additional prison time after cooperating with prosecutors in the Mashinsky case.

With the Leon and Goldstein orders now entered, the FTC has reached settlements with all three Celsius co-founders named in its 2023 case. The agency’s official case page still lists the broader proceeding as pending, while separate bankruptcy, securities and criminal matters have followed their own legal processes.

White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt will remain in his post after his scheduled military training was deferred, keeping the administration’s lead CLARITY Act negotiator in Washington during the final weeks before the Senate’s summer break. 

Witt had planned to begin Judge Advocate General training with the Georgia Army National Guard on July 27.

Witt confirmed the change in a July 20 post on X. He said he remained committed to his military service but added that “my training has been deferred, and that I will be able to see this effort through to the end.” The decision reverses a plan that would have shifted many of his responsibilities to White House Crypto Council deputy director Harry Jung.

Witt stays as the Senate calendar narrows

Witt serves as executive director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets and has played a central role in talks involving the White House, lawmakers, banks and crypto companies. As previously reported by crypto.news, he had already postponed the same training in April while CLARITY Act negotiations continued.

The Senate now has little room left on its calendar. Aug. 7 is the final scheduled session day before a state work period begins on Aug. 10. Supporters have treated that window as an important target because election-year politics could make a later vote harder to arrange.

The CLARITY Act would create federal rules for digital asset markets and divide oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Senate staff still need to resolve differences before leaders can bring a final version to the floor, where the bill would likely need Democratic support.

Ethics dispute still blocks a final Senate agreement

Witt’s decision to stay does not resolve the policy disputes holding up the bill. Senate negotiators still lack a final agreement over ethics rules that would restrict elected officials from profiting from crypto-related businesses. The White House had not accepted the proposed language as of that report.

Democrats have pushed for tighter limits covering government officials with digital asset interests, while the White House has argued that ethics standards should apply evenly. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has also acknowledged that Republicans still need a bipartisan agreement to move the measure forward.

The uncertainty has affected market expectations. A related crypto.news report said Polymarket traders placed the CLARITY Act’s chance of becoming law in 2026 at 31% on July 20. The figure can change quickly, but it reflected doubts about whether lawmakers could settle the dispute before the August recess.

Consumer protections and stablecoin yield remain in focus

The latest negotiations have also produced changes on customer protections. Coinbase vice chair Ryan VanGrack said Senate Democrats secured stronger safeguards in the revised bill and described the changes as giving the legislation “more teeth.” He did not provide full details, and lawmakers had not released the final Senate text as of July 20.

Other disagreements have centered on stablecoin rewards, decentralized software developers and law enforcement powers. The stablecoin yield debate has drawn strong lobbying from banks and crypto companies. Banking groups have argued that rewards paid on stablecoin balances could pull deposits from traditional banks, while crypto firms have pushed to preserve room for activity-based rewards under a regulated framework.

As previously reported, the Senate Banking Committee cleared a version of the CLARITY Act in May. Witt has worked on several of the unresolved issues, keeping him involved in the administration’s effort to reach a deal with lawmakers from both parties.

Harry Jung’s exit changes the White House staffing plan

Witt’s revised plans come as Harry Jung prepares to leave government service. Jung, the deputy director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets, said on July 21 that he would leave his post in two weeks. He had been expected to assume many of Witt’s responsibilities during the planned military leave.

Jung said he was proud of the council’s work and described the past two years as transformative for U.S. crypto policy. His departure means the White House will avoid an immediate leadership gap because Witt is staying. The council is also working on GENIUS Act implementation, the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and crypto tax policy.

Witt’s continued presence removes one staffing uncertainty, but the legislation still depends on lawmakers resolving ethics provisions, consumer rules and other contested sections. The Senate has not announced a final floor vote, leaving the bill’s path tied to negotiations before lawmakers leave Washington in August.

Celsius’ former co-founders are now facing additional financial consequences tied to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s case over what the regulator said were misleading assurances about the safety of customer assets before the crypto lender’s 2022 collapse.

The FTC has secured settlements in which Shlomi Daniel Leon and Hanoch “Nuke” Goldstein were ordered to pay a combined over $6 million to resolve FTC allegations that they misrepresented the security of the Celsius platform ahead of its bankruptcy filing. The latest orders follow the broader ripple effects of Celsius’ failure, which left users seeking recovery of funds after the firm, once valued on the promise of managed custody and lending, unraveled during a market downturn.

Key takeaways

• Goldstein, Celsius’ former chief technology officer, was ordered to pay $2.014 million under a court order signed Monday by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote.
• Leon, the former chief strategy officer, was ordered to pay $4.1 million under a separate stipulated order entered on June 29.
• The settlements extend FTC enforcement beyond CEO Alex Mashinsky, targeting additional executives’ alleged role in customer-facing representations.
• Both orders include restrictions barring the co-founders from marketing or selling products or services that could be used to deposit, exchange, invest, or withdraw crypto assets.
• The FTC previously alleged that Celsius misled customers about reserves, insurance coverage, and the nature of loans, and these settlements are credited toward related judgments.

Court-ordered payments and the scope of the bans

According to the FTC, the settlements with Goldstein and Leon are designed to address alleged consumer harm tied to the way Celsius presented its platform to retail customers. Judge Denise Cote’s order signed Monday requires Goldstein to pay $2.014 million. Leon’s stipulated order—entered on June 29—requires a larger payment of $4.1 million.

Beyond the monetary terms, the FTC’s statement notes that both co-founders agreed to restrictions aimed at reducing their ability to operate in ways connected to crypto custody and trading. In particular, the FTC said Leon is barred from marketing or selling products or services that could be used to deposit, exchange, invest, or withdraw assets. For Goldstein, the FTC describes a similar restriction covering retail products or services that could be used to buy, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute, or trade cryptocurrency.

“Similarly, Goldstein has agreed to a ban on marketing or selling retail products or services that can be used to buy, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute or trade cryptocurrency.”

FTC allegations: reserves, insurance, and loan practices

At the center of the FTC’s complaint was the claim that Celsius presented a picture of safety that, according to the regulator, did not match its actual conditions. The FTC alleged Celsius falsely told customers it maintained sufficient reserves to satisfy withdrawal demands.

The regulator also alleged Celsius promoted a $750 million insurance policy covering customer deposits, and represented that it did not issue unsecured loans.

The FTC further argued that these claims were made while Celsius’ executives continued to assure customers that deposits were safe in the final period before the platform collapsed. In the regulator’s framing, the alleged misrepresentations were not merely marketing mistakes; they were repeated assurances made during a period when the company’s financial situation was deteriorating.

How the settlements connect to the Mashinsky case

The settlements with Leon and Goldstein are part of an enforcement arc that began with the FTC’s action against Celsius founder and former CEO Alex Mashinsky, and then expanded to other executives. Earlier coverage of the Celsius fallout, including the trading restrictions placed on Mashinsky, underscored that regulatory scrutiny extended well beyond one individual once the company failed.

In April, Mashinsky agreed to an FTC settlement that included a permanent bar from promoting asset-related products and a $10 million payment. That settlement also involved a larger judgment framework described as $4.72 billion in a partially suspended structure, reflecting consumer harm allegations. Earlier reporting noted the settlement terms, including the $10 million payment and the partially suspended judgment.

The newly ordered payments from Goldstein and Leon—$2.014 million and $4.1 million, respectively—are stated to be credited against the $4.72 billion judgment. That matters because it shows how the FTC is coordinating multiple executive settlements into a single remedial accounting process, rather than treating each settlement as an isolated event.

Separately from the FTC track, the broader criminal fallout has also progressed. The U.S. Department of Justice previously reported that Mashinsky was sentenced to 12 years in prison in May 2025 after pleading guilty to commodities and securities fraud charges. Prosecutors said Mashinsky misled Celsius customers about the company’s profitability, investment risks, and the safety of customer funds.

Why these enforcement steps matter for Celsius customers and the industry

For Celsius users, the immediate takeaway is that the FTC’s case continues to identify and penalize senior figures beyond the most visible CEO at the time of collapse. The settlements do not reverse the bankruptcy outcome, but they do reinforce that the regulator intends to pursue accountability tied to marketing claims directed at retail customers.

For the broader crypto lending sector, these orders are another signal that “custody-and-lending” narratives—particularly those that reassure customers about reserves, insurance, and withdrawal readiness—are likely to remain under intense regulatory scrutiny. The bans also go beyond fines: they target future conduct by restricting marketing and sales roles connected to crypto deposit and trading functions.

What remains to be watched is how these settlements fit into the continued legal and enforcement landscape around Celsius and related claims. The crediting of co-founders’ payments against the $4.72 billion judgment suggests that additional financial outcomes may still surface as the FTC tallies and resolves separate executive-level actions tied to the same alleged consumer harm.

Going forward, investors and customers should pay attention to two things: whether additional Celsius executives face similar settlement-driven restrictions, and how courts continue to reconcile multiple payments under the same FTC judgment framework—especially as regulators seek to close gaps between public assurances and the actual condition of crypto lending platforms before collapses.