1. Illegal Fundraising in New York: Statutory Framework and Definitions
Illegal fundraising typically involves soliciting or accepting funds without proper registration, disclosure, or authorization required by law. Under New York General Business Law Section 349, deceptive or misleading fundraising practices constitute unfair methods of competition and deceptive acts. Federal securities laws, including the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, impose strict requirements on the offer and sale of securities. Violations of these statutes create both criminal liability and civil remedies for injured investors.
Securities Law Violations
Offering unregistered securities or failing to comply with exemptions under the Securities Act of 1933 constitutes illegal fundraising. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and state attorneys general actively prosecute schemes involving fraudulent investment offers, Ponzi schemes, and unregistered investment advisers. Penalties include criminal prosecution, civil injunctions, and restitution to victims. Defendants may face imprisonment for up to twenty years and fines exceeding one million dollars for securities fraud.
Charitable Solicitation Violations
New York Executive Law Section 172 requires charitable organizations to register with the Charities Bureau before soliciting donations. Illegal fundraising in the charitable context includes misrepresenting how funds will be used, failing to disclose administrative costs, or operating without proper registration. Violators face civil penalties, injunctive relief preventing further solicitation, and potential criminal charges. The state attorney general has authority to pursue enforcement actions and recover funds for defrauded donors.
2. Illegal Fundraising in New York: Enforcement and Prosecution
Federal prosecutors, the SEC, state attorneys general, and the New York Department of Financial Services coordinate enforcement efforts against illegal fundraising schemes. Criminal investigations may result in indictments charging wire fraud, mail fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering in connection with fraudulent fundraising. Civil enforcement actions seek disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, civil penalties, and injunctive relief to prevent future violations. Whistleblower programs, including the SEC Whistleblower Program, incentivize reporting of illegal fundraising activities.
Criminal Prosecution Standards
Prosecutors must establish that the defendant knowingly and intentionally engaged in a scheme to defraud investors or donors. Circumstantial evidence of misrepresentation, concealment of material facts, or false statements regarding use of funds supports criminal charges. The government may pursue charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (wire fraud), 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (mail fraud), and conspiracy statutes. Conviction requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but sentencing guidelines provide for substantial prison terms and restitution.
Civil Remedies and Injunctive Relief
Victims of illegal fundraising schemes may pursue civil actions for breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment. Courts may issue injunctions prohibiting defendants from soliciting funds, requiring disgorgement of proceeds, and imposing civil penalties. Class actions similar to the Coupang litigation framework allow multiple victims to seek recovery collectively. Declaratory relief establishing that fundraising practices violated consumer protection laws creates a benchmark for assessing corporate and individual liability in future cases.
3. Illegal Fundraising in New York: Key Defenses and Compliance Strategies
Defendants accused of illegal fundraising may assert defenses including lack of intent to defraud, reasonable reliance on professional advice, or compliance with applicable exemptions. However, mere negligence or inadvertent violations do not excuse liability under strict liability regimes. Organizations must implement robust compliance programs, maintain detailed records of fund solicitation and use, and obtain proper registrations and approvals. Engaging qualified securities counsel and compliance officers reduces exposure to illegal fundraising charges.
Affirmative Defenses
A defendant may argue that conduct fell within a recognized exemption under the Securities Act of 1933, such as the intrastate offering exemption or Regulation D safe harbor. Reliance on advice from qualified legal counsel regarding compliance may mitigate penalties in civil proceedings, though it does not eliminate criminal liability. The defendant must demonstrate that the reliance was reasonable and that counsel provided competent advice based on accurate facts provided by the defendant.
Compliance Best Practices
| Compliance Element | Description |
|---|---|
| Securities Registration | Register securities offerings with the SEC and state regulators unless a valid exemption applies. |
| Disclosure Documents | Prepare comprehensive disclosure documents explaining investment risks, use of proceeds, and management background. |
| Charitable Registration | Register charitable organizations with state authorities before soliciting donations. |
| Record Retention | Maintain detailed records of all fundraising activities, communications, and fund use for audit and regulatory review. |
| Legal Review | Obtain opinions from qualified securities and compliance counsel before launching any fundraising campaign. |
4. Illegal Fundraising in New York: Remedies and Class Action Framework
Victims of illegal fundraising may pursue individual claims or participate in class actions seeking monetary damages, restitution, and systemic relief. Class certification in illegal fundraising cases requires proof of commonality, typicality, and predominance of common questions of law or fact. Lead plaintiffs represent all class members and must demonstrate that they were harmed in a manner similar to other victims. The litigation framework established in complex cases, such as Coupang, demonstrates how courts manage large-scale investor and consumer disputes involving data security and corporate governance failures.
Monetary and Equitable Relief
Courts award actual damages representing the direct financial loss suffered by investors or donors, statutory damages where provided by statute, and punitive damages in cases of egregious misconduct. Injunctive relief prevents defendants from engaging in future illegal fundraising and compels implementation of compliance systems. Declaratory relief establishes that fundraising practices violated applicable law, creating precedent for assessing liability in similar cases. Disgorgement requires defendants to return ill-gotten gains and profits derived from illegal fundraising schemes.
Class Member Rights and Subclass Definitions
In class actions involving illegal fundraising, courts define subclasses based on distinct legal issues or geographic residence. For example, investors residing in New York may constitute one subclass while out-of-state investors form another, reflecting different state law claims. Class members receive notice of certification and have the right to opt out or object to proposed settlements. Lead plaintiffs work with counsel to pursue claims on behalf of all class members and negotiate settlements that provide fair compensation and systemic reforms to prevent future violations.
10 Feb, 2026
