> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bexus.info/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# U.S. SEC Sues Manager Over Alleged SpaceX Equity Fund Fraud, Alleging Fund Lost Entire SpaceX Stake Over $46,020 Nonpayment
- URL: https://www.bexus.info/20261026-news-161-en/
- Published: 2026-10-23T14:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-26T03:17:54.000Z
- Description: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit in federal court on September 30, 2026, against New York-based Meyer Global Management LLC (MGM) and its founder and CEO Owen E.H. Meyer over alleged fraud by the manager in selling a fund claiming to invest in SpaceX equity. The SEC
- Author: Alfred Kim
- Tags: english, 워싱턴, Washington

United States

On September 30, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit in federal court against New York-based Meyer Global Management LLC (MGM) and its founder and CEO Owen E.H. Meyer over fraud charges involving the sale of funds purportedly investing in SpaceX equity. The SEC alleged that the Starship X fund had its entire SpaceX equity position forfeited after failing to satisfy a $46,020 capital call, despite investors having contributed nearly $3 million. The SEC alleged that the manager did not inform investors of this development and, on June 12, 2026, when SpaceX went public, emailed investors who held no shares to "stay tuned for further updates regarding distributions." The SEC alleged that at least five such fraudulent schemes occurred. All of these statements are allegations made by the SEC in its complaint at the inception of litigation, and no court judgment has been rendered.

## SpaceX Is the Victim Investment Target, and Defendants Are a One-Person New York Asset Manager

The plaintiff is the SEC, and the defendants are MGM and Meyer. SpaceX is not a defendant. The SEC complaint describes SpaceX solely as a privately held company in which the funds sought to acquire equity, making no allegations of legal violations against SpaceX. In addition to SpaceX, other pre-IPO companies such as OpenAI, Neuralink, Destinus, and Relativity Space appear in the complaint under the same pattern. On the same day, the SEC issued Press Release 2026-98 and Litigation Release LR-26659, with the case filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under Case No. 1:26-cv-08607.

The defendants operate on a small scale. The SEC noted that MGM managed approximately 16 private funds, each created to hold equity in a single private company. Meyer, 35, is the sole owner and only full-time employee of the firm, the SEC explained. MGM's regulatory assets under management reported to financial authorities peaked at $34.33 million between 2022 and 2025, and stood at $25.33 million in 2026\. The SEC alleged that the two defendants raised at least $18.5 million from approximately 100 investors between 2019 and 2024.

The SEC is seeking permanent injunctions against future violations, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, and civil penalties. For Meyer, the SEC also requested conduct-based injunctions barring him from associating with investment advisers or broker-dealers. The complaint did not specify the amounts for disgorgement or penalties and demanded a jury trial. The defendants' arguments were not included in the documents released by the SEC.

## Investors Bought Fund-of-Funds Interests, Not SpaceX Stock

The structure outlined by the SEC in the complaint did not allow investors to hold SpaceX shares directly in their own names. The SEC stated that Meyer created separate funds in the form of special purpose vehicles (SPVs) to hold private company stakes, and investors served as limited partners with no role in operation or management. What investors purchased were not shares of stock, but limited partnership interests in the funds.

Even those funds did not hold SpaceX shares directly. The SEC stated that MGM's funds typically invested in other funds managed by third-party advisers, which either held the shares directly or reinvested into yet another third-party fund. The structure flowed from the investor to the MGM fund, from the MGM fund to a third-party fund, and at times to another third-party fund above that, with SpaceX shares sitting at the very end. Investors stood at the beginning of this chain.

Rather than investors appearing on SpaceX's shareholder register, their stakes were established through documentation across intermediary funds, with the asset manager holding those records. The SEC explained that Meyer solicited investors through personal networks, word-of-mouth, and business contacts, meeting some on online marketplaces for trading pre-IPO shares. Emails and account statements sent by the manager were virtually the only means of verification for investors, and the SEC alleged that those documents were contrary to fact.

Under this structure, the SEC alleges that a negligible sum wiped out the entirety of an equity position.

## Missing a $46,020 Capital Call Forfeited the Fund's Entire SpaceX Stake, SEC Alleges

The SEC explained that in early 2022, MGM raised approximately $3,125,000 from three outside investors to form the Starship X fund. The objective was to acquire equity in SpaceX by purchasing an interest in a fund (identified as Fund Y in the complaint) managed by a third-party adviser (Adviser C). According to the SEC, the agreement executed on February 3, 2022, included provisions for capital calls—demanding that investors pay committed funds to cover Fund Y's fees and expenses—and stipulated that failure to pay could result in forfeiture of the investment interest. The SEC noted that the defendants satisfied the capital calls for 2022 and 2023 on behalf of the fund.

The SEC challenged a capital call dated January 3, 2024, in the amount of $46,020\. The SEC alleged that the defendants failed to ensure payment was made, resulting in Starship X never paying it. Fund Y issued default notices on three occasions: February 9, March 22, and July 9, 2024\. When the defendants did not respond, Fund Y filed a lawsuit in Florida state court on October 1, 2024, and the SEC alleged that the defendants did not even file an answer. On November 19, 2024, the court entered a declaratory judgment transferring all of Starship X's SpaceX equity to Fund Y, leaving the fund with zero or virtually zero assets, according to the SEC.

The $46,020 figure represents roughly 1.5% of the approximately $3,125,000 raised by the fund (a calculated figure). About 68 times the demanded amount was at stake (also a calculated figure). In its press release, the SEC described the forfeited investment as "nearly $3 million." The SEC alleged that this conduct constituted a breach of fiduciary duty by the asset manager. An investment manager obligated to manage the fund for the benefit of investors failed to handle a single capital call and made no response despite three default notices and a lawsuit. It was 321 days from the date of the capital call to the date of the judgment (also a calculated figure).

## On the Day of the IPO, Investors With No Stake Received an Email to Stay Tuned for Distributions, SEC Alleges

The SEC alleged that the defendants failed to notify investors of the default or the litigation. According to the complaint, on October 29, 2024, the defendants billed the largest investor, who held 94.1% of Starship X, a $10,000 fee to transfer a portion of his individual holding to a family trust. The SEC noted that this date fell nearly a month after Fund Y had initiated default proceedings.

The SEC further alleged that even after the court entered judgment against Starship X in December 2024, the defendants issued a new interest certificate to the same investor. Although the stake was already worthless, the defendants did not disclose this fact. The complaint stated that the largest investor only discovered the Florida litigation and the forfeiture in December 2025, after hiring an attorney to investigate following inconsistent and vague communications from the defendants. The interval from the judgment date to early December 2025 was approximately one year (a calculated figure).

The SEC alleged that on June 12, 2026, the day SpaceX went public, the defendants sent an email to Starship fund investors. Quoted in the complaint, the email referred to a "dream that many of you have followed for years," writing, "Today, we have the opportunity to participate in what I believe will be one of the most important companies of our generation," and concluded with the phrase, "stay tuned for further updates regarding distributions of your shares." The SEC alleged that this statement was false and misleading. Starship X held no SpaceX shares to distribute at that time. The SEC alleged that every investor in the fund lost their entire investment.

From the judgment date to this email was 570 days, or approximately a year and a half (a calculated figure). The SEC alleges that the distribution investors were told to anticipate on the day of the IPO never existed in the first place.

Starship X is the fifth scheme detailed in the complaint, and the SEC alleges that the same mechanics were used in different ways across the preceding four cases as well.

## Starship VI Investors Received "Closed!" Notice Even Though No Shares Were Acquired, SEC Alleges

The first matter addressed by the SEC in the complaint is the Starship VI fund from 2021\. The SEC explained that in February and March 2021, MGM raised approximately $1.1 million from 13 individual investors to invest in SpaceX, and in mid-March signed an agreement to acquire an interest in another fund (Fund X) held by a third-party company (Company A), wiring $1,035,000\. Under Fund X's operating agreement, the transaction required the approval of Fund X's manager, the SEC noted.

According to the SEC, approval was never granted. On April 2, 2021, the manager of Fund X notified them via email that "we cannot accommodate the transfer here," and the defendants obtained neither the Fund X interest nor the underlying SpaceX shares. Nonetheless, the SEC alleged that Meyer sent an email to investors on June 29, 2021, with the subject line "Starship VI - Closed!," stating that the fund's investment was complete. This was 88 days after the rejection notice (a calculated figure). The SEC alleged that this representation was false.

The SEC alleged that while the money was returned, it never went to the investors. The SEC stated that Company A wired back at least $600,000 in total to Meyer-affiliated corporate accounts in December 2021 and December 2022\. Because this company had contributed only about 5% of the Starship VI investment capital, it was entitled to at most $30,000, and the SEC alleged that Meyer misappropriated the remaining $570,000\. Among the uses cited by the SEC from the initial $500,000 returned in January 2022 were $220,000 transferred to Meyer's personal account, approximately $70,000 toward an investment in Destinus (a portfolio holding of another fund), and $105,000 in MGM payments unrelated to the SpaceX investment. In the meantime, the SEC alleged that the defendants continued sending account statements and notices through September 2024 indicating that the equity value was increasing. According to the SEC, while the fund never acquired any equity, investors were led to believe their holdings were appreciating.

## Repeated Claims That Funds Were "Safe" While Capital Was Already Spent, SEC Alleges

The next two cases involve a single fund (Meyer Global Partners I, MGP I) taking in capital while altering its stated purpose. The SEC explained that this fund was established in early 2023 to purchase equity in online casino company PlayStar. Three investors sent $85,950 between March 27 and 30, 2023, but the SEC alleged that the defendants spent nearly all of this money on purposes other than investments or authorized operating expenses. As an example, the SEC noted that in April 2023, transfers of $35,000 and $30,000 were made to Meyer's personal account and used to pay legal fees unrelated to the fund.

The PlayStar investment did not materialize. According to the SEC, the defendants told the largest investor on July 5, 2023, that the investment had fallen through but that "your capital is safe in the fund," and on July 8 texted that he "promised your capital was safe." The SEC alleged that the balance in this account stood at $0 from May 3 to August 3\. The funds were not returned to investors until December 28, 2023\. The SEC characterized this episode as an undisclosed, interest-free loan of $85,950 lasting several months.

The same fund shifted its objective in March 2024 to investing in OpenAI equity, and the SEC alleged that the promised investment failed to occur once again. Citing Meyer's own sworn testimony, the complaint noted that the OpenAI equity acquisition fell through in March 2024\. Yet six investors sent $1,097,500 between April 8 and 18, and the SEC alleged that the defendants concealed the failure from investors for roughly six months. On July 19, 2024, an email was sent representing that "the investment is safe," the SEC noted.

The SEC alleged that a net amount of approximately $168,000 was transferred from this account to Meyer's personal account. With agreed-upon management fees from investors totaling roughly $54,000, the SEC explained that he took more than three times the agreed fee. Around October 2024, the defendants offered investors the option to reinvest in OpenAI at a higher valuation or receive a refund, but the SEC alleged that the fund was already short by approximately $130,000 at the time. Only three of the six investors received all or nearly all of their money back. Approximately $195,000 was needed to refund the remaining three investors, but only about $15,600 remained in the account as of March 19, 2025, according to the complaint.

## Roughly $686,000 in Liquidation Proceeds Never Reached Investors, SEC Alleges

The next case involves investor proceeds from three already-liquidated funds: Starship IV, V, and VII. The SEC explained that MGM raised approximately $5.6 million from about 45 investors across these three funds to invest in a fund managed by Adviser A. Around January 2025, Adviser A wound down and liquidated the investment. This process was tied to a separate settlement agreement that Meyer had entered into with another investment adviser. The SEC explained that while this settlement was designed not to impact the assets of the funds or investors, a third-party Receiver was tasked with handling liquidation distributions to allocate Meyer's firm's share of fees and carried interest.

According to the SEC, in mid-November 2025, the Receiver wired $13,829,158 to a Meyer-affiliated corporate account, all of which should have been directed to the three funds and their investors. However, the SEC alleged that the defendants distributed only about $13,142,522 to investors. Of the remaining $686,636, $50,000 went to an individual invested in an unrelated fund, and approximately $636,406 went into Meyer's personal account between November 2025 and July 2026\. The shortfall represented approximately 5% of the total amount owed (a calculated figure).

The SEC also took issue with the conditions imposed for receiving the payouts. Before wiring distributions, the defendants required investors to execute documents releasing the defendants from all liability related to the investment, accepting the defendants' calculated amount as the "sole and authoritative determination" of their final payout, the SEC noted. The SEC alleged that this payout was roughly 5% lower than the schedule Meyer submitted to the Receiver, a fact unknown to investors. In the complaint, the SEC characterized the defendants as having held a portion of the settlement proceeds hostage.

## SEC States Action Targets Repeated Conduct Rather Than an Isolated Mistake

Corey A. Schuster, Co-Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division's Asset Management Unit, stated in the press release that this case serves as a "reminder that fraudsters may target retail investors by touting the allure of exclusive and lucrative pre-IPO investment opportunities." Schuster added that while the defendants operated as investment advisers with fiduciary duties to their clients, the SEC alleges they engaged in multiple fraudulent schemes to enrich themselves. The SEC alleged that at least five such schemes occurred from December 2021 to the present, in three of which at least $1.27 million was misappropriated from client fund assets.

The statutory provisions charged by the SEC are Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder. The SEC alleged that all of these acts fall under the same framework of MGM and Meyer violating the fiduciary duties owed to their funds and investors. The complaint summarized these actions as spending investor funds or forfeiting equity while falsely assuring investors that their assets were safe or appreciating.

The SEC asked the court for permanent injunctions, disgorgement of profits, civil penalties, and conduct-based injunctions against Meyer. Whether the court accepts these claims will be determined in subsequent legal proceedings.

## Sources (KST)

- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Press Release 2026-98 "SEC Charges Meyer Global Management and Its CEO with Defrauding Retail Investors in Private Funds Held Interests" (2026-09-30): https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-98-sec-charges-meyer-global-management-its-ceo-defrauding-retail-investors-private-funds-held-interests
- SEC Litigation Release LR-26659: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26659