Federal prosecutors in Manhattan charged money manager Henry Paul Regan with conspiracy and fraud for allegedly running a Ponzi scheme that raised more than $60 million from investors and caused losses exceeding $50 million. The charges, brought by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, allege Regan used two entities, Next Level Holdings and Yield Wealth Ltd., to lure investors from at least 2022 through December 2024 with promises tied to Colombian precious metals and Affordable Care Act insurance policies. A parallel civil action by the Securities and Exchange Commission puts the total fraud figure even higher, at more than $63 million.
Why the Regan charges carry weight right now
The criminal case against Regan centers on a straightforward allegation: investor money never went where he said it would. Instead, funds were allegedly recycled as Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors, diverted to cover commissions, and wired to accounts abroad. That pattern, according to the federal charging documents, continued for roughly two years and pulled in more than $60 million before the scheme collapsed.
A critical timeline detail adds context. Yield Wealth Ltd., the registered investment adviser Regan controlled, had its SEC registration terminated effective September 5, 2024, according to the firm’s regulatory profile. The alleged scheme ran through at least December 2024, meaning Regan was still soliciting investors for months after the advisory firm lost its regulated status. During that gap, SEC records show a Regulation D Form D filing for a vehicle called Mega High-Yield Term Deposit LP, which appears in the agency’s EDGAR database. The timing raises a pointed question: whether the loss of Yield Wealth’s registration pushed investor solicitations toward less transparent, exempt offering structures that were harder for regulators to monitor in real time.
How the DOJ and SEC cases frame the $63 million fraud
The criminal and civil cases overlap but differ in scope. The grand jury indictment filed in the Southern District of New York alleges that Regan raised more than $60 million from investors and that losses exceeded $50 million. The SEC’s civil complaint sets the bar higher, alleging investors were defrauded of more than $63 million. The gap between those figures likely reflects different accounting methods: the DOJ tallies net losses after subtracting any returns investors received, while the SEC appears to count the total amount taken in through fraudulent means.
Both agencies describe the same core mechanics. Regan allegedly told investors their money would generate returns through Colombian precious metals trading and investments linked to Affordable Care Act health insurance policies. Neither strategy produced the advertised returns. Funds were instead used to pay earlier investors, a hallmark of a Ponzi structure, and to cover commissions and international wire transfers. The indictment identifies the scheme’s active window as running from at least 2022 through at least December 2024, spanning more than two years of alleged continuous fraud.
Open questions about Regan’s investors and missing funds
Several significant gaps remain in the public record about who invested with Regan and how much money can realistically be recovered. The government filings do not yet provide a full roster of victims, but both cases indicate that investors included individuals and entities that placed substantial sums into Next Level Holdings and related offerings. With alleged losses topping $50 million on the criminal side and more than $63 million in the SEC action, the eventual recovery rate will likely depend on how much cash, securities, or property authorities can trace and freeze.
The SEC’s complaint suggests that substantial amounts were moved through multiple bank accounts and into overseas destinations, complicating asset recovery. Prosecutors also allege that investor funds financed commissions and other payments that may not be clawed back in full. A detailed breakdown of transfers appears in an accompanying forensic summary filed with the court, outlining how money purportedly flowed between Regan-controlled entities and third parties. Those disclosures will guide both restitution calculations in the criminal case and any disgorgement orders in the SEC action.
Another unresolved issue is whether any institutional gatekeepers-such as intermediaries who introduced clients to Regan-face potential exposure. The charging documents emphasize Regan’s central role, but they also reference commissions paid to others, raising the possibility that some investors came in through referral networks. If so, regulators could scrutinize whether those intermediaries conducted adequate due diligence or simply passed along Regan’s marketing claims without verification.
For now, the picture is of a classic affinity-style scheme that promised sophisticated, high-yield strategies but allegedly relied on new money to pay old obligations. The termination of Yield Wealth’s registration in 2024, followed by continued fundraising through private vehicles, underscores how quickly investor protections can erode once a firm exits the regulated advisory space. As the parallel cases proceed, the key questions will be how much money is still missing, which investors are prioritized for restitution, and whether the Regan matter prompts tighter oversight of lightly regulated, high-yield offerings pitched as alternatives to traditional investments.
Warren Cohen is a finance writer based in Phoenix, Arizona, covering personal finance topics including credit, banking, and beginner investing. He earned his degree in business administration from Arizona State University and began his career working in consumer finance, where he gained direct experience with lending and credit systems. He now writes for personal finance websites and fintech platforms, focusing on clear, practical content that helps readers make informed financial decisions.
