In the Matter of Behruz Afshar, et al.
United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Exchange Act Release No. 78043 (2016)

- Written by Kelly Simon, JD
Facts
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (plaintiff) charged brothers Behruz and Shahryar Afshar, along with affiliates (defendants), with manipulating the securities market. The SEC alleged that the Afshars had intentionally misidentified trades to avoid transaction fees and to obtain execution priority and that they had effectuated manipulative trades to collect liquidity rebates from the exchange. The Afshars, who were sophisticated traders and former registered representatives, inaccurately tagged trades as being for public customers, not professional traders. The intentional mislabeling allowed the Afshars to avoid millions of dollars of transaction fees and gave their trades priority over other accurately labeled trades. Additionally, the Afshars were involved in a “spoofing” scheme to manipulate the exchange, by which they would lodge orders for securities that they had no intention of completing. As a result of the spoofing of orders, the Afshars received liquidity rebates and induced others to bid at the same price. The Afshars’ activities were particularly impactful because of high-frequency trading with algorithms, which allowed fast trades and increased susceptibility to intentional market disruptions. After being charged by the SEC, the Afshars submitted an offer of settlement, which the SEC accepted. The SEC then issued an administrative order.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.