Close Menu
Fund Focus News
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • WhiteOak Capital removes exit load on new equity and hybrid mutual fund investments from April 27, existing liquid and arbitrage fund charges unchanged
    • Direct funds vs regular funds: Differences, key things to remember, and which option investors should choose
    • Tired of money market funds? Check out this weekly paying low-risk ETF
    • What are ETFs and Should You Invest in Them?
    • Flexi Cap mutual funds explained: Key differences and returns of HDFC, ICICI, Parag Parikh & Mirae Asset
    • 10 Investments That Will Actually Reduce Your Taxes Immediately in 2026
    • 7 Low-Risk Investments for Beginners: Pros and Cons
    • Canara Robeco Conservative Hybrid Fund: Why investors are turning to conservative hybrid funds over fixed deposits
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Fund Focus News
    • Home
    • Bonds
    • ETFs
    • Funds
    • Investments
    • Mutual Funds
    • Property Investments
    • SIP
    Fund Focus News
    Home»Investments»SEC files lawsuit against Dusan Varga and Pannon Investment Advisors
    Investments

    SEC files lawsuit against Dusan Varga and Pannon Investment Advisors

    October 31, 2024


    The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a lawsuit against Dusan Varga and Pannon Investment Advisors LLC.

    The SEC complaint, seen by FX News Group, was submitted at the Florida Southern District Court on October 30, 2024.

    From May 2020 to at least January 2024, Dusan Varga and his company Pannon Investment Advisors LLC, raised approximately $1.6 million from at least 20 investors, through a series of unregistered and fraudulent offerings.

    The defendants solicited investments in securities through investment agreements to invest in the Pannon Risk-Managed Income Fund, a purported investment fund managed by the defendants. Defendants misrepresented that the Pannon Fund traded covered stock options to generate high income while managing downside risk, while promising investors fixed returns in the form of dividends of 3% or 4% a month.

    The defendants used a combination of phone calls, text messages, WhatsApp messages, emails, in-person meetings, Zoom meetings, and written documents to solicit investors.

    Defendants also solicited investors via a referral program under which they paid referral fees to existing investors for referring new investors to invest in the Pannon Fund, Defendants’ client.

    Further, the defendants made numerous material misrepresentations about the use of investor and client funds, the profitability of Pannon’s trading, Varga’s purported background as a registered representative of a broker-dealer, and the safety of investing with the Pannon Fund. For example, Defendants falsely represented to investors that, upon their demand, investors could receive a full return of their principal funds within a few business days and that investors’ principal funds were matched in an escrow account to ensure the liquidity of their investments.

    In reality, there was no escrow account, the defendants made Ponzi-like payments to investors, and Varga misappropriated and commingled investor and client funds in his own personal bank and brokerage accounts.

    Rather than using investor and client funds to consistently trade covered stock options as promised to investors, Defendants often engaged in riskier, uncovered options trading that ultimately resulted in aggregate trading losses of over $200,000.

    The scheme unraveled during the last quarter of 2023, when Varga and Pannon stopped making dividend payments to investors, initially blaming the delay in payment on processing issues with online bill pay services and banks. Despite numerous redemption requests by investors, Varga and Pannon have failed to return investors’ principal funds.

    The SEC accuses the defendants of violation of Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c) and 77q(a)], and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5]. Varga and Pannon also violated Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 206(4) and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 80b-6(1), (2), and (4) and 17 C.F.R. § 275.206(4)-8)] and breach of the fiduciary duties they owed to their advisory client, the Pannon Fund.

    The Commission seeks injunctive relief, as well as disgorgement with prejudgment interest, and civil penalties against the defendants. The Commission also seeks an order imposing an officer and director bar against Varga.



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email

    Related Posts

    10 Investments That Will Actually Reduce Your Taxes Immediately in 2026

    April 22, 2026

    7 Low-Risk Investments for Beginners: Pros and Cons

    April 22, 2026

    Financial Advisors: 6 Investments We Warn Every Client To Avoid

    April 16, 2026
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    The Shifting Landscape of Art Investment and the Rise of Accessibility: The London Art Exchange

    September 11, 2023

    Charlie Cobham: The Art Broker Extraordinaire Maximizing Returns for High Net Worth Clients

    February 12, 2024

    WhiteOak Capital removes exit load on new equity and hybrid mutual fund investments from April 27, existing liquid and arbitrage fund charges unchanged

    April 23, 2026

    The Unyielding Resilience of the Art Market: A Historical and Contemporary Perspective

    November 19, 2023
    Don't Miss
    Mutual Funds

    WhiteOak Capital removes exit load on new equity and hybrid mutual fund investments from April 27, existing liquid and arbitrage fund charges unchanged

    April 23, 2026

    WhiteOak Capital Asset Management has announced a revision to the exit load structure across its…

    Direct funds vs regular funds: Differences, key things to remember, and which option investors should choose

    April 22, 2026

    Tired of money market funds? Check out this weekly paying low-risk ETF

    April 22, 2026

    What are ETFs and Should You Invest in Them?

    April 22, 2026
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • Instagram
    • YouTube
    • Vimeo
    EDITOR'S PICK

    Australia’s federal pollies real estate interests exposed

    August 26, 2024

    Goldman Teams Up With Blackstone to Sell Novel Fund Finance Bond

    October 17, 2024

    Brickplatter Enables Premium Property Investment From ₹10 Lacs Via SPV-Based Fractional Ownership Platform

    June 29, 2025
    Our Picks

    WhiteOak Capital removes exit load on new equity and hybrid mutual fund investments from April 27, existing liquid and arbitrage fund charges unchanged

    April 23, 2026

    Direct funds vs regular funds: Differences, key things to remember, and which option investors should choose

    April 22, 2026

    Tired of money market funds? Check out this weekly paying low-risk ETF

    April 22, 2026
    Most Popular

    🔥Juve target Chukwuemeka, Inter raise funds, Elmas bid in play 🤑

    August 20, 2025

    💵 Libra responds after Flamengo takes legal action and ‘freezes’ funds

    September 26, 2025

    ₹50 lakh retirement corpus: How to invest in SCSS, mutual funds, equities and other assets — CA offers tips

    April 16, 2026
    © 2026 Fund Focus News
    • Get In Touch
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.