SEC v. Bin Hao; and Qidian LLC, No. LR-26500, Southern District of Florida (Mar. 17, 2026) — Press Release
raw: Bin Hao and Qidian LLC
Bin Hao and Qidian LLC, No. LR-26500 (Mar. 17, 2026)
summary
Bin Hao and Qidian, LLC operated a Ponzi-like scheme targeting Chinese Americans, resulting in a final judgment that requires Hao to pay over $2.2 million and accept an officer-and-director bar.
paragraph
Bin Hao and Qidian, LLC raised at least $10.3 million by selling promissory notes with misrepresented 'guaranteed' returns to fund real estate ventures. The defendants were charged with violating the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Hao was ordered to pay a total of $2,238,136 in disgorgement, interest, and civil penalties, alongside an officer-and-director bar.
narrative
From 2017 to 2021, Bin Hao and his company, Qidian, LLC, operated a Ponzi-like scheme targeting Chinese American investors through the sale of promissory notes promising 8-25% returns. While claiming funds were for real estate ventures, the defendants used $2.3 million of new investor money to pay prior investors and misappropriated $793,267 for Hao’s personal expenses. The SEC's enforcement action alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Upon reaching a settlement, Hao consented to a permanent injunction and an officer-and-director bar. The final judgment requires Hao to pay $1,526,484 in disgorgement, $475,201 in prejudgment interest, and a $236,451 civil penalty. This total judgment against Hao amounts to $2,238,136.
Classified ponzi(confidence 98%). EDGAR detection: forms Form D· recall 35% / precision 15%. detection rule →
Parties
Securities and Exchange CommissionBin HaoQidian LLC
Keywords
haoqidiansecsecurities exchangereal estatebinllcsecuritiesestate companydisgorgement prejudgmentprejudgment interestinterest civilinterestpayexchange
Exhibits & Attached Documents (1)
Extracted insights
Dollar amounts 7
- $10.30M $10.3 million $10M–$100M
- $2.30M $2.3 million $1M–$10M
- $2.24M $2,238,136 $1M–$10M
- $1.53M $1,526,484 $1M–$10M
- $793K $793,267 $100K–$1M
- $475K $475,201 $100K–$1M
- $236K $236,451 $100K–$1M
Entities 9
- person alice sum
- person bifurcated judgments
- person bin hao
- company bin hao and qidian, llc
- person final judgment
- person Jason R. Berkowitz
- person paul hopker
- agency sec investigation
- agency Securities and Exchange Commission
Triples 10
- SEC Obtains Final Judgment Bin Hao
- Bin Hao and Qidian, LLC Sold Promissory Notes and Membership Interests
- Qidian and Hao Raised $10.3 Million
- Qidian and Hao Used $2.3 Million of New Investor Money
- Bin Hao Misappropriated $793,267
- Bin Hao and Qidian Consented to Bifurcated Judgments
- Final Judgment Ordered Bin Hao to Pay $2,238,136
- Paul Hopker Conducted SEC Investigation
- Jason R. Berkowitz Supervised SEC Investigation
- Alice Sum Led Litigation
PDF (from attached: judgment)
Text layers
Extracted body text (2,493c)
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONLitigation Release No. 26500 / March 17, 2026Securities and Exchange Commission v. Bin Hao and Qidian, LLC, No. 23 cv 23704 JEM (S.D. Fla. filed on Sept. 28, 2023)SEC Obtains Final Judgment as to Virginia Resident in Alleged Ponzi Scheme that Targeted Chinese AmericansOn March 5, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida entered a final judgment as to defendant Bin Hao in the SEC’s civil enforcement action against Hao and his company, Qidian LLC.According to the SEC’s complaint, from at least January 2017 to as late as 2021, Hao and Qidian sold promissory notes and membership interests in various special purpose vehicles to investors with high annual return rates of 8-25% to facilitate providing loans to a Miami-based real estate company. The complaint alleged that starting in January 2019, the Miami real estate company ceased paying nearly all interest on loans it received from Qidian. Nevertheless, Qidian and Hao allegedly continued to solicit investors after January 2019, and raised at least $10.3 million while misrepresenting that Qidian was using investor proceeds to invest in real estate ventures to generate “guaranteed” annual investment returns. The complaint further alleged that Qidian and Hao used more than $2.3 million of new investor money to pay prior investors’ interest in a Ponzi-like fashion, and Hao misappropriated at least $793,267 to pay personal expenses.Without admitting or denying the allegations made in the complaint, Hao and Qidian consented to bifurcated judgments, entered by the Court on March 6, 2025, in which they agreed to be permanently enjoined from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; and to pay disgorgement with prejudgment interest and/or a civil payment in amounts determined by the Court upon motion by the Commission. In addition, Hao agreed to an officer-and-director bar. The final judgment as to Hao, which concludes the SEC’s litigation on this matter, ordered Hao to pay disgorgement of $1,526,484, prejudgment interest of $475,201, and a civil penalty of $236,451, for a total of $2,238,136.The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Paul Hopker and supervised by Jason R. Berkowitz of the SEC’s Miami Regional Office. The litigation was led by Alice Sum with assistance from Michael J. Gonzalez, under the supervision of Russell Koonin and Stephanie N. Moot.
OCR text (2,493c · html-text · 99% conf)
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONLitigation Release No. 26500 / March 17, 2026Securities and Exchange Commission v. Bin Hao and Qidian, LLC, No. 23 cv 23704 JEM (S.D. Fla. filed on Sept. 28, 2023)SEC Obtains Final Judgment as to Virginia Resident in Alleged Ponzi Scheme that Targeted Chinese AmericansOn March 5, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida entered a final judgment as to defendant Bin Hao in the SEC’s civil enforcement action against Hao and his company, Qidian LLC.According to the SEC’s complaint, from at least January 2017 to as late as 2021, Hao and Qidian sold promissory notes and membership interests in various special purpose vehicles to investors with high annual return rates of 8-25% to facilitate providing loans to a Miami-based real estate company. The complaint alleged that starting in January 2019, the Miami real estate company ceased paying nearly all interest on loans it received from Qidian. Nevertheless, Qidian and Hao allegedly continued to solicit investors after January 2019, and raised at least $10.3 million while misrepresenting that Qidian was using investor proceeds to invest in real estate ventures to generate “guaranteed” annual investment returns. The complaint further alleged that Qidian and Hao used more than $2.3 million of new investor money to pay prior investors’ interest in a Ponzi-like fashion, and Hao misappropriated at least $793,267 to pay personal expenses.Without admitting or denying the allegations made in the complaint, Hao and Qidian consented to bifurcated judgments, entered by the Court on March 6, 2025, in which they agreed to be permanently enjoined from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; and to pay disgorgement with prejudgment interest and/or a civil payment in amounts determined by the Court upon motion by the Commission. In addition, Hao agreed to an officer-and-director bar. The final judgment as to Hao, which concludes the SEC’s litigation on this matter, ordered Hao to pay disgorgement of $1,526,484, prejudgment interest of $475,201, and a civil penalty of $236,451, for a total of $2,238,136.The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Paul Hopker and supervised by Jason R. Berkowitz of the SEC’s Miami Regional Office. The litigation was led by Alice Sum with assistance from Michael J. Gonzalez, under the supervision of Russell Koonin and Stephanie N. Moot.