"Spoofing" as Fraud: A Novel and Untested Theory of Prosecution

The DOJ has signaled its intent to pursue prosecutions for spoofing — which the law defines as "bidding or offering with the intent to cancel the bid or offer before execution" — aggressively. This article begins with a brief discussion of the elements that the government must prove to establish commodities fraud and wire fraud. It then examines recent spoofing prosecutions that raise important questions about the applicability of the traditional fraud statutes to spoofing-related activity. How the federal courts answer these open questions will have significant implications for participants in the commodities markets.

21 minute readApril 01, 2019 at 12:09 AM
By
Jodi Misher Peikin
Justin Roller
"Spoofing" as Fraud: A Novel and Untested Theory of Prosecution

In June 2018, we published an article discussing the government's efforts to prosecute defendants who engage in a form of trading activity on commodity futures exchanges known as "spoofing," which the law defines as "bidding or offering with the intent to cancel the bid or offer before execution." 

This premium content is locked for Business Crimes Bulletin subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN Business Crimes Bulletin

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Subscribe Now

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

How Courts Interpret and Apply the Interplay Between the Bankruptcy Code and Medicare Program Act

The combination of increasing operating costs and uncertain government reimbursement funding continues to place health care providers under financial pressure, and in many cases, financial distress. Given the importance of Medicare/Medicaid funding of claims under provider agreements with the federal government, how courts interpret and apply the interplay between the Bankruptcy Code and Medicare Program Act determines the disposition of hundreds of millions of dollars of claims for reimbursement that support the health care system.

April 30, 2026

AI Transparency: Clear Explanations Matter More Than Disclosure

As AI becomes embedded in everyday business and legal operations, organizations are confronting a new expectation: simply disclosing AI use is no longer enough. A critical shift is taking place in the legal industry: transparency is no longer just about disclosure; it’s about comprehension.

April 30, 2026