The Tai Lopez lawsuit is a civil securities fraud case filed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on September 23, 2025, in the Southern District of Florida, accusing Lopez, his business partner Alexander Mehr, and their colleague Maya Rose Burkenroad of defrauding hundreds of investors out of approximately $112 million through their company Retail Ecommerce Ventures LLC. As of mid-2026, the case is administratively closed while the parties negotiate a possible settlement, and the FBI is running a separate criminal investigation.
What the SEC Says Happened
Between April 2020 and November 2022, Lopez and Mehr raised roughly $112 million from hundreds of investors through offerings tied to eight retail brands their company had bought out of bankruptcy, including RadioShack, Pier 1 Imports, Dressbarn, Modell’s Sporting Goods, Linens ‘N Things, Stein Mart, Franklin Mint, and Brahms.1SEC. SEC Complaint, Case 1:25-cv-24356 Investors bought unsecured promissory notes promising annualized returns as high as 25 percent, along with equity stakes offering monthly dividends above 2 percent.2CFO.com. Retailers, Investors Fall Victim to Alleged Ponzi Scheme Lopez and Mehr told them the companies were “on fire,” that “cash flow is strong,” and that money raised for a specific brand would be spent only on that brand.3CBS News. SEC Accuses REV Founders of Ponzi Scheme
The SEC alleges none of that was true. Internal financials cited in the complaint show Dressbarn lost $13.7 million in 2020 and $10.7 million in 2021, and Stein Mart posted net losses of $1.7 million and $5.7 million in the same years.2CFO.com. Retailers, Investors Fall Victim to Alleged Ponzi Scheme To keep up appearances, the SEC says, the defendants used capital from new investors to pay interest, dividends, and maturing notes to earlier ones. At least $5.9 million paid out as “returns” came from other investors rather than business profits, and another $5.9 million was moved between portfolio brands in violation of the promise that each brand’s funds would stay segregated.4SEC. SEC Litigation Release No. 26413
On top of the Ponzi-like payments, the SEC alleges Lopez and Mehr diverted about $16.1 million in investor money for personal use, $12.5 million of it to Lopez and $3.6 million to Mehr. The complaint says most of Lopez’s share was routed through TAL Promotions LLC, a company he wholly owned that did no work for REV or any of its brands.1SEC. SEC Complaint, Case 1:25-cv-24356
Who Is Named in the Complaint
The suit names three defendants. Lopez (whose legal name is Taino Adrian Lopez) and Mehr founded Retail Ecommerce Ventures in November 2019 and led it throughout the relevant period.1SEC. SEC Complaint, Case 1:25-cv-24356 Both face the broadest charges, including allegations of making material misstatements to investors.
The third defendant, Maya Rose Burkenroad, is Lopez’s cousin. She served as REV’s president and later chief operating officer from 2020 until March 2024. REV’s website described her as having “over 10 years of experience managing multi-million-dollar companies”; the SEC says that was false and that her prior jobs included substitute preschool teacher, radio station promoter, and assistant to Lopez.3CBS News. SEC Accuses REV Founders of Ponzi Scheme The complaint says she countersigned investor agreements, was a signatory on all of REV’s bank accounts, received weekly spreadsheets showing cash shortfalls, and directed which accounts to draw from to cover deficits. She is charged with direct antifraud violations and with aiding and abetting the misrepresentations made by Lopez and Mehr.1SEC. SEC Complaint, Case 1:25-cv-24356
All three are charged under the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The SEC is seeking permanent injunctions, bans from serving as officers or directors of public companies, civil monetary penalties, and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest from Lopez and Mehr.4SEC. SEC Litigation Release No. 26413
How REV Fell Apart
The company’s problems were visible well before the SEC arrived. REV spent roughly $120 million assembling its brand portfolio, with Pier 1 alone costing $20 million and a controlling stake in Tuesday Morning running $35 million.5New York Post. Owner of RadioShack, Pier 1 in Danger of Bankruptcy Filing By 2022, the company overall was producing about $60 million in revenue against roughly $60 million in losses and carried about $200 million in debt. Investor payments stopped late that year, and REV started asking existing investors for more money while warning of possible bankruptcy.
Tuesday Morning filed for Chapter 11 in early 2023. On December 29, 2023, a group of secured noteholders foreclosed on what remained of REV’s assets and transferred them to an unrelated entity called Omni Retail Enterprises LLC.1SEC. SEC Complaint, Case 1:25-cv-24356 Lopez stepped down as CEO and Burkenroad left her COO role around March 2024.
The Separate FBI Criminal Investigation
The SEC’s case is civil. The FBI has opened its own criminal investigation into Lopez and REV, and as of February 2026 agents were interviewing investors who lost money, though no criminal charges had been filed.6New York Post. FBI Probes Self-Help Guru Tai Lopez in Ponzi Scheme Legal experts quoted in reporting on the probe noted that a civil settlement with the SEC would not shield the defendants from criminal prosecution.
Where the Case Stands Now
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lopez (No. 1:25-cv-24356) is assigned to Judge Rodolfo A. Ruiz II in the Southern District of Florida. Soon after the complaint was filed, the parties opened settlement talks, and the court administratively closed the case to let those talks continue. Joint status reports filed between December 2025 and June 2026 described “active and detailed settlement negotiations.”7CourtListener. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lopez Docket
On June 8, 2026, Judge Ruiz ordered the parties to file another status report by June 30, 2026, saying either that they had reached a tentative settlement that SEC staff would recommend to the commissioners in Washington, or that the case should be reopened for active litigation with a deadline for the defendants to answer the complaint.7CourtListener. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lopez Docket No asset freeze, receivership, or other emergency relief has been imposed. Nothing has been proven in court, and the defendants have not yet filed a formal response to the allegations.