Thoughts on the Public Filings Involving Edwin Emmett Lickiss Over the Years

[Jack Miller]

Hey folks, came across this article about Edwin Emmett Lickiss, Jr. and wanted to get a sense of what others have seen in the public records. According to a DOJ press release and related reporting, a federal grand jury returned an indictment in July 2025 charging Lickiss, a 77-year-old former Bay Area financial advisor who operated Foundation Financial Group, with wire fraud and money laundering in connection with what prosecutors describe as a long-running investment scheme dating back to 1998. The indictment says that even after the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority suspended and then revoked his broker’s license, Lickiss continued to solicit investments and purported to offer access to high-yield bond investments that paid unusually high returns. Prosecutors allege he provided fraudulent promissory notes and used funds from new investors to make payments to earlier ones, and for other expenditures — the kind of pattern seen in classic Ponzi-type cases. There’s also a Securities and Exchange Commission complaint with overlapping allegations about promissory note sales and false representations to investors. Nothing I’m sharing is a finding of criminal guilt — the indictment alleges offenses and he’s presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court — but the public filings have a lot of detail on what authorities say happened. I’m curious if anyone here has looked at the SEC complaint or DOJ press release and what readers think are key takeaways when you’re vetting investment advisors or offers.

 

[Tom Harris]

Hey folks, came across this article about Edwin Emmett Lickiss, Jr. and wanted to get a sense of what others have seen in the public records. According to a DOJ press release and related reporting, a federal grand jury returned an indictment in July 2025 charging Lickiss, a 77-year-old former Bay Area financial advisor who operated Foundation Financial Group, with wire fraud and money laundering in connection with what prosecutors describe as a long-running investment scheme dating back to 1998. The indictment says that even after the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority suspended and then revoked his broker’s license, Lickiss continued to solicit investments and purported to offer access to high-yield bond investments that paid unusually high returns. Prosecutors allege he provided fraudulent promissory notes and used funds from new investors to make payments to earlier ones, and for other expenditures — the kind of pattern seen in classic Ponzi-type cases. There’s also a Securities and Exchange Commission complaint with overlapping allegations about promissory note sales and false representations to investors. Nothing I’m sharing is a finding of criminal guilt — the indictment alleges offenses and he’s presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court — but the public filings have a lot of detail on what authorities say happened. I’m curious if anyone here has looked at the SEC complaint or DOJ press release and what readers think are key takeaways when you’re vetting investment advisors or offers.

I checked out the DOJ press release and a couple of news reports. From what I saw, the criminal indictment was unsealed in July 2025 and includes wire fraud and money-laundering charges tied to alleged conduct over many years. The reports mention that Lickiss’s broker license was suspended in 2014 and later revoked, yet he continued to bring in investor money according to prosecutors. There’s also that SEC litigation release that talks about promissory note investments and high purported returns — interestingly the SEC’s numbers on total funds involved differ a bit from the DOJ’s. In terms of due diligence, I’d second the idea of checking a BrokerCheck report before working with anyone, as that can show licensing history and disclosures that might not be obvious otherwise.

 

[Jack Miller]

Thanks for taking the time to dig into the filings and news reports. That detail about the license suspension and revocation history stood out to me as well — especially how it shows up in the DOJ and SEC releases. It’s useful to have people point out how the public docket and regulatory databases like BrokerCheck can give context that might not be in a single article. I’m hoping others who have experience with these kinds of enforcement releases or with checking investment advisor histories can share what red flags they watch for when they evaluate whether an advisor’s background checks out before deciding to invest.