UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

Release No. 9759 / April 23, 2015

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-16511

In the Matter of

 the Registration Statement of

International Precious Metals, 

Inc.

64040 Harvest Moon Road

Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240

Respondent.

ORDER FIXING TIME AND PLACE 

OF PUBLIC HEARING AND 

INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 8(d) OF THE 

SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

I.

The Commission’s public official files disclose that:

On November 7, 2013, International Precious Metals, Inc. (“Respondent”) filed a 

Form S-1 registration statement seeking to register the offer and sale of 2,000,000 common 

shares. The registration statement was amended on January 15, 2014 (together, the 

“Registration Statement”). The Registration Statement has not been declared effective.

II.

After an investigation, the Division of Enforcement alleges that:

A. RESPONDENT

1. Respondent is a Nevada corporation headquartered in Desert Hot 

Springs, California. 
2

B. MATERIAL MISSTATEMENTS AND OMISSIONS

2. The Registration Statement includes untrue statements of material 

facts and omits to state material facts necessary to make the statements contained therein 

not misleading concerning the funding of Respondent, and disclosures that Respondent has 

a sole officer and director contrasted with the collective actions taken by undisclosed 

control persons and/or promoters. 

a. The Registration Statement states that the Respondent’s sole

officer and director “has advanced $25,100 to the company for expenses.” This 

disclosure is false and misleading because Respondent’s sole officer and director did not 

advance any money to Respondent.

b. The Registration Statement states that Respondent “issued 

5,000,000 founder’s shares to its Director [] for $5,000 in cash.” This disclosure is false 

and misleading because Respondent’s sole officer and director did not pay for his shares.

d. The Registration Statement states that Respondent has a sole 

officer and director. This disclosure is false and misleading because Respondent has 

undisclosed control persons and/or promoters, who are different than the sole officer and 

director listed in the Registration Statement. One of the undisclosed control persons 

and/or promoters:

i. drafted Respondent’s business plan;

ii. selected Respondent’s auditor; 

iii. signed Respondent’s bank documents listing his title as 

Respondent’s president;

iv. authorized payments from Respondent’s bank account to pay 

professionals that facilitated the filing of Respondent’s 

Registration Statement, including professional fees to its 

accountant, auditor and attorney; 

v. withdrew thousands of dollars of so-called consulting fees from 

Respondent’s bank account;

vi. funded Respondent; and

vii. communicated with the law firm that facilitated Respondent’s 

the filing of Respondent’s Registration Statement providing it with 

draft responses to staff’s comments to Respondent’s Registration 

Statement.

 

e. The Registration Statement is false and misleading because it 

omits that in 2003, two of the undisclosed control persons and/or promoters were banned 

by the British Columbia Securities Commission for engaging in an unregistered 

distribution, unresolved conflicts of interest, and misrepresentations, among other things.
3

f. The Registration Statement states that Respondent’s sole officer 

and director “will be devoting approximately 15 hours per week of his time to our 

operations.” This disclosure is false and misleading because Respondent’s sole officer 

and director has minimal involvement in – and spent little to no time on – Respondent’s 

operations. 

g. The Registration Statement states that “[t]here are no persons other 

than our sole officer [sic] and directors above that are expected by us to make a 

significant contribution to our business.” This disclosure is false and misleading because 

Respondent is controlled and/or promoted by undisclosed control persons and/or 

promoters.

III.

The Commission, having considered the aforesaid, deems it appropriate and in the 

public interest that public proceedings pursuant to Section 8(d) of the Securities Act be 

instituted with respect to the Registration Statement to determine whether the allegations of 

the Division of Enforcement are true; to afford the Respondent with an opportunity to 

establish any defenses to these allegations; and to determine whether a stop order should 

issue suspending the effectiveness of the Registration Statement referred to herein.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that public proceedings be and hereby are 

instituted under Section 8(d) of the Securities Act, such hearing to be commenced at 9:30 

a.m. on May 13, 2015, in Hearing Room 2 at the Commission's offices at 100 F Street 

N.E., Washington, DC 20549, and to continue thereafter at such time and place as the 

hearing officer may determine.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that these proceedings shall be presided over by an

Administrative Law Judge to be designated by further order, who is authorized to 

perform all the duties of an Administrative Law Judge as set forth in the Commission's 

Rules of Practice or as otherwise provided by law.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Respondent shall file an Answer to the 

allegations contained in this Order within ten (10) days after service of this Order, 

pursuant to Rule 220 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. § 201.220. If the 

Respondent fails to file the directed answer, or fails to appear at a hearing after being 

duly notified, the Respondent may be deemed in default and the proceedings may be 

determined against the Respondent upon consideration of this Order, the allegations of 

which may be deemed to be true as provided by Rules 155(a), 220(f), 221(f) and 310 of

the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. §§201.155(a), 201.220(f), 201.221(f) and 

201.310. This Order shall be served forthwith upon the Respondent in accordance with 

Rule 141 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. §201.141.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrative Law Judge shall issue an 

initial decision no later than 120 days from the date of service of this Order, pursuant to 
4

Rule 360(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice. In the absence of an appropriate 

waiver, no officer or employee of the Commission engaged in the performance of 

investigative or prosecuting functions in this or any factually related proceeding will be 

permitted to participate or advise in the decision of this matter, except as witness or counsel 

in proceedings held pursuant to notice. Since this proceeding is not “rule making” within 

the meaning of Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act, it is not deemed subject 

to the provisions of Section 553 delaying the effective date of any final Commission 

action.

By the Commission.

Brent J. Fields

Secretary