UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 92603 / August 6, 2021

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-19716

In the Matter of

Sica Wealth Management, LLC and 

Jeffrey C. Sica ,

Respondents.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

EXTENSION ORDER

The Division of Enforcement (“Division”) has requested an extension of time until 

February 28, 2022 to submit a Proposed Plan of Distribution under Rule 1101(a) of the 

Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans, 17 C.F.R. § 201.1101(a).

On February 27, 2020, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Administrative and 

Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Sections 203(e), 203(f) and 203(k) of the Investment 

Advisers Act of 1940, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-andDesist Order (the “Order”)1 against Sica Wealth Management, LLC (“SWM”) and Jeffrey C. 

Sica (“Sica”) (collectively, the “Respondents”). In the Order, the Commission found that from 

October 2013 to March 2015, based on Sica’s recommendation, approximately 45 SWM 

advisory clients invested a total of more than $30 million in securities issued by Aequitas 

Commercial Finance, LLC (“ACF”), one of numerous entities affiliated with the Aequitas 

enterprise, the ultimate parent of which is Aequitas Management, LLC (collectively referred to 

 

1

 Advisers Act Rel. No. 5453 (Feb. 27, 2020).
2

herein as “Aequitas”). The Order also found that from October 2013 to November 2015 (the 

“relevant period”), SWM and Sica failed to provide these advisory clients with material facts 

regarding compensation that Aequitas provided to SWM and another firm owned and controlled 

by Sica, (the “Affiliated Adviser”), which created conflicts of interest relating to SWM’s and 

Sica’s recommendations that clients invest in Aequitas securities. Specifically, Aequitas paid 

SWM and the Affiliated Adviser a total of approximately $2 million during the relevant period 

pursuant to consulting agreements and a loan agreement (collectively referred to as the “Aequitas 

agreements”). The Aequitas agreements and the resulting compensation should have been 

disclosed to clients so that they could fairly evaluate the conflicts in deciding whether to invest in 

Aequitas securities. By failing to disclose these facts to advisory clients, SWM and Sica violated 

Section 206(2) of the Advisers Act. 

The Commission ordered the Respondents to pay $236,029.19 in disgorgement, 

$62,664.23 in prejudgment interest, and collectively $110,000 in civil money penalties, for a 

total of $408,693.42, to the Commission. The Commission also created a Fair Fund, pursuant to 

Section 308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, so the penalties paid, along with the 

disgorgement and interest paid, can be distributed to harmed investors (the “Fair Fund”).

The Fair Fund consists of the $408,693.42 paid by the Respondents. The Fair Fund has 

been deposited in an interest-bearing account at the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Bureau of 

the Fiscal Service (“BFS”), and any accrued interest will be for the benefit of the Fair Fund.

In its request for an extension of time, the Division states that additional time is needed to 

verify eligible investor contact information, develop the distribution methodology, and prepare

the proposed plan of distribution.
3

Accordingly, for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Division’s 

request for an extension of time until February 28, 2022 to submit a Proposed Plan of 

Distribution is granted. 

For the Commission, by the Division of Enforcement, pursuant to delegated authority.2

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary 

 

2

 17 C.F.R. § 200.30-4(a)(21)(i).