Celsius co-founders Leon and Goldstein agree to pay more than $6 million to the FTC

Former co-founder of Celsius faces additional financial penalties over FTC allegations that he misled the safety of customers 'assets.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) lawsuit against crypto lending platform Celsius's misleading guarantees about the safety of customers' assets before its collapse in 2022 has now brought additional financial consequences to its former co-founder. The FTC has reached a settlement requiring Shlomi Daniel Leon and Hanoch "Nuke" Goldstein to pay a combined sum of more than $6 million to resolve the FTC's allegations of misrepresentation about the security of the Celsius platform before filing for bankruptcy. The latest orders follow a broader chain reaction from the collapse of Celsius, which saw the company, once valued on custody and loan commitments, collapse in the market downturn and users still seek money back.

Key Points

· Goldstein, former chief technology officer of Celsius, is required to pay $2.014 million under a court order signed by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote on Monday.
· Leon, former chief strategy officer, was required to pay $4.1 million under a separate prescribed order signed June 29.
·These settlements extend FTC's enforcement beyond CEO Alex Mashinsky to other executives, accusing him of playing a role in communicating with customers.
·Both orders contain restrictions that prohibit the co-founders from marketing or selling products or services that can be used to deposit, redeem, invest or withdraw crypto assets.
·The FTC previously accused Celsius of misleading customers about reserves, insurance coverage and the nature of loans, and these settlement amounts will be counted into the relevant judgment.

Court ordered payments and scope of injunction

According to the FTC, the settlement reached with Goldstein and Leon aims to address consumer harm caused by the way Celsius displays the platform to retail customers. The order signed by Judge Denise Cote on Monday required Goldstein to pay $2.014 million. Leon's regulation order was signed June 29, calling for a higher payment of $4.1 million. In addition to the money clause, the FTC statement stated that the two co-founders agreed to accept restrictions to reduce their ability to participate in crypto-asset custody and trading related businesses. Specifically, the FTC said Leon is prohibited from marketing or selling products or services that can be used to deposit, redeem, invest or withdraw assets. For Goldstein, the FTC describes similar restrictions, covering retail products or services that can be used to purchase, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute or trade cryptocurrency. "Similarly, Goldstein has agreed to prohibit the marketing or sale of retail products or services that can be used to purchase, sell, deposit, withdraw, distribute or trade cryptocurrency."

FTC Allegations: Reserve, Insurance and Loan Operations

At the heart of the FTC complaint is the claim that Celsius painted a safety picture, but according to regulators, this is inconsistent with its actual situation. The FTC accused Celsius of falsely telling customers it maintained sufficient reserves to meet withdrawal needs. Regulators also accused Celsius of promoting a $750 million insurance policy covering customer deposits and claiming it did not issue unsecured loans. The FTC further pointed out that these claims were made as Celsius executives continued to reassure customers that deposits were safe, just in the final stages before the platform collapsed. In the eyes of regulators, these alleged misstatements are not just marketing errors, but repeated guarantees made during a period when the company's financial situation deteriorated.

Connection between settlement and Mashinsky case

The settlement with Leon and Goldstein is part of an FTC enforcement operation that began with a lawsuit against Alex Mashinsky, founder and former CEO of Celsius, and later expanded to other executives. Previous reports of Celsius's collapse, including trading restrictions on Mashinsky, suggest that regulatory scrutiny goes far beyond one person after the company's collapse. In April, Mashinsky agreed to reach a settlement with the FTC that included a permanent ban on promoting asset-related products and a $10 million payment. The settlement also involves a larger sentencing framework, a partial suspension of $4.72 billion to reflect consumer damage allegations. Previous reports mentioned terms of the settlement, including a $10 million payment and a partial suspension of the judgment. The newly ordered payments by Goldstein and Leon-$2.014 million and $4.1 million, respectively-will be counted in the $4.72 billion verdict. This is important because it shows that the FTC is coordinating multiple executive settlements into a single remedial accounting process, rather than treating each settlement as an isolated event. Separated from the FTC's actions, broader criminal consequences are also advancing. The U.S. Department of Justice previously reported that Mashinsky was sentenced to 12 years in prison in May 2025 for pleading guilty to commodity and securities fraud charges. Prosecutors said Mashinsky misled clients about Celsius's profitability, investment risks and the safety of client funds.

What these enforcement actions mean for Celsius customers and industry

For Celsius users, the immediate key message is that FTC cases continue to identify and punish senior figures other than the CEO at the time of the collapse. These settlements do not reverse the outcome of bankruptcy, but they do strengthen regulators 'intention to hold accountable for marketing claims against retail customers. For the broader crypto lending industry, the orders are another sign that narratives of "custody and lending"-especially the practice of assuring customers reserves, insurance and withdrawal readiness-may still be subject to strict regulatory review. The bans are not limited to fines: they are designed to influence future behavior by restricting marketing and sales roles associated with crypto deposit and trading functions. It is worth noting how these settlements fit into the ongoing legal and enforcement landscape surrounding Celsius and related claims. Including co-founder payments in the $4.72 billion judgment suggests that more financial results may emerge as the FTC accounts for and resolves separate executive actions related to the same alleged consumer damage. Looking forward, investors and clients should focus on two things: whether other Celsius executives face similar settlement-driven restrictions, and how the court can continue to coordinate multiple payments within the same FTC decision framework-especially as regulators try to bridge the gap between public guarantees and what actually happened before the crypto lending platform collapsed.