Three Men Charged in $129M AI CEO Impersonation Scheme

By Amara Osei

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan unsealed a seven-count indictment on Thursday alleging that three men used AI to impersonate executives and divert more than $129 million from companies.

The indictment names Jacob Soall, 41, Sharon Hazan, 54, and Guy Sheetrit, 42. Prosecutors charged the trio with wire fraud, aggravated identity theft and money laundering. Most counts carry a maximum of 20 years, while aggravated identity theft carries two years.

What did prosecutors allege?

Prosecutors say the scheme ran from July 2024 through February 2026 and relied on people posing as both a chief executive and a lawyer. They describe a coordinated operation, not a series of unrelated calls.

The alleged ruse began with a request for help with a confidential deal. An employee heard the boss’s voice on the telephone and sometimes saw a face on video. Prosecutors say the supposed executive and supposed lawyer worked together.

The seven counts concern established offenses rather than a stand-alone AI charge. Familiar charges, familiar penalties.

Takeaway: The allegations describe a coordinated team, not one persuasive caller.

How did the fake calls work?

Companies usually received an email to accounting before the calls began.

• The group used AI to imitate the CEO’s voice on telephone calls and, on some video calls, the executive’s face.
• The caller then handed the employee to someone claiming to represent a lawyer at a major firm.
• Soall allegedly used a handwritten script titled “Lawyer Call” to discourage employees from checking with coworkers.
• The fake lawyer supplied the wiring instructions; the group then converted proceeds into cryptocurrency to cover its tracks before splitting them with co-conspirators.

Each step steered employees away from checking with coworkers and toward the wiring instructions supplied by the supposed lawyer.

Prosecutors identify Hazan as a money launderer in the scheme. Hazan boasted that he was “number one all over the world” among professional money launderers, according to prosecutors. Sheetrit allegedly laundered funds as well.

Takeaway: Verify the caller before releasing money.

Who was arrested, and where?\n

Authorities arrested Soall and Hazan in Spain and Sheetrit in the United Kingdom. All three await decisions on U.S. extradition requests, so the prosecution remains in an early procedural stage.

Hazan was convicted in Manhattan in 2008 of conspiring to commit bank fraud. That earlier conviction concerns a different offense; the current charges remain allegations. Arrest is not conviction.

Takeaway: The charges remain allegations while extradition decisions remain pending.

How much did companies lose?

Prosecutors identified several large losses:

• A British fintech company lost nearly $11.6 million.
• A Florida pet food company lost more than $5.2 million.
• Two hospital systems, in Missouri and California, lost nearly $7.8 million combined.

The disclosed victim list also includes a Rhode Island bank and a Massachusetts mutual fund company. The British fintech loss alone exceeded the combined loss attributed to the two hospital systems.

Takeaway: Several companies lost millions of dollars.

What does the case mean for practitioners?\n

U.S. Attorney Jamie McDonald urged businesses to consider how to protect themselves and warned: “SI technology offers tremendous potential. But the public should recognize that there are some who seek to use this emerging technology to pursue criminal goals.”

For practitioners, the consequence is direct: accounting and treasury staff cannot treat a familiar voice, even with a face on video, as proof of identity, and should check the caller before sending millions. The charges remain familiar because prosecutors relied on wire fraud, identity theft and money laundering rather than a new AI-specific offense.

AI supplied the disguise. Existing controls still matter.

Takeaway: A familiar voice is not authorization to move money.