ASIC removed more than 19,400 scam items as fake investment platforms reached 7,051

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) warned on 17 August 2026 that scammers are using generative AI to build coordinated networks of deepfake videos, fabricated news, false reviews, imitation websites and fake trading platforms. These networks can make a simple online search appear to provide independent confirmation when the apparent sources are controlled by the same operation.

ASIC said it took down more than 19,400 scam websites, social-media advertisements, phishing links and crypto-investment scam items in the 2025–26 financial year, 182% more than the 6,915 removed in the previous year. The total included 5,476 phishing hyperlinks, 7,051 fake investment platforms and 3,106 crypto-investment scam items.

Institutions and key facts

ASIC is Australia’s corporate, markets and financial-services regulator. A takedown is an online disruption and consumer-protection measure. It is not the same as a criminal conviction, regulatory penalty, recovery of funds or final ruling, and it should not be read as a count of distinct victims or cases. Multiple links, advertisements and imitation pages may belong to one scam network.

ASIC described a sequence in which synthetic endorsements and polished online material attract a user, followed by scripted calls, fake account managers and trading interfaces showing invented returns. Some operations allow a small withdrawal to build trust before demanding further payments for purported taxes, margin or account release.

Scamwatch’s May 2026 alert on fake crypto trading platforms describes a similar pattern. Users may be diverted from social media or share-trading groups to realistic-looking platforms where displayed trades and profits are fictitious and deposited money goes to scammers.

Impact on traders and brokers

Search results, professional websites, celebrity videos, purported media reports and positive reviews may all be manufactured by the same operator. Traders should separately verify the legal entity, licence number, regulator-register entry, official domain, receiving-account name and contact details.

A genuine licence number alone is insufficient because criminals may misuse the name or number of a licensed firm. Users should enter the regulator’s register independently and contact the firm through details published there, not through links supplied in advertisements, group chats or unsolicited messages.

For legitimate brokers and financial institutions, AI-enabled impersonation raises the importance of brand and domain monitoring, clear scam warnings and efficient reporting channels. Firms can reduce ambiguity by publishing their official domains, licensed entities, funding rules and communication methods they do not use.

TraderVote view

The figures show both expanded regulatory disruption capacity and the evolution of fake platforms from isolated webpages into coordinated narratives spanning advertisements, news, reviews and messaging apps. A review site should not merely repeat a platform’s claimed licence or online popularity; it should match the legal entity, domain and permitted activities against primary regulatory records.

Absence from a warning list does not establish legitimacy because alerts and takedowns can lag. Likewise, the number of removed items cannot be converted directly into confirmed losses or enforcement cases.

Sources

ASIC media release, published 17 August 2026, accessed 22 August 2026: https://www.asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-release/2026-releases/26-195mr-asic-warns-scammers-are-using-ai-to-spin-vast-webs-of-deception

Scamwatch alert on fake crypto trading platforms, published 19 May 2026, accessed 22 August 2026: https://www.scamwatch.gov.au/about-us/news-and-alerts/scam-alert-fake-crypto-trading-platforms

Written independently by Hengyuan from public regulatory information. This article is not investment advice.