Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings owned by Thomas Priore, committed fraud against four multi-billion-dollar collateralized debt obligations resulting in losses in the tens of millions of dollars range, according to the SEC. At the cost of their customers and investors, Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings also unethically earned tens of millions of dollars in advising fees and profits that were not revealed to the public.
You can help us put a stop to online scams before they grow too big and end-up ruining thousands of lives. A scam is a scam, doesn’t matter if it’s big or small. Now that this is out of the way, let’s get started with the review.
Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings: Payment penalties and agreement terms
ICP Asset Management, an investment advice business located in New York, as well as its founder and president, Thomas C. Priore, have reached a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on claims of fraud involving various collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) that they managed. The settlement was announced by the SEC.
The SEC filed a lawsuit against ICP, Priore, and other associated corporations including Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings in Manhattan’s federal court in June 2010, seeking a resolution to the matter. ICP, Priore, and the other entities have now reached an agreement to pay more than $23 million to satisfy the final judgment. 
The claims made by the SEC centered on fraudulent activities and misrepresentations that led to the CDOs excessively paying for securities and sustaining huge losses as a result. In addition to this, Priore and the firms affiliated with the ICP have been accused of improperly earning fees and profits that have not been declared for the benefit of the CDOs and the investors in those CDOs.
Even when dealing with sophisticated investors, investment advisors should always behave in the best interests of their advising clients, according to George S. Canellos, Deputy Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. This point was stressed in a recent speech given by Canellos.
The settlement that was reached with Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings and ICP sends a loud and obvious statement that the SEC will hold advisors accountable for instances in which they put their interests ahead of the interests of their customers.
The court gave its stamp of approval to the conditions of the settlement on September 6th. The following will be considered in the judgment:
- Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings is responsible for paying a penalty of $487,618 in addition to disgorgement costs totaling $797,337 and prejudgment interest totaling $215,045.
- ICP and its parent company, Institutional Credit Partners LLC, have been ordered to pay a total of $13,916,005 in disgorgement as well as prejudgment interest of $3,709,028. This obligation is held jointly and severally by the court. In addition to this, ICP is going to be asked to pay a penalty of $655,000.
- ICP Securities LLC, a broker-dealer with which the defendant is linked, has been ordered to pay a penalty of $1,939,474 in addition to the disgorgement payment of $1,637,581. Prejudgment interest will be paid for $301,893.
- Because Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings has reached an agreement to resolve an administrative process, he is no longer allowed to have any relationship with brokers, dealers, investment advisers, municipal securities dealers, or transfer agents. In addition to that, he is not allowed to take part in the offering of any penny stocks. After five years, however, he has the opportunity to submit a new application for association or participation in the activity.
In addition, Priore and the firms including Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings affiliated with the ICP have agreed to permanent injunctions that prevent them from breaching any securities laws. This was done without Priore or the ICP companies admitting or disputing the claims made by the SEC.
These statutes include Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 15(c)(1)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-3 and 10b-5, and Sections 206(1), (2), (3), and (4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Rules 204-2, 206(4)-7, and 206(4)-8.
Celeste A. Chase, Joseph Boryshansky, Joshua Pater, Susannah Dunn, and Kenneth Gottlieb were some of the persons who participated in the investigation that was conducted by the New York Regional Office of the SEC. The case was headed by Joseph Boryshansky, who had backing from Jack Kaufman, Mark Germann, Joshua Pater, and Susannah Dunn.
We look at 34 different data points when analyzing and rating online money-earning opportunities. Once the research on these data points is submitted, expert contributors reach out to the company’s customers and associates to get more insight into their operation. Finally, all the collected information is presented in the form of this expert review.
All the data is extracted from publicly available information and the sources are given in the transparency section at the bottom of every report.
These reports are made possible by the collective efforts of contributors like you. If you would like to become a contributor then contact us here.
Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings: Introduction of the Owner
It was announced in December 2018 that Mr. Priore the owner of Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings will be taking over as Chief Executive Officer of Priority, which signifies a significant change in the company’s leadership. Frequent leadership turnover may be an indication of organizational instability and a lack of continuity, which may cause unease among workers and investors.
Even though Priority is currently acknowledged as a prominent participant in the merchant acquiring market, the quick growth of Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings may give rise to concerns over the long-term viability of the company as well as the methods that were utilized to accomplish such rapid expansion. Rapid expansion could be considered problematic since it might lead to insufficient attention being paid to critical due diligence.
ICP Capital was established by Thomas Priore; nevertheless, in the end, the Securities and Exchange Commission leveled accusations against the company of engaging in fraudulent operations and making false representations, which resulted in a sizeable settlement.
The fact that he has a history of legal problems and measures taken by regulatory agencies raises questions about the ethical and legal requirements of his prior commercial efforts.
It is possible that Mr. Priore’s previous employment at PaineWebber’s Fixed Income Sales and Trading department, where he worked for eight years and progressed through the ranks to become Vice President, may be considered a potential detriment to his candidacy.
During that period, the business of finance was confronted with a large number of ethical and legal difficulties; his connection with such an environment may cause concerns to be raised about his professional behavior and procedures.
The fact that Mr. Priore earned a degree in business administration from Columbia University and a bachelor’s degree from Harvard University is not, on its own, sufficient evidence that he is a good leader or that he behaves ethically. There is a risk that unfavorable depictions may imply that he has not been able to successfully transition his scholastic achievements into appropriate business operations.
It is essential to point out that these pessimistic interpretations are founded on a paucity of evidence, and as a result, they need to be approached with extreme caution. It is common for individuals and organizations to have both good and bad components of their history.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the settlement that was announced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the matter involving Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings casts a bad shade on the business activities that were engaged in by both of these companies.
The claims of fraud and deception made by the SEC, which resulted in significant financial fines and legal limits, point to significant ethical and compliance flaws that exist throughout the business.
Especially in the field of financial services, it is essential to uphold the highest ethical standards at all times and always put the needs of customers first. This case sheds light on why this is so important. The fact that Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings is connected to these allegedly unethical business practices raises questions about his ability to lead and his moral standing in the corporate world.
After going through my details what do you think about Thomas Priore Priority Technology Holdings? Do share your thoughts.
The sad reality is most of the scholars end up scamming others. And it is heart-wrenching, when you see an immensely talented man wasting himself in foul-play.
Either stop scamming or restrict trade. We tax-payers are not donkeys. We work hard day and night to see such people, shattering the economy. In the next 10 years if the government is unable to deal with the depleting GDP value, one of its reasons would be these fraudsters.
Yet again, monetary penalty of $487,618… It would lead to nothing. After Few years, the businessman would head to another road, with new zest to scam others.
Why the hell is he allowed to submit the application, after 5 years? A scammer is a scammer, all his life.
Joke of the year, the firm agreed to not breach any law further????, was it an alternative for the firm. I guess being lawful is an obligation.
ICP was established by Thomas, but that doesn’t mean it’s his firm. A firm belongs to the ground level workers and not to the fat ugly lethargic CEOs.
Take me to a world, where people are not running after money. Because money is never enough, so there is no point of chaerting.