ProPetro avoids fine in executive perk case; ex-CEO to pay $195K
By 
Aaron Nicodemus2021-11-23T21:28:00
The former CEO of ProPetro Holding Corp. will pay $195,046 to settle SEC charges related to the company’s failure to disclose some of his executive perks and stock pledges to investors. ProPetro avoided a fine because of its remedial efforts.
Related articles
-
News BriefGreenbrier Companies fined by SEC over CEO perk disclosures
Greenbrier Companies and its former chief executive officer will pay a total of $1.1 million to settle charges from the Securities and Exchange Commission the firm failed to disclose perks related to the use of a private jet owned by the CEO.
-
ArticleSEC investigating ProPetro’s financial disclosures
Oilfield services company ProPetro Holding announced the SEC has opened an investigation into its financial disclosures and reporting.
-
ArticleProPetro shuffles leadership team amid accounting probe
ProPetro Holding has announced a shuffling of its executive leadership team following the completion of a review conducted by its audit committee into a series of internal control failures.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
ArticleFormer startup CEO gets 7 years in prison for $175M fraud against JPMorgan Chase
Charlie Javice, a former CEO who duped JPMorgan Chase into purchasing her start up company for $175 million, has been ordered to forfeit more than $22 million by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and to spend 7 years in jail.
-
ArticleGeorgia Tech to pay $875,000 for allegations brought by compliance officers
Georgia Tech Research Corp. (GTRC) has agreed to pay $875,000 to settle allegations first raised by two compliance officers that its cybersecurity protocols violated acceptable standards for defense contractors, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said.
-
ArticleTractor Supply Company hit with $1.35M fine for alleged California privacy violations
Tractor Supply Company has agreed to get into compliance with California’s consumer privacy law and to pay a $1.35 million fine—the largest yet by California—to settle allegations it violated the privacy rights of customers and job applicants.