The update describes permanent removal of an insurance license following admitted fraudulent conduct in obtaining the license, which is the core definition of Licence Revocation.
Mandatory inheritance: Licence Revocation is a child of Enforcement, so Enforcement must be raised as the secondary tag.
Product
This regulatory update concerns insurance licensing discipline and fraud enforcement, which falls outside the Product Type taxonomy scope entirely.
No secondary product type can be identified as this update addresses regulatory enforcement action rather than any financial product or service.
Obligation
The update documents a regulatory disciplinary action (license revocation) taken by DIFS against an individual for fraudulent conduct in obtaining an insurance license, which reflects an Approval and Certification obligation—specifically, the regulator's duty to certify/approve only qualified applicants and revoke approval when fraud is discovered.
The update also reflects a Governance and Oversight element insofar as the Senior Deputy Director retains ongoing jurisdiction and discretion to issue further orders, though this is secondary to the primary disciplinary action itself.
Activity
This regulatory update concerns the revocation of an insurance license for fraudulent exam conduct and does not describe any active financial services business activity; it is a disciplinary/enforcement action against an individual licensee.
While fraud is mentioned, the update is fundamentally an administrative enforcement and licensing decision rather than a description of an operational financial services activity or control.
Themes
The update concerns disciplinary action against an individual for fraudulent conduct in obtaining an insurance license, which relates to financial crime and fraud prevention in the insurance sector, though the focus is on licensing integrity rather than retail customer harm.
The fraudulent exam conduct and dishonest practices element also touches on fraud prevention, though this is primarily an enforcement action against a licensee rather than a customer-facing fraud control measure.
Functions
This is a regulatory enforcement action against an individual licensee for exam fraud, which does not directly impose operational or compliance obligations on a retail financial services firm's internal functions.
Legal functions may need to monitor this precedent for potential implications around licensing and conduct standards, but the update does not impose direct obligations on the firm.
2026-08-17 18:43:10·pdonofrio@vixio.com
Meta Id
3410133
Content ID
3418615
GUID
f41f79dcebe218fdff42e0af83ccc92d
Pipeline Progress
🔄 Pipeline Journey
⏱
34s
total
✓
Queued18:42:36
+10s
✓
Metadata18:42:46
+0s
✓
S3 Content18:42:46
+5s
✓
Extracted18:42:51
+4s
✓
LLM Gen18:42:55
+15s
✓
Stored18:43:10
TITLE: Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services Revokes Insurance License for Fraudulent Exam Conduct
BODY:
On August 12, 2026, the Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS) revoked the insurance license of Justin Price following his admission to fraudulent conduct in obtaining the license. DIFS served Price with a Notice of Opportunity to Show Compliance (NOSC) on June 2, 2026, alleging violations under Sections 1239(1)(a) and 1239(1)(g) of the Michigan Insurance Code (MCL 500.1239).
Price admitted to hiring and employing Alicia Jackson to take and pass an online proctored licensing exam on his behalf. This conduct violated Section 1239(1)(a) of the code, which prohibits obtaining a license through misrepresentation or fraud, and Section 1239(1)(g), which prohibits fraudulent or dishonest practices and untrustworthiness in the conduct of business. Price entered into a Stipulation to Entry of Order, waiving his right to a hearing before an administrative law judge and voluntarily accepting the disciplinary action.
Joseph A. Garcia, Senior Deputy Director and General Counsel of DIFS, issued the Order Accepting Stipulation on August 12, 2026. The revocation became effective immediately upon entry of the order. Price is permanently barred from reapplying for any license administered by DIFS. Any attempt to reapply will constitute a violation of the order and result in commencement of additional disciplinary proceedings. The Senior Deputy Director retains jurisdiction over the matter and may issue further orders as deemed necessary and appropriate under the Michigan Insurance Code.
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES Before the Director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Services In the matter of: Justin Price Enforcement Case No. 26-19033 System ID No. 1345538 Respondent. _____________________________/ Issued and entered on August _1_2_ _, 2026 by Joseph A. Garcia Senior Deputy Director, and General Counsel ORDER ACCEPTING STIPULATION Based upon the Stipulation to Entry of Order and the files and records of the Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS) in this matter, the Senior Deputy Director finds and concludes that: 1. The Senior Deputy Director has jurisdiction and authority to adopt and issue this Order Accepting Stipulation in this proceeding pursuant to the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act of 1969 (APA), as amended, MCL 24.201 et seq., and the Michigan Insurance Code of 1956 (Code), MCL 500.100 et seq. 2. All required notices have been issued in this case, and the notices and service thereof were appropriate and lawful in all respects. 3. Acceptance of the Stipulation to Entry of Order is reasonable and in the public interest. 4. All applicable provisions of the APA have been either satisfied or waived by all Parties. 5. On or about June 2, 2026, DIFS served a Notice of Opportunity to Show Compliance (NOSC) on Respondent. In the NOSC, DIFS asserted that Respondent provided justification for sanctions pursuant to Sections 1239(1)(a) and 1239(1)(g) of the Code, MCL 500.1239(1)(a) and MCL 1239(1)(g). 6. Respondent admits that sanctions are warranted under Section 1239(1)(a) of the Code, MCL 500.1239(1)(a), because Respondent attempted to and did obtain a license through misrepresentation or fraud. 7. Respondent admits that sanctions are warranted under Section 1239(1)(g) of the Code, MCL 500.1239(1)(g), because Respondent used fraudulent or dishonest practices and demonstrated untrustworthiness in the conduct of business. Order Accepting Stipulation Enforcement Case No. 26-19033 Page 2 of 2 8. The Director is authorized to take disciplinary action against Respondent’s insurance license in addition to the imposition of monetary penalties for the above-described statutory violations pursuant to Sections 1239 and 1244 of the Code, MCL 500.1239 and MCL 500.1244. Now therefore, based upon the Stipulation to Entry of Order and the facts surrounding this case, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 9. All agreements contained in the Stipulation to Entry of Order are accepted and adopted in their entirety. 10. Respondent shall comply with all terms agreed to in the Stipulation to Entry of Order. A failure to comply with a term in the Stipulation shall be deemed a violation of this Order. 11. Respondent’s license is hereby REVOKED, effective immediately. 12. Respondent shall not reapply for a license administered by the Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services. Any attempt to do so will constitute a violation of this Order and will result in the commencement of additional proceedings. 13. The Senior Deputy Director retains jurisdiction over the matters contained herein and has the authority to issue such further order(s) as shall be deemed just, necessary, and appropriate in accordance with the Michigan Insurance Code. Failure to abide by the terms and provisions of the Stipulation to Entry of Order and this Order may result in the commencement of additional proceedings. ____________________________________ Joseph A. Garcia Senior Deputy Director, and General Counsel STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES Before the Director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Services In the matter of: Justin Price Enforcement Case No. 26-19033 System ID No. 1345538 Respondent. _____________________________/ STIPULATION TO ENTRY OF ORDER Justin Price (Respondent) stipulates to the following: 1. Respondent had the opportunity to have this Order Accepting Stipulation and Stipulation to Entry of Order (collectively “Consent Order”) reviewed by legal counsel. 2. Respondent has read and understands this Consent Order. 3. Respondent understands that Respondent has a right to a hearing before an administrative law judge, at which DIFS would be required to prove the charges set forth by presentation of evidence and legal authority and at which Respondent would be entitled to appear, to cross-examine all witnesses presented by DIFS, and to present such testimony or other evidence or legal authority deemed appropriate as a defense to said charges. Respondent understands and intends that by agreeing to the Consent Order, Respondent is knowingly and voluntarily waiving Respondent’s right, pursuant to the Michigan Insurance Code of 1956 (Code), MCL 500.100 et seq., the rules promulgated thereto, and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), MCL 24.201 et seq., to a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. 4. Respondent agrees that all parties have complied with the procedural requirements of the APA and the Code. 5. The Senior Deputy Director retains jurisdiction over the matters contained herein. 6. On or about June 2, 2026, the Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS) served Respondent with a Notice of Opportunity to Show Compliance (NOSC) alleging that Respondent committed conduct warranting disciplinary action against Respondent’s license and monetary penalties pursuant to Sections 1239 and 1244 of the Code, MCL 500.1239 and MCL 500.1244. 7. Respondent admits to hiring and employing Alicia Jackson to take and pass an online proctored licensing exam on Respondent’s behalf, justifying sanctions under Sections 1239(1)(a), 1239(1)(g), and 1244 of the Code. 8. Respondent agrees that, in lieu of further disciplinary action, Respondent’s license shall be revoked, effective immediately upon entry of the Consent Order. Order Accepting Stipulation Enforcement Case No. 26-19033 Page 2 of 2 9. Respondent shall not seek another license administered by DIFS. Any attempt to�� so wi �. co� � �itute a violation of this Stipulation and will result in the commencement of additional 1 dis c ipli nary proceedings. 10. Both parties consent to entry of the Consent Order upon its approval by the Senior Deputy Director. 11. Respondent understands that this Consent Order will be presented to the Senior Deputy Director for approval and that the Senior Deputy Director may or may not approve and adopt it. Respo ndent further agrees that the Senior Deputy Director has jurisdiction and authority to approve and adopt this Consent Order. 12. Respondent waives any objection to the Director deciding this case following a Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules hearing in the event that the Consent Order is not approved. Date °- ulationa nd recommend that the Senior Deputy Director accept ii and issue an ����� � 6-10-2026 666666------111111000000------222222000000222222666666 Date