PCAOB Censure and Bar of Jeffrey Hoskow

1666 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 Office: 202-207-9100 Fax: 202-862-8430 www.pcaobus.org By this Order Instituting Disciplinary Proceedings, Making Findings, and Imposing Sanctions (“Order”), the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“Board” or “PCAOB”) is: (1) censuring Jeffrey Hoskow (“Hoskow” or “Respondent”); (2) barring Hoskow from being an associated person of a registered public accounting firm; and (3) requiring Hoskow to complete 40 hours of continuing professional education (“CPE”) relating to PCAOB auditing standards, in addition to any CPE required in connection with any professional license, before filing any petition for Board consent to associate with a registered public accounting firm.Hoskow may file a petition for Board consent to associate with a registered public accounting firm after two years from the date of this Order. The Board determined to accept Hoskow’s offer of settlement, which does not require him to pay a civil money penalty, after considering his financial resources. Based on Hoskow’s conduct, the Board would have imposed a civil money penalty of $25,000 on him in this settlement, if it had not taken his financial resources into consideration. Order Instituting Disciplinary Proceedings, Making Findings, and Imposing Sanctions In the Matter of Jeffrey Hoskow, Respondent.

Order The Board is imposing these sanctions on the basis of its findings that Respondent violated PCAOB rules and standards concerning audit documentation in connection with performing an audit of the financial statements of one issuer client.I. The Board deems it necessary and appropriate, for the protection of investors and to further the public interest in the preparation of informative, accurate, and independent audit reports, that disciplinary proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Respondent pursuant to Section 105(c) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2022, as amended (the “Act”), and PCAOB Rule 5200(a)(1). II. In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, and pursuant to PCAOB Rule 5205, Respondent has submitted an Offer of Settlement (the “Offer”) that the Board has determined to accept. Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceeding brought by or on behalf of the Board, or to which the Board is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings herein, except as to the Board’s jurisdiction over Respondent and the subject matter of these proceedings, which is admitted, Respondent consents to the entry of this Order as set forth below.III. On the basis of Respondent’s Offer, the Board finds that:All references to PCAOB rules and standards in this Order are to the versions of those rules and standards, and to their organization and numbering, in effect at the time of the audit discussed herein. The findings herein are made pursuant to Respondent’s Offer and are not binding on any other person or entity in this or any other proceeding. The Board finds that Respondent’s conduct described in this Order meets the conditions set out in Section 105(c)(5) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7215(c)(5), which provides that certain sanctions may be imposed in the event of: (1) intentional or knowing conduct, including reckless conduct, that results in a violation of the applicable statutory, regulatory, or professional standard; or (2) repeated instances of negligent conduct, each resulting in a violation of the applicable statutory, regulatory, or professional standard.

Order A. Respondent 1. Jeffrey Hoskow was, at all relevant times, an audit manager at Zwick CPA, PLLC (the “Firm”) and an “associated person of a registered public firm,” as that term is defined in Section 2(a)(9) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 1001(p)(i). He served as an audit manager on the issuer audit discussed in this Order. B. Registered Firm and Other Relevant Individual 2. Zwick CPA, PLLC is a public accounting firm headquartered in Southfield, Michigan. The Firm is, and at all relevant times was, registered with the PCAOB pursuant to Section 102 of the Act and PCAOB rules. The Firm is licensed to practice public accountancy by the Michigan State Board of Accountancy (license no. 1102002614) and the Connecticut State Board of Accountancy (license no. CPAP.0005441).3. Jack Zwick, CPA is an owner of the Firm and a certified public accountant licensed by the New York State Board for Public Accountancy (license no. 021082) and the Michigan State Board of Accountancy (license no. 1101003535). Zwick is, and at all relevant times was, an “associated person of a registered public accounting firm,” as that term is defined in Section 2(a)(9) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 1001(p)(i). At all relevant times, Zwick was the engagement partner in charge of all issuer audits the Firm conducted, including the audit discussed in this Order. C. Issuer 4. Genie Energy Ltd. (“Genie”) was, at all relevant times, a Delaware corporation headquartered in Newark, New Jersey. Genie’s public filings disclose that it was engaged in the business of providing energy services. Genie was, at all relevant times, an “issuer,” as that term is defined by Section 2(a)(7) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 1001(i)(iii). The Firm performed an integrated audit of Genie’s financial statements and internal control over financial reporting (“ICFR”) for the year ended December 31, 2022 (the “Genie Audit”). In connection with the Genie Audit, the Firm issued audit reports dated March 15, 2023, that contained unqualified opinions on Genie’s financial statements and ICFR. See Zwick CPA, PLLC and Jack Zwick, CPA, PCAOB Rel. No. 105-2026-002 (Jan. 13, 2026).

Order D. Respondent Violated PCAOB Rules and Standards by Improperly Adopting Work Papers from Genie’s Predecessor Auditor as the Firm’s Own 5. In connection with the preparation or issuance of an audit report, PCAOB rules require that a registered public accounting firm and its associated persons comply with the Board’s auditing and related professional practice standards.6. An auditor must prepare audit documentation in connection with each engagement conducted pursuant to the standards of the PCAOB. Audit documentation should be prepared in sufficient detail to provide a clear understanding of its purpose, source, and the conclusions reached.7. Further, audit documentation “must contain sufficient information to enable an experienced auditor, having no previous connection with the engagement,” to “understand the nature, timing, extent, and results of the procedures performed, evidence obtained, and conclusions reached.”8. Prior to the report release date, the auditor must have completed all necessary auditing procedures and obtained sufficient evidence to support the representations in the auditor’s report. At the time of the Genie Audit, PCAOB standards further provided that “[a] complete and final set of audit documentation should be assembled for retention as of a date not more than 45 days after the report release date (documentation completion date).” In addition, although “[c]ircumstances may require additions to audit documentation after the report release date,” any documentation added “must indicate the date the information was added, the name of the person who prepared the additional documentation, and the reason for adding it.”9. In connection with the Genie Audit, the Firm’s engagement team failed to complete all necessary ICFR procedures and failed to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to support the representations in the Firm’s ICFR report prior to the report release See PCAOB Rule 3100, Compliance with Auditing and Related Professional Practice Standards; PCAOB Rule 3200, Auditing Standards. See AS 1215.04, Audit Documentation. Id. at .06. Id. at .15. Id.Id. at .16.

Order date. Indeed, no ICFR documentation was included in the work papers as of the report release date for the Genie Audit. 10. Shortly before the documentation completion date, Hoskow, who had access to the predecessor auditor’s work papers for the prior year audit, took those work papers, replaced the name of the predecessor auditor with “Zwick CPA,” updated the year under audit, and added work paper sign-offs. 11. Hoskow did so even when the documentation reflected events that had occurred in the prior year (2021), not the year under audit (2022). For example, in one ICFR work paper, Hoskow replaced the year “2021” with “2022,” so that the work paper reads: “In 2022, [Genie] changed their Tax Specialist to [Entity A] instead of [Entity B]. Further this year due to the UK being reported as discontinued operations, [Genie] noted that the complex provision calculation need expertise on UK tax laws and [Genie] outsourced UK provision and calculation to the 3rd party . . . .” However, both of the documented events—the change in Tax Specialists and the discontinuance of Genie’s UK operations—actually occurred in 2021, the year before the one the Firm was engaged to audit. 12. In addition, Hoskow prepared various other significant work papers related to audit planning and evaluating audit results that inappropriately included documentation related to other issuers—documentation that was inaccurate and irrelevant to Genie’s operations. 13. As a result of Hoskow’s conduct, the Firm’s audit documentation was insufficient to enable an experienced auditor with no previous connection with the engagement to understand the nature, timing, extent, and results of the procedures performed, evidence obtained, and conclusions reached. 14. Accordingly, Respondent violated AS 1215. IV. In view of the foregoing, and to protect the interests of investors and further the public interest in the preparation of informative, accurate, and independent audit reports, the Board determines it appropriate to impose the sanctions agreed to in Respondent’s Offer: See AS 1105.04, Audit Evidence (requiring auditors to plan and perform audit procedures to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a reasonable basis for the auditor’s opinion).

Order Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: A. Pursuant to Section 105(c)(4)(E) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 5300(a)(5), Hoskow is hereby censured. B. Pursuant to Section 105(c)(4)(B) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 5300(a)(2), Hoskow is barred from being an “associated person of a registered public accounting firm,” as that term is defined in Section 2(a)(9) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 1001(p)(i).C. After two years from the date of this Order, Hoskow may file a petition for Board consent to associate with a registered public accounting firm pursuant to PCAOB Rule 5302(b). D. Hoskow acknowledges that the determination to accept his Offer, without imposing a civil money penalty, is contingent upon the accuracy and completeness of the financial information he provided to the PCAOB’s Division of Enforcement and Investigations (the “Division”). Hoskow also acknowledges that, if at any time following this settlement, the Division obtains information indicating that any financial information he provided—including, but not limited to, any information concerning assets, income, liabilities, or net worth—was fraudulent, misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete in any material respect as of the time such information was provided, then at any time following entry of this Order (1) the Board may institute a disciplinary proceeding for noncooperation with an investigation under PCAOB Rule 5110 and/or (2) the Division may petition the Board to (a) reopen this matter to consider whether Hoskow provided accurate and complete financial information at the time such information was provided to the Division; and (b) seek an order directing payment of the maximum civil money penalty allowable under the law or any lesser amount determined to be appropriate. No other issue shall be considered in connection with this petition other than whether the financial information provided by Hoskow was fraudulent, misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete in As a consequence of the bar, the provisions of Section 105(c)(7)(B) of the Act will apply with respect to Hoskow. Section 105(c)(7)(B) provides: “It shall be unlawful for any person that is suspended or barred from being associated with a registered public accounting firm under this subsection willfully to become or remain associated with any issuer, broker, or dealer in an accountancy or a financial management capacity, and for any issuer, broker, or dealer that knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of such suspension or bar, to permit such an association, without the consent of the Board or the Commission.”

Order any material respect; and, if so, whether a civil money penalty should be ordered up to the maximum civil money penalty allowable under the law. Hoskow may not, by way of defense to any such petition: (i) contest the findings in this Order; (ii) assert that payment of a civil money penalty should not be ordered; (iii) contend that the amount of the civil money penalty to be ordered should be less than $25,000, which is specified herein as the amount the penalty would have been, based on his conduct and without consideration of the Hoskow’s financial resources; or (iv) put forward any other contention or assert any defense to liability or remedy, including, but not limited to, any defense based on statute of limitations or any other time-related defense, other than to contend (a) that he did not provide financial information that was fraudulent, misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete in any material respect, or (b) that a civil money penalty should not be ordered in an amount higher than $25,000. For any disciplinary proceeding for noncooperation with an investigation under PCAOB Rule 5110, Hoskow consents for purposes of effectuating service to be served using the email account used by him for communications with the Division during the investigation. E. Pursuant to Section 105(c)(4)(F) of the Act and PCAOB Rule 5300(a)(6), Hoskow is required to complete, prior to filing any petition to terminate his bar and for Board consent to associate with a registered public accounting firm, 40 hours of continuing professional education and training relating to PCAOB auditing standards (such hours shall be in addition to, and shall not be counted in, the continuing professional education he is required to obtain in connection with any professional license). ISSUED BY THE BOARD. /s/ Phoebe W. Brown ________________________ Phoebe W. Brown Secretary