Provident Trust Group Review: $395 IRA Fee, Ascensus Ownership and the Court Record, 2019 to 2026

Why this review exists

People search “provident trust group” to find out whether the firm is safe, what it charges, and whether it has been sued. The results are the company's own site, directory pages and review blogs. None we found sets the fee schedule next to the court decisions. We read both. We have no affiliate relationship with Provident Trust Group and earn nothing if you open an account there. For how custodians compare, see our SDIRA custodian comparison, and for the tax rules inside the account, our self-directed IRA real estate rules.

Two cautions. A self-directed IRA custodian is not the investment: a good fee schedule says nothing about whether the note, LLC or property in the account is sound. And court records of disputes are a small, dated sample. They show where investors went to court and how judges answered, not how many accounts went well.

1. What it is, who regulates it and who owns it

Provident says it is “a self-directed IRA custodian dedicated to helping individuals take control of their retirement” and shows “$14B+ assets under custody” and “Serving 26,000+ clients” on its home page (November 9, 2026; the company's own figures, not audited). An Ascensus release of October 2017 gave “more than $4 billion in assets under custody and nearly 30,000 clients” and said the firm was founded in 2008. The count of clients is therefore lower now than in 2017 on the company's own numbers, while assets are higher; we do not know why.

Two things the documents do not settle. First, the January 2018 release says the Ascensus agreement “was announced on October 23, 2017,” while the October release we read is dated October 18, 2017; we report both. Second, the releases do not say what became of the 2016 Beneficient agreement. The Ascensus release lists advisers to Provident for the 2017 sale but does not name the seller, so we do not say who sold it. The Nevada FID lists give a name and nothing else: no licence number, dates or conditions. We did not find an FID enforcement order against Provident, but we did not search the FID enforcement database itself, so treat that as “none found,” not “none exist.”

2. What it charges

Provident's fee schedule (footer “PTG Fee Schedule (3/2025)”) and Fee Disclosure are posted on its Forms page, which adds “Please note: Fees may differ.”

The company says its fee is flat: “Provident Trust Group charges a flat-rate annual fee to maintain your account, rather than a fee that increases based on the number of assets or the value of the assets held in your account.” That matters for someone with several notes or a large property, because some custodians charge per asset.

Our arithmetic. The first year costs $50 + $395 = $445. Ten years of the annual fee alone, if the schedule never changes and there are no transactions, is $50 + 10 × $395 = $4,000. As a share of the account, $395 is 0.79% of $50,000, 0.158% of $250,000 and 0.0395% of $1,000,000 (our arithmetic). The Fee Disclosure lets Provident change the schedule at any time with notice “through email” and says fees are “non-refundable.” The fee document we read is dated 3/2025; ask for the schedule that applies to your account.

Two terms in the Fee Disclosure deserve a careful read. If an invoice is unpaid, Provident “may, at its complete and sole discretion, liquidate sufficient asset(s) to cover outstanding fees plus one year's estimated fees, including the Account Termination Fee.” And the $500 minimum cash balance must stay in the account, which matters if your investment pays out and is reinvested elsewhere.

3. What it says it will and will not do

The IRA account agreement we read (marked Rev. 11/2025; the document footer reads “PTG EP Rev. 12/2025”) is the paper the courts below were reading in earlier versions. Its key terms:

For the tax angle on valuation, see our guide to the Form 5498 fair market value box. The SEC's investor alert, quoted by a federal court, says: “Custodians for self-directed IRAs disclaim most duties to investors, and may allow investors to invest retirement funds in ‘alternative assets’ such as real estate, promissory notes, tax lien certificates, and private placement securities.” Provident's agreement does exactly that.

4. The court record

We found six matters that name Provident Trust Group, LLC and read the decisions or reports in five. Parties other than companies are described, not named. The same Woodbridge Ponzi scheme appears in two of them. For scale: Justia’s federal docket index lists 23 cases with “Provident Trust Group” as a party name (read November 9, 2026), the most recent filed August 13, 2025; in several the company appears as plaintiff or as custodian for an account holder, which is routine for a self-directed custodian. A count of filings is not a count of findings.

What the courts held about a directed custodian

The pattern is consistent but not absolute.

• Contract wording decided most of it. In the Nevada class action the court said the contract “squarely places the obligation to conduct due diligence on, or otherwise verify, any and all investments on Plaintiffs,” so Provident “had no obligation to even look.” It also held that valuation was the holder's job under the contract.
• A custodian label is not a fraud claim. In the Texas life-settlement case the court dismissed fraud, conspiracy and fiduciary claims because the complaint did not plead facts showing what Provident knew. Holding retirement accounts for investors in an earlier venture was not enough.
• Signed forms mattered. The New York decision rests on a direction-of-investment form that said “My account is self-directed and I, alone, am responsible for the selection, due [diligence], management, review, and retention of all Investments in my account.” The investor said he did not read it; the court held that nothing suggested a different warning would have changed his mind. That decision also notes the Treasury rule that requires some trustees to perform an independent valuation applies only to trustees that are not banks, and held Provident was not required to do one.
• The question was not closed in Texas in 2019. The magistrate judge in the Ironbridge case declined to dismiss at the outset, saying the exculpatory clauses are “not favored” in Texas and that choice of law was unresolved. We could not open the later order and do not report the final result.
• Allegations are not findings. Plaintiffs in the Texas case argued in a brief that Provident held nearly 1,500 accounts containing Woodbridge securities; the court said it could not consider facts from another case. Nothing we read found that Provident knew of a fraud.

Where a court found a fiduciary duty or a failure to follow the agreement, we did not find it. A different complaint, with facts about specific knowledge or a contract breach, could come out differently, and the plaintiffs in the Nevada class action were given leave to try again on commingling. We did not find the result of that second round.

5. What this means for someone with an account there

1. The custodian will not catch a bad investment. If you hold a private note, an LLC interest or real estate there, the only check is yours. Ask the sponsor for audited financials, the recorded lien, the insurance and the independent valuation before you sign the direction-of-investment form.
2. Plan for the annual valuation. The agreement gives you 30 days to supply a credible value. Twelve months without one lets Provident distribute the asset and issue a Form 1099-R, which is a tax bill you may not have budgeted for. See our rules page on what happens to an IRA that holds a prohibited transaction.
3. Check the fee that applies to you. The $395 is for a standard Traditional or Roth IRA; the page says fees may differ. Ask for the current schedule in writing, and ask whether the termination fee is $25 or $250.
4. Keep $500 in cash. If you let it fall, the agreement allows Provident to distribute the account.
5. Know the exit price. A transfer to another custodian counts as a termination for fee purposes under the Fee Disclosure. If you are comparing custodians for a note or crowdfunded deal, check which one the platform supports; our custodian comparison lists platform matchups.
6. If you lost money in a scheme your IRA held, the cases above show the contract and the pleading are where such claims turn; a securities lawyer can read your signed forms. For one receivership where Provident was briefly a defendant, see our Wells Real Estate receivership page.

This is analysis of public documents, not investment, legal or tax advice.

Sources: Nevada Financial Institutions Division trust company lists dated January 26, 2026 and February 19, 2026; Provident Trust Group Fee Schedule (3/2025), Fee Disclosure (3/2025), IRA account agreement (Rev. 11/2025) and website pages (home, FAQ, forms), read November 9, 2026; Ascensus press releases of October 18, 2017 and January 22, 2018; The Beneficient Company press release of August 15, 2016; Provident Trust Group press release of September 26, 2013; U.S. District Court D. Nev. No. 2:18-cv-01382 (order of April 23, 2019); W.D. Tex. No. 1:19-cv-102 (report and recommendation of December 9, 2019); N.D.N.Y. No. 6:19-cv-252 (decision of March 23, 2021); N.D. Tex. No. 3:19-cv-1681-L (report of November 14, 2022 and order of March 16, 2023); Court of Appeals of Nevada No. 83250-COA (order of April 29, 2022, read in a short extract); the receiver's eighth interim status report, S.D. Fla. No. 9:24-cv-80980 ECF 219 (July 30, 2026). Court outcomes are stated as the courts stated them; allegations are not repeated as fact. Quoted text is verbatim from the saved documents. Figures labelled “our arithmetic” are calculated by us. This is analysis of public documents, not investment, legal or tax advice. Compiled by CrowdfundedWealth on November 9, 2026.