CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT
BREAKING NEWS: A Nationwide Preliminary Injunction Halts Compliance with the Corporate Transparency Act
On December 3, 2024, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas granted a preliminary injunction halting all enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act’s reporting requirements nationwide. It means the January 1, 2025, deadline for filing beneficial ownership information has been suspended for all corporations in the country.
The court found that the CTA and its reporting requirements are likely unconstitutional.
In the matter before the Court, Plaintiffs challenge an unprecedented law known as the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”)... At its most rudimentary level, the CTA regulates companies that are registered to do business under a State’s laws and requires those companies to report their ownership, including detailed, personal information about their owners, to the Federal Government on pain of severe penalties. ...
Despite attempting to reconcile the CTA with the Constitution at every turn, the Government is unable to provide the Court with any tenable theory that the CTA falls within Congress’s power. And even in the face of the deference the Court must give Congress, the CTA appears likely unconstitutional. Accordingly, the CTA and its Implementing Regulations must be enjoined. ...
[T]he CTA, 31 U.S.C. § 5336 is hereby enjoined. Enforcement of the Reporting Rule, 31 C.F.R. 1010.380 is also hereby enjoined, and the compliance deadline is stayed under § 705 of the APA. Neither may be enforced, and reporting companies need not comply with the CTA’s January 1, 2025, BOI reporting deadline pending further order of the Court.
Because this is a preliminary injunction, it temporarily suspends the compliance requirement. Another court could reverse this ruling, either before or after the January 1, 2025 deadline. We believe the CTA will eventually end up before the Supreme Court.
We are monitoring the situation and will continue to inform you of the latest developments. Read the Court's ruling here.
|
DISCLAIMER. Our newsletter provides commentary, not legal advice. Boards need to retain an attorney to review the facts surrounding their particular situation before providing a legal opinion. We serve as corporate counsel to California associations only. Request a proposal to represent your association.
PAST NEWSLETTERS. Readers can find current and prior year newsletters posted here. Older newsletters are not posted since the information they contain can change over time with new statutes and case law. The website, however, is kept updated with current information which can be found via the "Index" or through our website's internal "Google Search" feature.
|
|
October-November New Clients
1275 North Havenhurst
2709 Tenth Street
5 Highland Carlsbad
620-626 Alcatraz Ave.
8 Pacific Oceanside
9900 S. Santa Monica
Calderon
Camelot Woods
Casa De Oro
Cascade Gardens
Colony Townhouse
Colorado Place
Dickens Court
Golf Green Mobile Home
Greenwich
Hidden Valley Village
Highlands Resort
Isla Mar at Aviara
Menlo Square
Ramona Village
Ranch House Place
Sandalwood in Encinitas
Sungate Ranch
The Excelsior
The Lenox
Terrace Recreation
Venture Commerce
Center - Otay
Venture Commerce
Center - Sorrento
Villa Tuscano
Village Racquet Club
Vista Townehomes
West Hollywood Edition |
Our knowledge of the Davis-Stirling Act
runs deep. |
ADAMS|STIRLING
offers growth opportunities and excellent benefits for attorneys. Call Adrian Adams at 800-464-2817
or send an email. |
|