Over the last several months, AALRR has tracked and reported on the changes to the Corporate Transparency Act’s (CTA) Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting requirements. On March 2, 2025, the U.S. Treasury Department issued a statement providing that it will not enforce any penalties or fines associated with the reporting requirements under the current deadlines. Additionally, Treasury will also not enforce any penalties or fines against U.S. citizens or domestic reporting companies or their beneficial owners even after FinCEN’s upcoming rule changes take effect. Click here to read our full alert.
For those following recent developments regarding the Corporate Transparency Act, and its Beneficial Ownership Information reporting requirements, the last month has been a dizzying rollercoaster. As of the date of this alert, the nationwide injunction preventing the enforcement of the CTA and its BOI reporting requirements has been reinstated by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal, meaning that “Reporting Companies” (as defined in the CTA) are currently not required to file BOI reports. However, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) continues to accept voluntary BOI submissions.
On December 23, 2024, with the looming January 1, 2025, filing deadline just days away, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a nationwide injunction which had temporarily prohibited the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and its implementing regulations (including the mandatory beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting rule).
Other AALRR Blogs
Recent Posts
- When Applying for Contracts of Insurance, Disclose or Prepare to Have Your Wings Clipped
- Old Note, New Deadline: How Partial Payments May Keep Claims Alive
- In Cases Involving Financial Transactions, the Money is in the Provable Facts
- California Secretary of State Implements New Filing Access Requirements for Third Party Filings
- Can a Delaware Forum Selection Clause Strip California Shareholders of Their Inspection Rights Where California is the Company’s Principal Place of Business? A California Court Says No.
- A Plaintiff, a Defendant, and a Judge Walk Into an AI Trap
- Watch Out For Insurance Policy Sublimits That Can Result In Less Coverage For Claims
- A Prevailing Plaintiff On A Financial Elder Abuse Claim Is Entitled To An Award Of All Fees Intertwined With The Prosecution Of Such A Claim Which Includes The Successful Defense Of A Competing Claim For Elder Abuse
- A Derivative Plaintiff Who Defeats an Initial Bond Motion Must Still Pay the Ordinary Costs that Go to the Victor if They Lose at Trial
- Density Bonus Agreement Survives Foreclosure: California Court Rules Affordable Housing Covenant Equivalent to Permit Condition
Popular Categories
- (32)
- (33)
- (8)
- (7)
- (15)
- (5)
- (3)
- (1)
- (4)
- (2)
- (3)
- (3)
- (1)
- (2)
- (4)
- (5)
- (1)
- (1)
- (2)
- (2)
- (2)
- (1)
- (3)
- (1)
- (2)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
Contributors
- Cindy Strom Arellano
- Gary A. Barrera
- Eduardo A. Carvajal
- Michele L. Collender
- Scott K. Dauscher
- Christopher M. Francis
- Evan J. Gautier
- Carol A. Gefis
- Ani Grigoryan
- Edward C. Ho
- Micah R. Jacobs
- John E. James
- Jonathan Judge
- David Kang
- Jeannie Y. Kang
- Michael H. Kang
- Matthew D. Kramer
- Joseph K. Lee
- Thomas A. Lenz
- Shawn M. Ogle
- Kenneth L. Perkins, Jr.
- Jon M. Setoguchi
- Ryan C. Squire
- McKenna Stephens
- Jon Ustundag
- Brian M. Wheeler