ARTICLE
13 March 2024

The Corporate Transparency Act Is Unconstitutional (According To The Northern District Of Alabama)—Should You Still Comply?

KR
Kutak Rock LLP

Contributor

Kutak Rock is a national law firm with over 550 attorneys across the U.S., built on a foundation of teamwork, innovation, and exceptional client service. Originally focused on finance, the firm has evolved into a leading provider of legal services in business and corporate law, public finance, litigation, and real estate. Emphasizing collaboration across offices, Kutak Rock delivers integrated legal solutions to business and governmental clients. The firm is committed to long-term sustainability, attorney engagement, and community impact through significant pro bono work. It also prioritizes keeping clients informed with timely legal insights and updates.

On March 1, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama ("Court") determined that the Corporate Transparency Act is unconstitutional.
United States Alabama Corporate/Commercial Law

On March 1, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (“Court”) determined that the Corporate Transparency Act is unconstitutional. This decision was made in a case brought by the National Small Business Association (“NSBA”) (whose members include more than 65,000 businesses across the country), along with one individual NSBA member (“Mr. Winkles”) who was a small business owner resident in Alabama (the “Plaintiffs”). According to the court, “the Corporate Transparency Act is unconstitutional because it exceeds the Constitution's limits on Congress' power.” The court was unpersuaded by arguments that the CTA could be supported by congressional powers pertaining to foreign affairs and national security, the Commerce Clause, and taxation (other arguments were also made by the Plaintiffs but not addressed by the court).

In addition to its opinion, the Court issued an injunction against enforcing the CTA against the Plaintiffs (the NSBA and Mr. Winkles). There is case law to support an interpretation that the injunction may apply to all 65,000+ current members of the NSBA. Indeed, FinCEN has announced:

. . . the government is not currently enforcing the Corporate Transparency Act against the plaintiffs in that action: Isaac Winkles, reporting companies for which Isaac Winkles is the beneficial owner or applicant, the National Small Business Association, and members of the National Small Business Association (as of March 1, 2024). Those individuals and entities are not required to report beneficial ownership information to FinCEN at this time.

We expect that the Department of the Treasury will appeal the Alabama decision (which could likely take 10-24 months to be resolved) and cannot predict whether a stay will be issued during the appeal. We have seen some commentators advise that U.S. companies can now ignore the CTA. We strongly suggest that such an approach be taken by a company only after consultation with counsel. FinCEN's announcement (above) indicates they are expecting continued compliance by any company not a member of the NSBA as of March 1, 2024.

For the full opinion: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/alabama/alndce/5:2022cv01448/183445/51

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More