U.S. Appeals Court Blocks Corporate Transparency Law Pending Review

Millions of corporate entities will not have to share information about their owners with the Treasury Department after an appeals court paused enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act that would have required them to do so by Jan. 1.

  • A U.S. appeals court has paused enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), a key anti-money laundering law.

  • The Fifth Circuit Court’s decision follows a ruling by a Texas judge deeming the law unconstitutional.

  • The law’s fate will be determined in a hearing scheduled for March 25.

  • Companies are no longer required to meet the January 13 reporting deadline, per the Treasury Department.

A federal appeals court has reinstated a nationwide injunction blocking the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), a 2021 anti-money laundering law that mandates companies disclose their beneficial owners to the U.S. Treasury Department, according to a Reuters report

  • The New Orleans-based Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued the order late Thursday, December 27, maintaining the status quo until a more thorough review of the law’s constitutionality can occur.

  • This decision overturns a prior ruling from earlier in the week, where a three-judge panel temporarily allowed enforcement while the Department of Justice appealed. 

  • The court clarified that its latest action aims to "preserve the constitutional status quo" as substantive arguments are considered.

Challenging the Law’s Constitutionality

The injunction originated from a December 3 ruling by U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant in Texas, who concluded that the CTA likely oversteps Congressional authority and infringes on states’ rights under the Tenth Amendment. 

Judge Mazzant described the legislation as a "quasi-Orwellian statute," criticizing its potential to impose costly and burdensome compliance requirements on millions of U.S. businesses.

The plaintiffs—led by the National Federation of Independent Business and represented by the conservative Center for Individual Rights—argued that the CTA violates fundamental constitutional protections. These include:

  • First Amendment: Alleged infringement on rights to free association.

  • Fourth Amendment: Concerns over the disclosure of private information.

  • Tenth Amendment: Claims that the law usurps state powers to regulate corporate entities.

"Given that we have established that the CTA is likely unconstitutional, this intrusive form of government surveillance should be halted until the law's fate is finally resolved," said the Center’s president, Todd Gaziano.

While opponents highlight constitutional concerns and administrative burdens, proponents emphasize the need to address the U.S.’s vulnerability to financial crimes. Supporters argue the law is essential to curb the use of anonymous shell companies by criminals and terrorists to conceal illicit funds.

Implications for U.S. Businesses

The CTA was designed to combat money laundering and other financial crimes by requiring entities like corporations and limited liability companies (LLCs) to report beneficial ownership information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). 

  • Before the injunction, approximately 32.6 million existing businesses faced a January 13, 2024, deadline to submit initial reports, with reporting obligations extending into 2025. 

  • Following the court’s decision, FinCEN announced that reporting is no longer required but encouraged companies to voluntarily comply.

What Comes Next

The Fifth Circuit has scheduled oral arguments for March 25 to determine the law’s future. 

This back and forth in the courts has created widespread confusion and uncertainty, Danielle Lemberg, a Seward & Kissel LLP partner working on corporate formations and transactions, told Bloomberg Law

“Our advice to clients throughout this sort of turmoil is, if they’ve completed their own analysis as to their beneficial ownership information, if they have all of their information at hand, they may wish to voluntarily file,” Lemberg said. “Or at the least, they gather all of that information and have it at hand, so that they’re ready to file if the injunction is lifted and the CTA requirements are forced.”

Customer Stories

See how leading enterprise in-house teams have scaled smarter with Legal.io's high-caliber flex talent.

More from Legal.io


Tax Implications for Immigrants
Tax Implications for Immigrants

Tax consequences on one’s income are bound to arise regardless of the way a person has immigrated to the US- – through investment, employment, or family relationships.

Aug 19, 2015
Read More
California Extends Data Privacy Protections to Brain Waves with SB 1223

California has become the second state after Colorado to extend data privacy protections to brain waves after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law SB 1223, amending the CCPA to define neural data as persona-sensitive information, effective immediately.

Oct 03, 2024
Read More
ABA Says Law Schools Still Need Approval for Alternative Admissions Program
ABA Says Law Schools Still Need Approval for Alternative Admissions Program

The American Bar Association requires law schools to seek variances to use the JD-Next exam in admissions, awaiting more data on its validity and reliability as a tool for assessing prospective students.

Feb 27, 2024
Read More
3 Millennial Standards for the Legal World
3 Millennial Standards for the Legal World

A large portion of today’s workforce consists of millennials (those born between 1980-2000). This generation has defined a modified set of employer standards as they are differently-motivated in the workplace. So how do you keep your millennial legal team engaged? Start with understanding what they are looking for in a firm:

Apr 30, 2020
Read More
Valve Removes Mandatory Arbitration from Steam Subscriber Agreement

Valve updated the Steam Subscriber Agreement, eliminating the mandatory arbitration clause and class-action waiver, now directing gamers to the courts instead.

Oct 01, 2024
Read More
Ready to hire?

Schedule a free consultation to discuss your hiring needs.

Free 15-min consultation
Legal.io Platform
5 star reviews
Hiring made smarter

Easy-to-use platform for hiring legal talent, managing spend, and optimizing your panel — plus an average savings of 50%.

Need Immediate Help?

Submit a hiring request and let our experts handle the entire process for you.