Corporate Transparency Act Ruled Unconstitutional: Key Implications

In 2021, Congress passed the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), marking a significant step toward enhancing transparency within the U.S. corporate landscape. Administered by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the United States Treasury Department, the CTA aims to shed light on the ownership structures of a wide array of business entities, including U.S. and foreign limited liability companies (LLCs), corporations, limited partnerships, and other closely held entities. Effective from January 1, 2024, the act mandates that many entities, both formed in the U.S. and those registered to do business within its borders, report detailed information on their beneficial owners.

The definition of “beneficial owners” under the CTA is broad, encompassing any natural persons who either directly or indirectly control a significant portion (25% or more) of the equity interests in a corporate entity or who have substantial control over the entity’s operations. Legal firms, such as Montague Law, engaged in submitting Beneficial Ownership Reports on behalf of their clients, must now gather personal information about these owners, including names, addresses, and details about the reporting company.

The introduction of the CTA has sparked a debate on privacy and constitutional rights, leading to significant legal challenges. A notable case unfolded when an Alabama federal district court, led by Judge Liles C. Burke, declared the CTA unconstitutional in the National Small Business United v. Yellen decision. The court’s ruling questioned Congress’s authority to enforce such sweeping requirements on state law entities, emphasizing a perceived overreach that exceeds the Constitution’s limits on the legislative branch.

The case brought forth by the National Small Business Association and its member, Issac Winkles, against the Treasury Secretary and the Acting Director of FinCEN, challenged the CTA’s mandates on multiple constitutional grounds. The plaintiffs argued that the CTA’s disclosure requirements exceeded Congress’s authority under Article I of the Constitution and violated several fundamental amendments.

The government defended the CTA by citing its authority under various clauses, including foreign affairs powers, the Commerce Clause, and taxing powers. However, the court found these justifications lacking. It concluded that the act’s requirements do not fall within the scope of regulating interstate commerce, nor are they justified by national security concerns or taxation purposes.

In response to this landmark decision, FinCEN announced it would comply with the court’s order and temporarily halt the enforcement of the CTA against the plaintiffs. This decision leaves other entities in a state of uncertainty regarding their obligations under the CTA. The legal landscape continues to evolve as further challenges and interpretations of the CTA emerge. Montague Law remains at the forefront, providing expert guidance to navigate these complex regu

Legal Disclaimer

The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or tax advice. The content presented is not intended to be a substitute for professional legal, tax, or financial advice, nor should it be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult with their own attorney, CPA, and tax advisors to obtain specific guidance and advice tailored to their individual circumstances. No responsibility is assumed for any inaccuracies or errors in the information contained herein, and John Montague and Montague Law expressly disclaim any liability for any actions taken or not taken based on the information provided in this article.

Contact Info

Address: 5472 First Coast Hwy #14
Fernandina Beach, FL 32034

Phone: 904-234-5653

More Articles

Montague Law | The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (H.R. 3633) introduces the first comprehensive U.S. framework for regulating crypto assets, clarifying when a token is a security or a commodity—and which agency has jurisdiction. By defining key blockchain terms, outlining token lifecycle transitions, and establishing dual registration regimes under the SEC and CFTC, the Act offers long-awaited regulatory certainty for startups, exchanges, and investors navigating the evolving digital asset ecosystem.

Read More
Montague Law | Small Business Attorney

Unlocking Tax-Free Wealth: A Practical Guide to QSBS for Startup Founders

Unlock the power of QSBS and discover how startup founders can turn equity into a tax-free windfall. This guide breaks down Qualified Small Business Stock (QSBS) eligibility, tax savings of up to $10 million, and critical steps entrepreneurs must take to preserve this valuable exemption. Whether you’re planning your next fundraising round or structuring a cap table, understanding QSBS could mean millions in tax savings.

Read More