2024 年 12 月 3 日，德州法院發布了一項全國性禁令，禁止聯邦政府執行《公司透明度法案》和相關的財務法規，直到法院發出進一步命令。

該裁決保留了2025年 1月1日的最後期限，該期限要求幾乎所有在美國運營的實體向財政部金融犯罪執法網絡（FinCEN）提交其受益所有權報告。該禁令的措辭明確表明，它適用於所有美國實體，而不僅僅是訴訟各方，儘管各方本身並未尋求全國性的命令。

Texas Top Cop Shop 和其他組織［包括全國獨立企業聯合會（NFIB）的 30 萬名成員〕對該法案的報告義務提出了質疑。在此之前，阿拉巴馬州法院於2024年3月提出了類似的質疑（阿拉巴馬州北區國家小型企業聯合訴耶倫案）。

這兩項質疑都是基於憲法提出的，聲稱該法案和相關的大量財政部法規超出了美國國會的權力。先前的質疑也成功了，但阿拉巴馬州法院僅責令政府不要對提起訴訟的特定原告執行該法案。

德州的禁令沒有這樣的限制。該判決明確指出，就初步禁令而言，該法案和報告規則「可能違憲」。調查發現，該報告構成了對國家監管的公司組織的過度乾預，並引發了人們對可能侵犯隱私和憲法保護的擔憂。法院裁定，原告因此確立了「根據其主張的實質成功的可能性很高」。

法院表示，「這兩種規定都不會被強制執行，而且報告公司無需遵守該法案的報告截止日期」。然而，它尚未就該法案和報告規則是否違反法律或構成違反憲法做出明確的結論。從這個意義上說，該禁令是暫時的。法院承認，作為“下級法院”，其在全國範圍內發放救濟的決定存在爭議，但它重申其有權這樣做。

美國財政部和FinCEN似乎都尚未回應，但專家表示，他們幾乎肯定會尋求中止或加速上訴。受該法案影響的數十萬個組織已花費數百萬美元為2025年1月1日的最後期限做準備，美國政府也是如此。

Baker Hostetler 律師事務所評論道：「鑑於所有非豁免實體的年底截止日期僅剩幾週時間，尋求中止可能會造成更多的不確定性和混亂，具體取決於是否以及何時獲得批准。」它補充，如果政府要努力遵守最後期限，就必須迅速採取行動。 「根據政府對阿拉巴馬州地方法院裁決的回應，我們預計政府將在未來幾天內發布後續步驟通知，以表明他們打算採取的行動方針，以便全國數百萬潛在申報者不會陷入猜測。最初的提交截止日期迫在眉睫。」

該命令沒有具體規定適用於新成立公司的其他提交截止日期。 希普曼和古德溫律師事務所評論，「據推測，法案的禁令和報告規則也將適用於其他截止日期」。它警告公司，對該禁令的迅速上訴可能會導致禁令被撤銷或縮小，因此2024年之前形成的報告公司的提交截止日期最終可能不會延長。

US court issues nationwide injunction blocking Corporate Transparency Act

On 3 December 2024, a Texas court issued a nationwide injunction preventing the federal government from enforcing the Corporate Transparency Act and associated treasury regulations until further order of the court.

The ruling stays the 1 January 2025 deadline that required almost all entities operating in the US to file reports of their beneficial ownership to the Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). The wording of the injunction makes clear that it applies to all US entities, not just the parties to the litigation, even though the parties themselves did not seek a nationwide order.

The challenge to the Act’s reporting obligations was brought by Texas Top Cop Shop and others, including 300,000 members of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). It followed a similar challenge made by an Alabama court in March 2024 (National Small Business United v Yellen, North District Alabama).

Both challenges were made on constitutional grounds, alleging that the Act and the associated reams of treasury regulations go beyond the powers of the United States Congress. The previous challenge had also succeeded, but the Alabama court only enjoined the government not to enforce the Act against the specific plaintiffs who brought the action.

The Texas injunction is not so restricted. The judgment explicitly states that the Act and reporting rule are 'likely unconstitutional' for purposes of a preliminary injunction. It found that the reporting constituted an overreach into state-regulated corporate formations and raised concerns about potential violations of privacy and constitutional protections. The plaintiffs have thus established 'a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their claims', it ruled.

'Neither may be enforced, and reporting companies need not comply with the [Act’s] reporting deadline', said the court. However, it has not yet made a definitive finding that the Act and reporting rule are contrary to law or that they amount to a violation of the constitution. To that extent, the injunction is temporary. The court acknowledged that, as a 'lower court', its decision to issue nationwide relief is controversial, but it reaffirmed that it had the authority to do so.

Neither the treasury nor FinCEN appear to have issued a response yet, but experts say they are virtually certain to seek a stay or an expedited appeal. The hundreds of thousands of organisations affected by the Act have spent millions of dollars preparing for the 1 January 2025 deadline, as has the US government.

'Given that the year-end deadline for all nonexempt, preexisting entities is merely a few weeks away, pursuing the stay could create even more uncertainty and chaos, depending on if and when it is granted', commented law firm Baker Hostetler. If the government is going to try to preserve the deadline, it will have to move fast, it added. 'Based on the government’s response to the Alabama district court decision, we anticipate that the government will issue a notice of its next steps in the next few days to signal their intended course of action so that millions of potential filers nationwide are not left guessing with the initial filing deadline looming.'

The order does not specifically address other filing deadlines applying to newly formed companies. 'Presumably, the injunction of the [Act] and the reporting rule would apply to [these] other deadlines as well', commented law firm Shipman and Goodwin. It cautioned companies that a swift appeal of the injunction could result in its reversal or narrowing so that the filing deadline for reporting companies formed before 2024 ultimately may not be extended.

Sources:
• Baker Hostetler
• Shipman & Goodwin
• Foley & Lardner
• Darrow Everett
• Eastern District of Texas Court (order, PDF)