Publicidad
The enforcement of the anti-money laundering law in the United States has hit a roadblock as the U.S. appeals court has temporarily suspended its implementation. This law requires corporate entities to disclose the identities of their beneficial owners to the U.S. Treasury Department. However, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the Corporate Transparency Act, which mandates this disclosure, was unconstitutional.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans reinstated a nationwide injunction that had been issued earlier by the federal judge in Texas. The government is appealing this decision, and a separate panel will determine whether to uphold the ruling. The court stated that it was suspending the enforcement of the law to maintain the constitutional status quo while the case is under review.
The initial deadline for companies to submit their beneficial ownership information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) was January 13. However, in response to the court order, FinCEN announced that companies are not required to submit this information at this time. They can still voluntarily provide this information if they choose to do so.
President-elect Donald Trump has requested the Supreme Court to delay the implementation of a law that would ban TikTok. This issue has added to the legal challenges faced by the government, as several small businesses and the National Federation of Independent Business have challenged the constitutionality of the Corporate Transparency Act.
The Center for Individual Rights, which represents these groups, argued that the law allows for intrusive government surveillance and should be suspended until its constitutionality is determined. The law was intended to combat money laundering and other financial crimes by requiring corporations and LLCs to disclose information about their beneficial owners.
Supporters of the law claimed that it was necessary to prevent criminals from using entities like limited liability companies to launder money without disclosing their involvement. However, U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant in Texas ruled that the law likely violated states’ rights under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution and that Congress overstepped its authority in passing the legislation.
The fate of the Corporate Transparency Act remains uncertain as the legal battle continues. The arguments will be heard on March 25 by a panel of judges from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In the meantime, the enforcement of the law has been suspended, and companies are not required to submit their beneficial ownership information to FinCEN.
The decision by the appeals court has significant implications for the financial industry and businesses operating in the United States. It highlights the challenges faced in balancing the need for transparency and accountability with concerns about government overreach and the protection of individual rights. The outcome of this case will have far-reaching effects on how companies are required to disclose beneficial ownership information and comply with anti-money laundering regulations in the future.
