Our firm has experience assisting businesses in establishing production lines in the U.S. by entering into manufacturing supply agreements with local manufacturers. These supply chain agreements require careful consideration of the parties’ respective obligations, particularly concerning expected volumes, warranties, and logistics management. These agreements should also include safeguards to protect the foreign manufacturer’s intellectual property rights and establish quality standards consistent with those normally employed in their country of origin. By leveraging our experience, foreign manufacturers can ensure a smooth transition of their production operations.

For manufacturers of products that are incorporated into construction projects, establishing production lines in the U.S. offers additional benefits beyond potential tariff savings. It may also make products eligible for selection in federally-funded construction projects. Two key frameworks to consider are the Buy American Act (BAA) and the Buy America regulations.

The Buy American Act (BAA) applies to direct federal procurement, such as contracts for federal building construction. Under the BAA, products must be manufactured in the U.S., with at least 55% of the cost of components sourced domestically. It is important to note that these thresholds may vary based on recent policy changes. 

Buy America regulations are more restrictive and apply to federally funded transportation projects, such as highways and rail systems. Under the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) rules, all steel, iron, and manufactured products must be produced in the U.S. without reliance on a component cost threshold. This stringent requirement ensures that transportation projects funded by the federal government prioritize domestic production.

Foreign manufacturers would typically learn of these requirements if their goods are being specified by a U.S. architect or contractor that is handling the procurement for a project with federal funding. Typically, the manufacturer would be required to provide a certificate of compliance with the project’s country of origin requirements.

In conclusion, the tariffs introduced by the Trump administration present challenges for foreign manufacturers, but they also create opportunities for those willing to adapt their production strategies. By partnering with local manufacturing providers, foreign manufacturers can seek ways to stay competitive in the U.S. market. Compliance with regulations such as the Buy American Act and Buy America can provide access to federally-funded projects. 

Our firm has assisted foreign businesses in navigating these complexities and establishing successful production lines in the U.S.

The post Client Alert: Establishing U.S. Production Lines and Opportunities for Foreign Manufacturers appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

New Deadline: The deadline for most reporting companies to file their initial, updated, or corrected BOI reports is now extended to March 21, 2025. This extension provides an additional 30 days from the original deadline of February 19, 2025. Companies that were previously granted a later deadline due to specific circumstances, such as disaster relief, should adhere to their original extended deadlines.

Future Modifications: During this 30-day extension, FinCEN will evaluate options to further modify the deadlines, particularly for entities posing lower national security risks. FinCEN also plans to initiate a process to revise the BOI reporting rule to reduce the regulatory burden on lower-risk entities, including many small businesses.

Action Required: Reporting companies should utilize this extension to ensure compliance with the BOI reporting requirements. Reports can be submitted directly to FinCEN through their E-Filing system, available at FinCEN’s BOI E-Filing System.

Happening in the Background: This extension comes amidst ongoing discussions and legal challenges regarding the implementation of the Corporate Transparency Act. Recently, the U.S. House passed H.R. 736, the Protect Small Businesses From Excessive Paperwork Act of 2025, with a unanimous vote of 408–0. This bill extends the deadline for an estimated 32 million small businesses to report their beneficial ownership information (BOI) to January 1, 2026. The previous deadline was January 1, 2025, but the reporting requirements have been delayed due to numerous court cases. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate.

There are now 6 different cases pending in front of federal judges that challenge the CTA’s constitutionality.

Our Recommendation: Newly formed companies (after Jan. 1, 2024) need to comply with the obligation to file a report within 30 days after their formation. As to “existing” reporting companies (formed prior to Jan. 1, 2024), there is a possibility of a further extension of the BOI filing date if the bill approved by the House of Representatives is also approved by the Senate in the coming weeks. However, our recommendation is that, unless you care to continue following this never-ending saga, existing companies should also file their report prior to the March 21 deadline and avoid being caught by surprise.

The post Client Alert: Corporate Transparency Act Deadline Extended appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

On December 3, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in the case Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc. v. Garland, temporarily halting the enforcement of the CTA and its beneficial ownership reporting obligations. The court also suspended all related compliance deadlines.

Then, on December 23, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the injunction, ordering that reporting companies must once again submit their beneficial ownership information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Companies were given a new, extended deadline of January 13, 2025, to file their reports.

This development was short-lived. On December 26, 2024, the Fifth Circuit vacated its order to stay the injunction, meaning companies were no longer required to submit beneficial ownership reports while the Court continued to consider the merits of the case.

In a further reversal, on January 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court intervened, issuing a stay on the injunction (24A653 McHenry v. Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc. (01/23/2025).

However, on January 7, 2025, a separate nationwide injunction was issued in the case of Smith v. United States Department of the Treasury, also pending in the Eastern District of Texas, further blocking the enforcement of the CTA’s beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting requirements. This means that, despite the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, the BOI reporting obligations remain unenforceable for now. FinCEN has clarified on its website that “[r]eporting companies […] are not subject to liability if they fail to file [beneficial ownership] information while the Smith order remains in force.”

We continue to monitor the ongoing litigation closely. For the time being, the filing of BOI reports remains voluntary.

The post Client Alert: Corporate Transparency Act Update – BOI Filing Remains Voluntary appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network has announced that the reporting of certain stakeholder information is voluntary, pending the resolution of the federal government’s appeal of an injunction by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. This injunction barred enforcement of the CTA and its beneficial ownership reporting requirements, citing potential unconstitutionality.

Fabio pointed out the difference between the Texas court’s decision and an earlier decision by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama: “This case in Texas goes a step further, and a big step further, because it imposed the injunction, which is not limited to the plaintiffs in the case, but it’s a nationwide injunction.”

Fabio is a corporate and real estate attorney, representing businesses and investors in the acquisition and financing of property, along with business transactions and corporate matters. He specializes in cross-border transactions involving clients based in the United States, Europe, and Latin America.

Read the full article in the Daily Business Review here: https://www.law.com/dailybusinessreview/2024/12/10/nationwide-injunction-halts-corporate-transparency-act-reporting-requirements/?slreturn=20241218103920&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss

The post Fabio Giallanza discusses with the Daily Business Review CTA compliance and the Texas court’s decision on a nationwide injunction appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

In response, FinCEN issued guidance stating that, while the injunction is in effect, businesses are not required to file their beneficial ownership information. The court also stayed all deadlines for compliance. However, FinCEN also clarified that companies may still voluntarily submit their reports during this time. This guidance ensures businesses are clear on their obligations during the ongoing litigation.

The Department of Justice filed a Notice of Appeal on December 5, 2024, challenging the injunction. While several district courts have upheld the CTA’s constitutionality, including those in Virginia and Oregon, FinCEN will comply with the injunction as long as it remains in effect. Therefore, businesses are not required to submit beneficial ownership reports and will not face penalties for non-compliance during this time, though they may still voluntarily submit the reports.

Given this uncertainty, reporting companies should make a determination as to whether to submit their BOI report voluntarily or await an appellate decision on the injunction. For those companies that decide to wait, completing the analysis to identify their beneficial owners under the CTA may facilitate filing in the event enforcement of the law is reinstated. 

For those reporting companies that choose to file voluntarily or need assistance in determining their beneficial owners, our Firm remains ready to assist them in navigating the process and ensuring compliance with the requirements.

The post Client Alert: Corporate Transparency Act Litigation Update appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Reports under the CTA must be submitted by December 31, 2024. For businesses registered on or after January 1, 2024, registration is required within 90 days of filing their initial Articles of Organization or incorporation. Our firm is available to assist clients with this filing.

On March 1, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama deemed the CTA unconstitutional. However, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the U.S. Department of Treasury maintains that all applicable entities must still file their reports, except for those members of the National Small Business Association, the plaintiff in the case.

If you would like our assistance with your company’s CTA report, we are here to help.

Please note that the CTA report is not an annual filing. You will only need to refile if you sell your company or make significant governance changes, such as appointing a new president or senior officer.

The firm’s legal services will include:

1. Assessing your CTA reporting obligations by reviewing your corporate structure
2. Identifying beneficial owners based on the information you provide
3. Filing your company’s initial Beneficial Ownership Information report with FinCEN

Please be aware that the CTA is a complex law, and non-compliance can lead to significant penalties. We are here to guide you through this process and ensure you remain compliant. To receive an engagement letter, please email Emma Rodgers at ERodgers@wsh-law.com and she can send it to you by email or DocuSign upon request. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us by phone at (305) 854-0800 or by email, and we can discuss the process in more detail.

The post The Deadline is Approaching for the Corporate Transparency Act Filing Deadline appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Creation of Easements by Property Owners-HB 799 Signed Into Law

On June 26, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed House Bill 799 (HB 799) into law. HB 799 allows property owners in Florida to create easements on their own land while retaining ownership of both the dominant and servient estate.

Most states follow the principle that an owner cannot create an easement on its own land. The rationale behind this is that all uses of an easement are already covered by the general right of fee ownership. This was also the common law in Florida prior to the new law.

However, Florida’s HB 799 significantly departs from this common law approach, by introducing a new Section 704.09 to the Florida Statutes, which enables property owners “to create an easement, servitude, or other interest in the owner’s real property.” The new law became effective immediately. Section 2 states that its application is retroactive “to respect the intent of the parties to real property transactions that occurred before the effective date of this act.”

The Common Law in Florida and Other States

Florida courts have so far followed the principle that “one cannot have an easement in his own land.” Property owners can create an easement at the time of conveying a part of their land by reserving the easement in the deed. Florida courts also recognize the possibility of implying the existence of easements, even in the absence of an express reservation, from a pre-existing use in the presence of absolute necessity.

The approach of Florida courts is consistent with the common law in most states and it is premised on the notion that ownership inherently includes the right to use property without restrictions. Therefore, establishing a separate easement would be illogical and unnecessary. Some states have codified this principle. For example, California Civil Code Section 805 (West 2022) states that “A servitude thereon cannot be held by the owner of the servient tenement.” The same principle is at the heart of the “doctrine of merger,” pursuant to which an easement is automatically terminated when the dominant and servient estate become vested in the same owner.

The New Law and Its Impact

The new law introduces the ability for property owners to create easements “notwithstanding that the owner owns all of the affected real property.” The law expressly provides for its retroactive effect, with a statement of policy indicating that “it is the intent of the Legislature to respect the intent of the parties to real property transactions that occurred before the effective date of this act and the parties’ reliance on such easements … .”

The statute does not contain a repeal of the doctrine of merger, which continues to be applicable in Florida. This creates somewhat of an inconsistency, leading to a situation in which, on one hand, the law respects easements created by property owners on their own land and, on the other hand, to the possibility of the inadvertent termination of easements when a property owner acquires both the dominant and servient estate.

Title reviewers will need to be very careful to spot easements created in documents filed prior to a granting deed, for example condominium declarations, even if such easements were not expressly reserved in the deed.

Conclusions

In summary, Florida’s House Bill 799 (HB 799) allows property owners to create easements on their own land while retaining ownership of both the dominant and servient estate. This departure will demand extra care in the title review process.

Read the original article in the Daily Business Review here.

The post Fabio Giallanza authors article in the Daily Business Review discussing the change in Florida property law introduced by House Bill 799 appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

The post Client Alert – Corporate Transparency Act Litigation Update appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

“We are thrilled to be selected by the DBR as a 2024 Florida Legal Awards finalist in the Innovators category. Our well-rounded RTWC2026 Focus Group is at the forefront of helping businesses and governments take advantage of the exciting opportunities offered by the 2026 FIFA World Cup games being hosted in South Florida,” says Marlon Hill, WSHC+B Partner and member of the RTWC2026 Focus Group.

Our RTWC2026 Focus Group, composed of Alan K. Fertel, Chad S. Friedman, Fabio Giallanza, Marlon A. Hill, Mitchell A. Bierman, and Nelson Slosbergas, will be at the forefront of the Firm’s efforts in assisting clients with their World Cup-related business activities. 

The firm’s RTWC2026 Focus Group will be honored at the DBR’s Florida Legal Awards event on April 4, 2024. 

Read more here: https://www.law.com/dailybusinessreview/2024/03/10/innovators-weiss-serota-helfman-cole-bierman/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss

The post WSHC+B’s Road to the World Cup 2026 Focus Group interviewed by DBR Florida appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Our Road to the World Cup Focus Group – RTWC2026 Focus Group, composed of Alan K. Fertel, Chad S. Friedman, Fabio Giallanza, Marlon A. Hill, Mitchell A. Bierman, and Nelson Slosbergas, was recognized for its innovative approach to providing professional assistance to clients preparing for the 2026 World Cup.

The RTWC2026 Focus Group will be at the forefront of the Firm’s efforts in assisting clients with their World Cup-related business activities. With its multilingual and multicultural team, the RTWC2026 Focus Group is well versed in serving domestic as well as international businesses and organizations in French, Italian, Mandarin Chinese, Portuguese, Spanish and Hebrew.

The firm’s RTWC2026 Focus Group will be honored at the DBR’s Florida Legal Awards event on April 4, 2024. 

To view the full list of honorees and finalists, click here.

The post WSHC+B’s Road to the World Cup 2026 Focus Group recognized by DBR Florida Legal Awards appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.