Why No BOI?

(Business terrorist image Imagen 3/Google Gemini)

I asked my good buddy Google Gemini to describe the court arguments against FinCEN beneficial ownership reporting (which as of this hour is on a court-mandated hold pending a possible Supreme Court stay). Two of the items identified by Gemini are Bill of Rights related.

“Some argue the reporting requirements force businesses to disclose information about their owners, which they consider a form of compelled speech. The First Amendment protects freedom of expression, and this argument suggests the government is overstepping its bounds.”

“Critics argue that the collection of beneficial ownership information constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. They contend that this collection is overly broad and lacks sufficient justification to meet the constitutional standard of reasonableness.”

Human sources, including Engage Wealth Advisors, mention these same concerns.

So the big boys are still subject to KYC, KYB, and AML regulations, while the little boys (sole proprietors) aren’t. The ones in the middle who would have been subject to the Corporate Transparency Act remain in a state of limbo.

Of course, if an anonymous entity claimed that BOI opponents are Putin lovers who want to hide terrorist activities, those same opponents would want to know who is saying that about them. What’s good for me isn’t good for thee…