NEWS

Client Alert: I-9 Inspections Are Active. The Risk Is Immediate.

Federal immigration enforcement is not theoretical. It is operational. Employers across Virginia, DC, Maryland, Delaware, New York, North Carolina, Florida and Kentucky should assume that Form I-9 inspections are occurring now and without warning.

A standard inspection starts quietly. A written Notice of Inspection arrives. It triggers a fixed response window. Three business days.

What the government can require:

1. Compelled Production: Under INA § 274A and its implementing regulations, federal agents may compel production of I-9s and supporting records, including payroll, corporate documents and contractor information.
2. Place and Means: They choose the place of inspection. They can demand electronic systems, audit trails, and underlying data. They can escalate to subpoenas or warrants.
3. Scope: The scope is not limited to current employees. It reaches terminated employees within the prior year.

This is a records case. Until it is not.

NEWS

Client Alert: You’ve Just Received a Force Majeure Notice Amid the Iran War — Immediate Steps for Receiving Parties

A force majeure notice arrives from your counterparty citing the Strait of Hormuz crisis, Iranian strikes, or related government action. The notice claims performance is impossible and seeks to suspend or terminate obligations. This wave of notices was triggered in earnest by QatarEnergy’s recent declaration of force majeure on multiple long-term LNG supply contracts — a direct consequence of production disruptions and the ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz amid the Iran War.

NEWS

Client Alert: Supreme Court Rules President Lacks Authority to Impose Tariffs Under IEEPA

• The Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs in a 6-3 decision.
• The Supreme Court did not address how tariffs will be refunded to importers. Resolution of that process will now be in the hands of the lower courts.

NEWS

Client Alert: The Fifth Circuit Clarifies “Limited Partner” for Self-Employment Tax Purposes

• The Fifth Circuit held that a “limited partner” for purposes of the self-employment tax means a partner in a state law limited partnership who has limited liability. 
• The court rejected the IRS’s “passive investor” interpretation and instead held that generally, a limited partner with limited liability under state law qualifies for the exclusion from the self-employment tax on the partner’s share of partnership income. 
• The Fifth Circuit’s decision could lead to a potential circuit split, ultimately setting up the issue for consideration before the Supreme Court.