top of page

Want more great resources?

Subscribe to receive all the latest industry research, trends, and updates directly in your inbox.

The Final BOI Rule: 17 Questions Asked and Answered

  • Nov 13, 2023
  • 2 min read

Updated: Nov 20, 2023


The Corporate Transparency Act’s (CTA) beneficial ownership information (BOI) rule is only five years old. Despite its relative newness, it’s about to undergo a dramatic makeover, requiring bankers and compliance experts to scramble.


Beginning January 2024, financial institutions will need to furnish the names of owners at reporting companies at the 25-percent-or-higher level and supply a longer list of individuals with substantial control. These individuals can include the CEO, the CFO, board members, and others.


Additionally, the new BOI rule means financial institutions will be responsible for supplying ownership and control information directly to FinCEN as part of the onboarding process for new customers and supporting existing ones.


At a recent webinar titled “Navigating the Corporate Transparency Act: The Final BOI Rule,” RiskScout partnered with Constantine Lizas*, a former FDIC regulator, now Partner at Harris Beach PLLC, to untangle some of the complicated details.

A white Q&A graphic on red background.

Attendee Final BOI Rule Questions and Lizas’ Insightful Answers


Question 1: Is there any precedent for civil or criminal penalties surrounding the Corporate Transparency Act that our audience should know about?

Answer: No, at this moment, there’s no precedent. It’s just the statutory law at this point, and we have to see where that goes.


With respect to beneficial ownership information, one of the things that’s going to be really important is understanding what the company is doing. So, if you have a legitimate company, and they just forget and have bad controls and are not as responsible as they should be, I don’t see any major liability for that individual or company.


But if you have a company that is helping to layer funds in a money laundering scheme, and let’s say the prosecutors can’t prove that that company knew that the funds were the funds of a specified unlawful activity—then I think in that type of situation, you are going to see prosecutors and regulators trying to go for a criminal penalty.


In other words, if they can’t prosecute for money laundering but they could prosecute for a violation of beneficial ownership information reporting, that’s when criminal penalties will be seen.


Answer: The reporting companies will send the information to FinCEN. Ultimately, there’s going to be an online VPN or PDF that will go to FinCEN but not to the financial institutions. That’s where we’re going to have some confusion.


The reporting companies will have to report to FinCEN, but when they open a new account at a bank, they’ll then have to submit beneficial ownership information—which could be slightly different and have slightly different exemptions—to the bank, too. It will then be up to the bank to contact FinCEN to confirm whether the bank or the financial institution has the correct information.


Answer: Most likely, there will be a portal where the financial institution will submit a query. And then somebody from FinCEN will go ahead and search the database. You already have a system that is very difficult to maneuver, and it will be made more difficult by the fact that the financial institution will not be able to search the database.


Now regulators and law enforcement will have more access to the database, but FIs are only going to be able to request that FinCEN run individual queries.


Answer: At the end of the day, if the customer has what’s defined as “an account” at the financial institution, then that burden will be on the bank.


Third-party risk is a huge issue. Regulators just put out new third-party risk guidance recently. Banks need to understand what third parties do, and they need to all be on the same page and make sure that everybody is meeting all their BSA responsibilities.


Answer: For new customers, it’s going to be part of the onboarding procedures. For existing customers, it’s going to need to be inserted into the account relationship paperwork, which means that it’s going to have to be re-executed at some point going forward.

Answer: That is correct, and it’s a difference between the current rule and the new rule. Under the current rule, you would [report] the four beneficial owners and a control person—and the control person would be just one person. Now you’re in a situation where all of those individuals with substantial control would be listed, and you’re going to have seven individuals [to report].


Although there’s no limit on how many people could be reported, you’d think that after five, ten, or 15 people, there’s not as much substantial control. That’s something to be determined at a later date.


Answer: That’s something we’re still waiting to find out. Hopefully, it’s the same day, or just a couple of business days.


The FinCEN database, from what I understand from talking to people from FinCEN, is going to be built from the ground up with fairly new technology, if not the latest technology. I think there’s a hope or expectation that the Beneficial Ownership Secure System (BOSS) is going to be far ahead of what anyone has seen with respect to the SAR database. It should be far more responsive.


Answer: That’s not been determined yet by FinCEN. [You do get permission] in the beginning to develop a risk profile, but you may want to do it again later, too, if you get negative news or an alert. There is an expectation and a requirement that the financial institution goes ahead and does enhanced due diligence, and that may entail going back and looking again at the beneficial owners.

Answer: The financial institution will need the consent of the reporting company [to access the database]. Once it gets consent and sends the appropriate certifications to FinCEN, it will have access to query the database through FinCEN but won’t have access to search the database.


Answer: The answer is “yes” to January 1st, but there could be up to a week or two or even a month lag. If a reporting company gets registered with the secretary of state on January 1st, it would still have 30 days to file with FinCEN.

Answer: It could change, but the way that the proposed access rule was written, financial institutions would not have searchable access to the database. I doubt that that will change because it’s a non-public database.


I think there are pretty strong signals from FinCEN that it’s not going to let institutions have searchable access to the database.


Answer: Pretty high, but it depends on the state. There are some states that are a little more protective of privacy, but there are also some states that believe some transparency—or sunshine—is a good thing.



Answer: Right now, the best information is from the proposed rule, available here.


Answer: Look, financial institutions can get a query from the customer. The idea is that when getting information from the customer, they’d have to check on that information and be able to confirm that information by sending it to FinCEN.


Answer: They will, but only for the purposes of examination as it pertains to customer due diligence.


Answer: That is the risk. I think it would be fair to say that at this point, unintentional reporting or misreporting—meaning something benign—may not get a penalty or may just get a civil penalty. But when you get into illegal activity and if you’re using the company to aid or abet illegal activity, that’s when you’re looking at criminal sanctions.


I’d also point out that everyone knows FinCEN is short-staffed. So, if you’re talking about 25-to-40 million entities, and let’s just say one percent have some problems with reporting, you’re talking 2.5 to four million entities that might need some sort of civil penalty. It’s not clear that anyone in the country has the capacity to handle that, whether it’s FinCEN or the U.S. Attorney’s offices. That’s a high number of cases. And even if you’re only saying there are problems with 0.1 percent of cases, that’s still 250,000 to 400,000 cases.


Answer: If financial institutions are going to continue to onboard a customer or keep that customer, if it’s an existing one, then there’s going to need to be a policy and procedure to move forward and resolve discrepancies.


As community banks and credit unions await a final BOI rule and clarifications, RiskScout will continue holding webinars to answer pressing questions. We hope you’ll join us. To view other informative sessions held this year, subscribe to our YouTube channel.


Constantine Lizas

*Meet the Presenter:

Constantine Lizas joined Harris Beach’s Washington, D.C. office after leaving the FDIC’s Enforcement Section as an acting Supervisory Counsel and the FDIC’s lead BSA/AML Counsel. At the FDIC, he advised the interagency team that began drafting new rules pursuant to the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020. He also served as a federal prosecutor in the Department of Justice’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section. In May, Constantine spoke at the Practicing Law Institute on

He assists financial institutions with examination matters, enforcement actions, government investigations, and compliance issues. For more, visit this web page, which includes information about his background, services, and recent insights.

For more detailed information and to watch the webinar, click here.

Stay Up to Date

Want to keep your finger on the pulse of the latest industry news, trends, and data? 

Enter your email and be the first to know when there's new content added. 

bottom of page