All Businesses in Saudi Arabia Now Obliged to Employ Saudi Nationals
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.12.13
The Saudi Arabian Ministry of Labor's Nitaqat program obliges businesses in Saudi Arabia to ensure that a certain percentage of their workforce is comprised of Saudi nationals (the Saudization Obligation) and ranks businesses on the basis of the businesses' compliance with the Saudization Obligation.
Under the Nitaqat program, the specific percentage (or range of percentages) of a business’s workforce that must be comprised of Saudi nationals is determined by reference to (a) the business activity that the business undertakes and (b) the total size of the business’s workforce. Since the implementation of the Nitaqat program in 2011, businesses with fewer than 10 employees have been exempt from the application of the Nitaqat program, so that businesses with fewer than 10 employees could in principle have no Saudi employees at all. However, this exemption will expire as of 30 March 2013, at which time every business in Saudi Arabia regardless of its area of business or number of employees, will become subject to the Nitaqat program and will be required to employ at least one Saudi national.
Depending on the extent of a business's compliance with its Saudization Obligation, the Ministry of Labor will rank a business as red (non-compliant), yellow (poor compliance), green (compliant), or premium (more than compliant). Businesses that are classified as red or yellow are subject to penalties, while businesses that are classified as green or premium are awarded incentives.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
