1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FTC Extends Enforcement Date of Red Flags Rule

FTC Extends Enforcement Date of Red Flags Rule

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.03.09

The Federal Trade Commission (the "FTC") announced that it has postponed enforcement of the Red Flags Rule1 until November 1, 2009. This is the third enforcement extension by the FTC. The Red Flags Rule became effective January 1, 2008 and the mandatory enforcement date was originally November 1, 2008. The FTC suspended enforcement of the Rule until May 1, 2009 and subsequently suspended enforcement until August 1, 2009.2

The Red Flags Rule requires financial institutions and creditors to look for "red flags" that signal possible identity theft. The FTC announced that it has provided this additional extension since small businesses and entities with a low risk of identity theft remain uncertain of their obligations. The FTC intends to provide additional guidance to assist these companies. The FTC explained in a July 29th press release that these steps are consistent with the House Appropriations Committee's request that the FTC defer enforcement in conjunction with additional efforts to minimize the burden on health care providers and small businesses with a low risk of identity theft problems.

Please let us know if you have any questions or if we can help you in crafting a compliant Program.

1 72 Fed. Reg. 63717, 63771-63775 (Nov. 9, 2007) (codified at 16 C.F.R. Part 681).

2 The enforcement delay does not apply to the address discrepancy and credit card issuer rules. These rules are not addressed in this Health Law Alert.

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....

View All Insights