Two title & escrow industry associations are asking a federal appeals court to keep the Residential Real Estate (RRE) Rule from coming back.
On October 23, 2026, the American Land Title Association (ALTA) and the Texas Land Title Association (TLTA) filed amicus briefs, written arguments from groups or individuals that are not formal parties to a court case, but have a stake in the case’s outcome and want to share their perspective with the court. In their briefs, both groups asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to uphold a ruling that vacated the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network’s (FinCEN) RRE Rule.
ALTA and TLTA said the rule puts heavy costs on title & escrow companies and that FinCEN lacks the legal authority to impose it. ALTA said in an announcement that the briefs argue the rule “imposes significant costs and operational burdens on title and settlement professionals without adequately demonstrating that its benefits justify those requirements.”
What is the Flowers Title case against FinCEN, and why have ALTA and TLTA weighed in?
In April 2025, Flowers Title Companies, L.L.C. challenged the RRE Rule in Texas federal court. The company argued that the government overstepped its authority with the rule by forcing title companies to collect and report private details about certain non-financed home sales, something Flowers asserted the law doesn’t give FinCEN the power to require.
A federal judge sided with Flowers, vacating the rule nationwide in a March 19, 2026 decision. FinCEN appealed, seeking to have the order overturned so it can impose the rule.
The appeal remains active. Both ALTA and TLTA filed briefs in the case supporting Flowers and asking for the order to remain vacated. While its appeal of the March 19 decision is active, FinCEN is not currently enforcing the RRE Rule.
What does ALTA’s amicus brief argue?
ALTA’s brief argued in part that the RRE Rule would saddle title & escrow companies with far higher compliance costs than FinCEN estimated, while also running into pushback from buyers and sellers over privacy and data security.
The RRE Rule sought to make title & escrow companies report most non-financed residential transfers involving a trust or entity. In effect for only the first few weeks of March before being vacated, the rule said each report had to include beneficial ownership information, which identifies the people who ultimately own or control the buyer. ALTA argued that would be a major burden on title & escrow teams.
Main points from ALTA’s brief include:
- FinCEN’s $559.4 million first-year cost-to-implement estimate is too low. ALTA said FinCEN did not fully count the real cost to title & escrow companies of employee training, technology changes, recordkeeping, and the time it takes to get information from buyers and sellers.
- Title professionals cannot make anyone hand over information. They have no authority to compel buyers or sellers to provide beneficial ownership information. They could still face penalties if a report is missing required details.
- Buyers and sellers are pushing back. ALTA surveyed more than 1,300 title & escrow professionals. In that survey, 45% reported that buyers or sellers said that they would not provide the requested information, and 85% said buyers or sellers raised significant privacy or data security concerns.
- Banks already collect much of this information. ALTA said financial institutions already gather beneficial ownership information from their business customers when accounts are opened, and law enforcement can get it through subpoenas and other legal channels. That makes the rule’s burdens harder to justify.
- The benefits are unproven. ALTA questioned whether FinCEN showed that the rule’s expected benefits outweigh its costs.
What does TLTA’s amicus brief argue?
TLTA made the case that transactions involving legal entities, trusts, or cash happen regularly in the real estate market. FinCEN treats them as inherently suspicious. TLTA said they are not. That matters because it goes to whether FinCEN had the power to write the rule at all.
Main arguments from TLTA’s brief include:
- FinCEN’s legal basis covers “suspicious” transactions, not whole categories. TLTA said the statute FinCEN relies on to implement the rule only lets it require reports of transactions with specific facts that make someone believe something is wrong. The rule instead labels a whole category, non-financed transfers to entities and trusts, as suspicious. In TLTA’s view, that goes beyond what the law allows.
- The targeted transactions are routine and legal. Title professionals see entity ownership, trust ownership, and cash purchases every day for ordinary reasons. Real suspicion comes from the particulars of a transaction. If a whole category counts as suspicious, they argue that the word loses its meaning.
- A general “procedures” clause cannot fill the gap. FinCEN also points to a broader part of the law that lets it require certain procedures. TLTA said that part cannot let FinCEN require reports on a whole class of transactions. If it could, FinCEN could skip the suspicion requirement Congress wrote into the law.
Given all this, TLTA asserted that FinCEN lacks the legal authority to impose the rule as written. It asked the Fifth Circuit to uphold the district court order vacating the rule.
Is the Flowers case the only court fight over FinCEN’s RRE Rule?
No. Fidelity National Financial (FNF) challenged the rule in Florida, where a federal judge upheld it. FNF’s subsequent appeal to the Eleventh Circuit is active but undecided. ALTA filed an amicus brief supporting FNF’s appeal this summer. If the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits come to opposite decisions, the fight could ultimately reach the Supreme Court. A third case, in Puerto Rico, is on hold.
Where does the FinCEN RRE Rule stand today?
The RRE Rule is not in effect anywhere right now. Because of the Texas court’s vacatur, title & escrow companies are not currently required to file RRE reports.
FinCEN has also said it will not require retroactive reporting for transactions that would have been reportable while the rule was being contested in court, even if it ultimately wins the appeal and puts the rule in place.
Qualia built an end-to-end FinCEN reporting solution into Qualia Core that is ready if the rule takes effect. Title & escrow companies can track the appeals as they move forward. Qualia will continue to share key developments.
To stay informed on important title & escrow issues, subscribe to the Qualia Insight blog.
