Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Business Filing Fraud topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee refers business-filing fraud prevention bill after Secretary of State staff outline new removal process

2836319 · April 1, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House File 2,566, sponsored by Representative Reyer, was re-referred to the State Government Finance and Policy Committee after testimony from the Office of the Secretary of State describing a process to handle fraudulent business filings and rules for deceptive solicitations.

The Minnesota House Commerce Committee on Tuesday re-referred House File 2,566, the Minnesota Business Filing Fraud Prevention Act, to the State Government Finance and Policy Committee. The bill aims to give the Office of the Secretary of State a statutory process to correct fraudulent business filings and to require clearer labeling on solicitations that could be mistaken for official communications.

Representative Reyer, sponsor of the bill, told the committee that business identity fraud—where bad actors hijack or create businesses in another person's name—can leave victims facing bills, legal trouble or tax liabilities. She said the current office lacks statutory authority to remove wrongful filings without a court order and that this bill would create an administrative path for review and correction.

Lauren Bethke, Deputy General Counsel for the Office of the Secretary of State, testified that the bill establishes a multi-step process. A person claiming a wrongful filing would submit a declaration to the office; staff would notify both the complainant and the original filer. If the filer does not respond within 21 calendar days, the office would presume the filing was fraudulent and could issue an order; if the filer responds, the office would make a preliminary determination with opportunity for response, and a final order would be subject to judicial review.

Bethke also described a second article in the bill that requires certain commercial solicitations to be clearly marked as advertisements so business owners can distinguish them from official communications. Committee members had no additional questions; the committee re-referred the bill to the State Government Finance and Policy Committee by voice vote.

The bill packet included letters of support and staff from the Secretary of State's office remained available to answer follow-up questions.