California Business Law Changes

The 2024 legislative session in California witnessed the approval of over 40 amendments to the California Corporations Code and related statutes, signaling a substantial evolution in the state’s business regulatory framework ¹. These changes, comprehensively documented in the “2025 Edition of California Laws Governing Business Entities Annotated,” published by CSC in collaboration with LexisNexis, reflect a commitment to modernizing and refining the legal landscape for businesses operating within the state ¹. Key areas of focus include the introduction of new requirements for venture capital companies and franchise brokers, along with significant developments in the realm of employee non-compete agreements and various tax-related adjustments ¹. The sheer volume of these amendments underscores the need for legal professionals and business stakeholders to gain a thorough understanding of their implications. The specific attention directed towards venture capital and franchise brokers suggests a deliberate effort to address the unique regulatory considerations within these dynamic sectors of the California economy ¹.

2. Key Amendments to the California Corporations Code:

The “2025 Edition of California Laws Governing Business Entities Annotated” serves as a critical resource, capturing the extensive modifications made to the California Corporations Code, including the introduction of new obligations for venture capital companies ¹.

2.1. New Requirements for Venture Capital Companies:

Significant amendments were enacted concerning the regulation of venture capital companies, primarily through modifications to the Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law, initially adopted and subsequently refined by legislative action in 2024 ². These amendments, signed into law on June 29, 2024, aim to enhance transparency regarding founder diversity within the venture capital ecosystem ².

A notable aspect of these changes is the narrowing of the scope of funds subject to the reporting requirements. The amended law now focuses more specifically on entities that are fundamentally engaged in venture capital investments, refining the definition of a “covered entity” ². The original law’s business criterion included a broader provision that encompassed venture capital companies managing assets on behalf of third-party investors, irrespective of whether they directly invested in traditional venture capital companies ². This potentially captured a wider range of entities than intended. The revised criterion stipulates that a venture capital company will only be considered a “covered entity” and thus subject to the law if it “primarily” engages in the business of investing in, or providing financing to, startup, early-stage, or emerging growth companies and maintains a California nexus ². This adjustment indicates a legislative intent to more precisely target entities whose core activity aligns with traditional venture capital investment practices.

Furthermore, the initial deadline for reporting diversity metrics to the State of California has been extended from March 1, 2025, to April 1, 2026 ². This extension likely acknowledges the complexities involved in collecting and compiling the required data, providing covered entities with additional time to establish the necessary reporting mechanisms. This suggests a pragmatic approach by the legislature, recognizing the potential administrative challenges associated with the new requirements.

In addition to the extended deadline, a new ongoing reporting obligation has been introduced. Starting March 1, 2026, covered entities are required to report and keep current their name and contact information with the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) ². This ensures that the regulatory body has up-to-date information for all entities subject to the law, facilitating communication and oversight. Maintaining accurate contact information is a fundamental aspect of regulatory compliance.

The amendments also detail the specific diversity information that covered entities must report. At an aggregated level, they must disclose the gender identity, race, ethnicity, disability status, LGBTQ+ identification, and veteran status of each member of the founding team of all businesses in which they made a venture capital investment ². Additionally, they must report whether any founding team member identifies as a resident of California or declined to provide any of the aforementioned information ². This detailed data collection reflects a legislative objective to gain comprehensive insights into the diversity landscape of venture-backed startups in California.

Covered entities are also obligated to report the total number and dollar amount (as a percentage of total venture capital investments) of investments made in the prior calendar year to businesses “primarily founded by diverse founding team members,” broken down by each of the reported demographic categories ². This specific reporting requirement directly addresses the law’s aim to track investment flows to diverse founders. A business is considered “primarily founded by diverse founding team members” if more than half of the founding team members who responded to the required survey self-identify as a woman, nonbinary individual, Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino-Latina, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, Alaskan Native, disabled individual, veteran or disabled veteran, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer individual ². The definition of a “founding team member” includes individuals who owned initial shares or similar ownership interests, contributed to the concept, research, development, or work performed by the business before initial shares were issued (and were not passive investors), or have been designated as the chief executive officer or president ².

To facilitate the collection of this sensitive information, covered entities are mandated to use a standardized survey form provided by the DFPI ². This ensures consistency in data collection across all reporting entities. Along with the survey, covered entities must provide a written disclosure to each founding team member, either before or when providing the survey, stating that the decision to disclose demographic information is voluntary, no adverse action will be taken if they decline to participate, and the aggregated data for each demographic category will be reported to the DFPI ². This emphasizes the voluntary nature of the disclosure and aims to build trust with the individuals providing the information. Survey results must be collected and reported in a manner that keeps individual responses anonymous, and backup data for reports must be retained for at least five years after the report is submitted ².

Non-compliance with these reporting requirements can lead to significant penalties. The DFPI is authorized to issue cease and desist orders, require payment of costs (including attorney’s fees and investigative expenses), and impose monetary penalties for violations ². These penalties can reach up to $5,000 per day for general violations, with potentially higher amounts for reckless or knowing violations ². The severity of these penalties underscores the importance the state places on compliance with the Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law.

The legislative history and definitions related to venture capital companies are further clarified in the California Corporations Code ³. While Senate Bill 54 was chaptered in 2023, it was subsequently amended by Senate Bill 164 in 2024, reflecting an ongoing legislative refinement of these regulations ³.

2.2. New Regulations for Franchise Brokers:

The “2025 Edition” also highlights the introduction of new regulations specifically targeting franchise brokers, marking a significant development in California’s franchise law landscape ¹. Senate Bill 919, signed into law on September 24, 2024, and officially titled the “Franchise Investment Law: Franchise Brokers,” amends the existing California Franchise Investment Law to impose annual registration and presale disclosure requirements on franchise brokers ⁵.

A key aspect of this new law is the requirement for franchise brokers to register annually with the DFPI before offering or selling any franchise in California ⁵. This requirement is set to take effect on the later of July 1, 2026, or 12 months after the California Legislature makes the necessary appropriation ⁵. This dependence on legislative funding introduces a degree of uncertainty regarding the precise implementation timeline. The registration process will necessitate franchise brokers filing copies of their Uniform Franchise Broker Disclosure Document (UFBDD), paying applicable registration fees ($450 for initial filing, $150 for renewal, $50 for amendment), and providing copies of any required financial securities, insurance policies, or other documents online with the DFPI commissioner ⁵. Registration will be effective upon the filing of a complete application and the payment of the fee, expiring on December 31 of the filing year ⁵.

Going beyond the registration requirement, the California Franchise Broker Law also imposes a presale disclosure obligation on all franchise brokers ⁵. Before engaging in any communication with prospective franchisees regarding investment opportunities, brokers are now legally obligated to provide them with a copy of the broker’s disclosure document ⁵. This measure aims to ensure that potential franchisees have access to crucial information about the broker’s background, experience, and the franchises they represent before making any financial commitments.

The law provides a broad definition of a “franchise broker,” encompassing any person who directly or indirectly engages in the business of offering or selling a franchise and receives or is promised a fee, commission, or other form of consideration from a franchisor ⁵. Common titles used by franchise brokers include franchise seller, broker network, broker organization, franchise sales organization, consultant, and coach ⁶. However, the definition specifically excludes certain parties, including franchisors, subfranchisors, area representatives, their officers, directors, or employees, employees of their affiliates, and franchisees of the offered franchised brand (unless the franchisee operates a franchised broker business) ⁵.

The revised law also restricts who can be involved in a franchise sale within California. Only individuals listed in Item 2 of a franchisor’s registered Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD), licensed real estate brokers or salespersons, licensed broker-dealers or agents under the California Corporate Securities Law of 1968, or persons registered as franchise brokers are now permitted to participate in the offer or sale of franchises ⁵.

Registered franchise brokers are further obligated to promptly notify the commissioner in writing, through an application to amend their registration, of any material change in the information contained in their latest filed Uniform Franchise Broker Disclosure Document ⁷. This requirement to amend upon a material change is based on the same materiality standard that applies to franchisors under the California Franchise Investment Law ⁵. While this does not necessitate constant updates, it ensures that the DFPI is informed of significant changes in the broker’s information. The commissioner is also granted the authority to issue rules further defining what constitutes a material change and the circumstances under which an amended Broker Disclosure Document must be filed ⁵.

The Broker Disclosure Document itself has specific content requirements. It must include at least a standardized cover page, detailed information about the franchise broker (such as legal name and contact information), professional experience, any relevant administrative, civil, or criminal actions, the industries and number of brands represented, a description of the services offered, compensation details, and the brands for which the broker sold a franchise in the past year ⁵. The DFPI is expected to issue further regulations specifying the exact format and content requirements for this crucial document ⁵.

In addition to registration and disclosure, registered franchise brokers are required to maintain a complete set of books, records, and accounts for each California franchise offer for a period of five calendar years after the offer ⁵. This record-keeping requirement ensures that there is a documented history of franchise sales activities, which can be important for regulatory oversight and dispute resolution.

Failure to comply with the California Franchise Broker Law can have significant legal and financial consequences. A franchise broker who violates the law may be held liable for damages to the franchisee, subfranchisor, or franchisor, and may also be required to provide indemnification to the franchisor ⁵. Furthermore, a franchisee who worked with an unregistered or non-compliant broker may have grounds to seek rescission of the franchise agreement for the broker’s willful violations ⁵. The commissioner also retains the authority to issue a stop order, which can suspend or revoke a broker’s registration for violations of the law ⁵.

2.3. Authority to Cancel Business Entity:

Another notable amendment to the California Corporations Code, enacted through Chapter 783 of the Statutes of 2024 (Senate Bill 1168), grants the Secretary of State the authority to cancel a business entity (specifically a limited liability company or a corporation) under specific circumstances related to the unlawful use of personal identifying information ⁸. This new provision, effective January 1, 2025, is triggered when a court order has been filed pursuant to Civil Code Section 1798.202 within the record of the business entity ⁸.

Civil Code Section 1798.202 provides a mechanism for individuals who have learned or reasonably suspect that their personal identifying information has been unlawfully used in a business entity filing to seek legal recourse ⁸. After initiating a law enforcement investigation, such individuals can petition the superior court. If the court determines that the petition is meritorious, it can issue an order requiring certain information in the business entity filing to be redacted or removed from publicly accessible electronic indexes and databases ⁸. This court order is then filed with the Secretary of State ⁸.

The newly enacted provision in the Corporations Code states that, beginning January 1, 2025, the Secretary of State may cancel the business entity that is the subject of such a court order if, after 60 days from the filing of the order, an updated statement of information has not been filed on behalf of the entity ⁸. This updated statement of information must not contain any of the information that the court ordered to be redacted ⁸. This amendment provides an additional layer of protection for individuals whose identities have been compromised in fraudulent business filings, allowing for the potential cancellation of the implicated entity if corrective action is not taken.

3. Analysis of New Case Law Developments:

The “2025 Edition of California Laws Governing Business Entities Annotated” not only incorporates the numerous legislative amendments but also includes more than two dozen new case notes from both state and federal courts that interpret California business law ¹. These case notes provide valuable insights into how the courts are applying and interpreting the existing statutes. Furthermore, the edition features five full-text cases that address significant legal topics within California business law ¹. These topics include the Business Judgment Rule, which defines the standard of care expected of corporate directors in their decision-making; annual meetings compliance, addressing the legal requirements for holding shareholder meetings; the enforceability of noncompetition provisions, a particularly relevant area given the recent legislative changes; stock options disputes, which often arise in the context of employee compensation and equity; and transfers to stockholders, covering the legal aspects of शेयरholder transactions ¹.

The “2025 Edition” conveniently lists these new cases in a dedicated Table of New Annotations and marks them with gray bars within the text for easy identification ¹. While the research snippets provided do not detail the specific holdings or implications of these individual cases, their inclusion in the annotated edition underscores the ongoing evolution of California business law through judicial interpretation. Legal professionals relying on this resource will need to review these cases to understand the nuances of their rulings and how they might affect their practice and their clients’ businesses. The specific legal topics covered by these cases suggest areas that have been subject to recent judicial scrutiny and where new precedents may have been established.

4. Other Significant Legislative Changes Affecting California Businesses:

Beyond the amendments to the Corporations Code directly addressing venture capital companies and franchise brokers, the 2024 legislative session brought about several other noteworthy changes impacting California businesses across various sectors.

4.1. Strengthening Prohibition of Employee Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Clauses:

California has long held a strong public policy against the enforcement of employee non-compete agreements. In 2024, the state took further steps to solidify this stance with the enactment of two new laws, Senate Bill 699 (SB 699) and Assembly Bill 1076 (AB 1076), both of which went into effect on January 1, 2024 ⁹.

SB 699 adds Section 16600.5 to the California Business & Professions Code, explicitly making it a civil violation for employers to even attempt to enforce a non-compete or non-solicitation provision that is void under California law, regardless of where and when the agreement was signed ⁹. This effectively nullifies any non-compete clause in an employment contract within California, regardless of its origin ¹⁰. This legislative action removes any ambiguity regarding the applicability of California’s prohibition to agreements entered into outside the state, significantly bolstering employee mobility.

AB 1076 further strengthens this prohibition by amending Section 16600 and adding Section 16600.1 to the Business & Professions Code ⁹. Notably, this bill imposed a new requirement on employers. By February 14, 2024, employers were mandated to notify all current employees and former employees who were employed after January 1, 2022, and who were required to sign non-compete or customer non-solicitation provisions, that those provisions are void under California law ⁹. This proactive notification requirement underscores the state’s commitment to ensuring that employees are aware of their rights and the unenforceability of these restrictive covenants. Employers who enter into or even attempt to enforce a void non-compete or non-solicitation provision in California may face legal repercussions, including potential injunctive relief, actual damages, and the possibility of being required to pay the employee’s attorney’s fees and costs if the employee prevails in a legal challenge ⁹.

4.2. Tax Law Changes Affecting Businesses:

Several amendments to California’s tax laws, effective in 2024, will impact various aspects of business operations within the state ¹¹. These changes, as outlined by the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB), include the following:

California law no longer permits the deduction for intangible drilling and development costs under IRC Section 263(c) for oil and gas wells if these costs were paid or incurred on or after January 1, 2024 ¹¹. Additionally, for taxable years commencing on or after January 1, 2024, the calculation of depletion as a percentage of gross income from the property is no longer allowed for specified natural resources, including coal, oil shale, and oil and gas wells ¹¹. Furthermore, the Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit has been repealed for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, meaning that taxpayers can now only claim any available carryovers of this credit ¹¹. These changes collectively represent a notable shift in the state’s tax policy concerning the oil and gas industry.

In contrast, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2029, California law now allows a qualified taxpayer to exclude from their gross income any amount received as a California qualified wildfire loss mitigation payment through the California Wildfire Mitigation Financial Assistance Program ¹¹. This provision aims to provide financial relief to those undertaking wildfire mitigation efforts, reflecting the state’s ongoing challenges with wildfires.

There is also a limitation on reporting business purchases subject to use tax on income tax returns. For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2023, and before January 1, 2029, if a business makes more than $10,000 in purchases subject to use tax (excluding vehicles, vessels, and aircraft) per calendar year and has not paid the tax, they are no longer permitted to report these purchases on their income tax return ¹¹. This change likely intends to encourage businesses to directly pay use tax on such purchases rather than relying on income tax reporting.

Regarding tax-related deadlines, beginning on or after June 27, 2024, the Director of Finance will determine when Internal Revenue Code Section 7508A, which relates to the postponement of certain federal tax-related deadlines in the event of a federally declared disaster, will apply for California tax purposes to a taxpayer affected by a state of emergency declared by the Governor ¹¹. This aims to align state tax relief measures with federal provisions during times of emergency.

Finally, the elective tax for pass-through entities (PTEs) and the corresponding credit for owners remain in effect for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2021, and before January 1, 2026 ¹¹. This allows eligible partnerships and S corporations to annually elect to pay a state tax at a rate of 9.3 percent based on their qualified net income, with the owners then receiving a credit against their personal income tax for their share of the tax paid by the entity ¹¹.

4.3. Changes Related to Notary Publics:

Amendments enacted through Chapter 691 of the Statutes of 2024 (Assembly Bill 2004) introduce changes affecting the role of notary publics in the context of electronic records related to real property ⁸. This new law authorizes a disinterested custodian to certify that a tangible copy of an electronic record is a complete and accurate reproduction of the electronic record ⁸. It further requires a county recorder to accept for recording a tangible copy of an electronic record that has been so certified by a notary public, provided that specified requirements are met ⁸. Notably, the law clarifies that such a tangible copy of an electronic record imparts notice of its contents, even if the person making the certification fails to fully qualify as a disinterested custodian ⁸.

Additionally, this statute addresses the evidentiary weight of recorded instruments affecting title to real property. It provides that any such instrument, 90 days after it has been copied into the proper book of record kept in the office of any county recorder, provides notice of its contents to specified individuals, notwithstanding any defect, omission, or informality in the execution of the instrument, the certificate of acknowledgment, or the absence of such a certificate ⁸. These changes aim to facilitate the recording of electronic documents related to real property and to provide greater certainty regarding the legal effect of recorded instruments, even in the presence of minor technical imperfections.

4.4. New Standards for National Fast-Food Chain Restaurants:

Assembly Bill 1228 (AB 1228), which became operative on January 1, 2024, introduces significant new standards specifically for franchisors and franchisees operating National Fast-Food Chain Restaurants in California ¹². This legislation brings about substantial changes in labor costs and regulatory oversight for this sector.

Effective April 1, 2024, AB 1228 mandates an increase in the minimum wage for fast food employees to $20 per hour ¹². This represents a significant rise in labor costs for affected businesses. The bill also establishes a Fast-Food Council, an 11-member body comprising representatives from various stakeholders, including fast-food employees, worker advocates, franchisors, franchisees, and government officials ¹². This Council is authorized to set fast-food restaurant standards for minimum wage and to develop minimum standards on working hours and other working conditions, including health and safety standards and training ¹². The Council’s authority to set wages extends until January 1, 2029, at which point the Council and its authority will sunset ¹².

The law defines a “National Fast Food Chain” as a set of limited-service restaurants with more than 60 establishments nationally that share a common brand or have standardized options for decor, marketing, packaging, products, and services, and are primarily engaged in providing food and beverages for immediate consumption with limited or no table service, where customers typically order and pay before consuming ¹². Certain businesses are specifically exempted from this definition, including establishments operating a bakery as of September 15, 2023, that produce bread for sale on-premises (as long as they continue to operate as a bakery and the bread is sold as a stand-alone item), restaurants located and operating within a grocery establishment where the grocery establishment employer directly employs the restaurant workers, and limited-service restaurants with 60 or fewer establishments nationally that share a common brand ¹².

AB 1228 broadly defines “working conditions” to include not only wages but also conditions affecting fast food restaurant employees’ health and safety, security in the workplace, the right to take time off work for protected purposes, and the right to be free from discrimination and harassment in the workplace ¹². Franchisors of non-exempt National Fast Food Chains have a general responsibility to ensure that their franchise system meets the minimum fast food restaurant employment standards set by the Fast Food Council, including standards on wages, working conditions, and training ¹². They are also required to amend their Franchise Disclosure Documents (FDDs), including all exhibits, to comply with both state and federal disclosure requirements, ensuring that prospective franchisees are adequately informed about the impacts of AB 1228 ¹². Franchisees, in turn, are responsible for ensuring that the requirements mandated by the bill are followed at their individual locations ¹².

To ensure transparency, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) expects franchisors of non-exempt National Fast Food Chains to demonstrate compliance with state and federal franchise disclosure laws in their FDDs. This includes specific disclosures in Item 1 regarding AB 1228 under the section related to rules and regulations specific to the industry. In Item 5, franchisors must disclose any additional fees charged to the franchisee for initial training and any safety or security measures specifically mandated by AB 1228’s requirements and standards. Item 6 requires franchisors to disclose all fees a franchisee must pay, including any additional training and assistance related to AB 1228. Item 7 necessitates the inclusion of increased costs related to AB 1228 training, assistance, and standards implementation in the estimated initial investment. Finally, Item 11, which covers assistance and training provided to franchisees, must include disclosures related to safety measures to be taken by the franchisee at its outlet, specifically addressing AB 1228’s requirements and standards ¹².

5. Conclusion and Implications:

The legislative and case law changes enacted in California during 2024 represent a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for businesses operating within the state. The amendments to the Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law underscore a commitment to fostering greater transparency and diversity within the venture capital sector. The new regulations for franchise brokers aim to enhance consumer protection and ensure a more standardized and regulated process for franchise sales. The strengthened prohibition of employee non-compete agreements further reinforces California’s long-standing policy favoring employee mobility. Various tax law changes will impact businesses across different industries, particularly the oil and gas sector, while also providing relief in areas such as wildfire mitigation. Finally, the new standards for National Fast-Food Chain Restaurants will have a direct and substantial impact on labor costs and operational requirements for franchisors and franchisees in this industry.

The “2025 Edition of California Laws Governing Business Entities Annotated” serves as an indispensable resource for legal professionals navigating these complex changes. Businesses operating in California must proactively engage with these new regulations, reviewing and updating their internal policies and procedures to ensure full compliance. Consulting with legal counsel is strongly recommended to fully understand the implications of these changes and to mitigate any potential risks. The sheer volume and scope of these updates necessitate a diligent and informed approach from all stakeholders in the California business environment.

Table of Changes to California Business Entity Laws in 2024:

Change Number	Affected Law/Code Section	Brief Description of Change	Effective Date	Source (Snippet ID)
1	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Narrowed the scope of “covered entities” to those primarily engaged in venture capital investment.	June 29, 2024	2, 2
2	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Extended the initial reporting deadline for diversity metrics to April 1, 2026.	June 29, 2024	2, 2
3	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Requires covered entities to report and maintain their name and contact information with the DFPI starting March 1, 2026.	March 1, 2026	2, 2
4	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on the gender identity of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
5	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on the race of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
6	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on the ethnicity of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
7	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on the disability status of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
8	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on LGBTQ+ identification of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
9	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on the veteran status of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
10	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates reporting on the California residency of founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
11	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Requires reporting on whether a founding team member declined to provide diversity information.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
12	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Requires reporting on investments in businesses primarily founded by diverse founding team members.	Reporting from Jan 1, 2025	2
13	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Defines “primarily founded by diverse founding team members.”	June 29, 2024	2, 3
14	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Defines “founding team member.”	June 29, 2024	2, 3
15	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Mandates the use of a standardized survey form provided by the DFPI.	Effective date TBD	2
16	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Requires specific disclosures to founding team members about the voluntary nature of the survey and data use.	Effective date TBD	2
17	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Requires anonymous collection and reporting of survey results.	Effective date TBD	2
18	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Increases the data retention period for backup data to five years.	June 29, 2024	2
19	Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law	Specifies penalties for non-compliance, including potential monetary fines.	June 29, 2024	2
20	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Requires annual registration of franchise brokers with the DFPI.	Later of July 1, 2026 or 12 months after appropriation	5, 5
21	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Imposes a presale disclosure obligation on franchise brokers.	Later of July 1, 2026 or 12 months after appropriation	5
22	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Broadly defines “franchise broker.”	January 1, 2025	6, 5
23	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Specifies exemptions from the definition of “franchise broker.”	January 1, 2025	6, 5
24	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Restricts who can be involved in a franchise sale in California.	Later of July 1, 2026 or 12 months after appropriation	5, 5
25	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Outlines the process for franchise broker registration, including fees and required documents.	Later of July 1, 2026 or 12 months after appropriation	5
26	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Requires registered brokers to amend their registration for material changes.	January 1, 2025	7, 5
27	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Specifies requirements for the Broker Disclosure Document.	Effective date TBD	5
28	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Mandates record-keeping for registered franchise brokers.	Later of July 1, 2026 or 12 months after appropriation	5
29	Franchise Investment Law (SB 919)	Outlines potential liabilities for non-compliance, including damages and rescission.	Later of July 1, 2026 or 12 months after appropriation	5, 5
30	Corporations Code (SB 1168, Chapter 783)	Authorizes the Secretary of State to cancel a business entity (LLC or corporation) if a court order under Civil Code 1798.202 has been filed.	January 1, 2025	8, 8
31	Business & Professions Code Sections 16600 & 16600.1 (AB 1076)	Further strengthens the prohibition on non-compete and non-solicitation provisions in employment.	January 1, 2024	9
32	Business & Professions Code Section 16600.5 (SB 699)	Makes attempting to enforce a void non-compete or non-solicitation provision a civil violation.	January 1, 2024	9, 10
33	Various Tax Laws	Repealed the deduction for intangible drilling and development costs for oil and gas wells.	January 1, 2024	11
34	Various Tax Laws	Repealed the calculation of percentage depletion for specified natural resources.	January 1, 2024	11
35	Various Tax Laws	Repealed the Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit.	January 1, 2024	11
36	Various Tax Laws	Allows an exclusion from gross income for California qualified wildfire loss mitigation payments.	January 1, 2024	11
37	Various Tax Laws	Limits the reporting of business purchases subject to use tax on income tax returns under certain conditions.	January 1, 2023	11
38	Various Tax Laws	Specifies the process for postponing certain tax deadlines due to state-declared emergencies.	June 27, 2024	11
39	Business & Professions Code (AB 2004, Chapter 691)	Authorizes a disinterested custodian to certify tangible copies of electronic records.	January 1, 2025	8, 8
40	Business & Professions Code (AB 2004, Chapter 691)	Requires recorders to accept for recording tangible copies of electronic records certified by a notary public under specific conditions.	January 1, 2025	8, 8
41	Business & Professions Code (AB 2004, Chapter 691)	Clarifies that tangible copies of electronic records impart notice of their contents under certain conditions.	January 1, 2025	8, 8
42	Business & Professions Code (AB 2004, Chapter 691)	Provides that recorded instruments affecting real property provide notice after 90 days, regardless of certain defects.	January 1, 2025	8, 8
43	Labor Code & Business & Professions Code (AB 1228)	Increased the minimum wage for fast food employees to $20 per hour.	April 1, 2024	12, 12
44	Labor Code (AB 1228)	Established the Fast-Food Council with the authority to set standards for minimum wage and working conditions.	January 1, 2024	12, 12
45	Labor Code & Business & Professions Code (AB 1228)	Defined “National Fast Food Chain.”	January 1, 2024	12, 12
46	Labor Code & Business & Professions Code (AB 1228)	Specified exemptions from the definition of “National Fast Food Chain.”	January 1, 2024	12, 12
47	Labor Code (AB 1228)	Defined “working conditions” for fast food employees.	January 1, 2024	12, 12
48	Franchise Investment Law (AB 1228)	Requires franchisors of National Fast Food Chains to ensure their system meets the Fast-Food Council’s standards.	January 1, 2024	12, 12
49	Franchise Investment Law (AB 1228)	Requires franchisors of National Fast Food Chains to amend their FDDs to disclose the impacts of AB 1228.	January 1, 2024	12, 12
50	Franchise Investment Law (AB 1228)	Specifies additional disclosure requirements in the FDD for franchisors of National Fast Food Chains related to AB 1228.	January 1, 2024	12, 12

Works cited

1. CSCPublishing—Latest Releases – CSC Blog, accessed March 28, 2025, https://blog.cscglobal.com/cscpublishing-latest-releases-4/
2. California Amendments to Venture Capital Diversity Reporting Law …, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2024/07/california-amendments-to-venture-capital-diversity-reporting-law-provide-some-respite
3. 2024 California Code Corporations Code – CORP TITLE 4 – SECURITIES DIVISION 2.5 – Fair Investment Practices by Venture Capital Companies CHAPTER 1 – Fair Investment Practices by Venture Capital Companies Section 27500. – Justia Law, accessed March 28, 2025, https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-corp/title-4/division-2-5/chapter-1/section-27500/
4. Bill Text: CA SB54 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session | Amended – LegiScan, accessed March 28, 2025, https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB54/id/2831802
5. California Enacts New Franchise Broker Law – Polsinelli, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.polsinelli.com/publications/california-enacts-new-franchise-broker-law
6. 2024 California Code Corporations Code – CORP TITLE 4 – SECURITIES DIVISION 5 – FRANCHISE INVESTMENT LAW PART 1 – DEFINITIONS Section 31020., accessed March 28, 2025, https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-corp/title-4/division-5/part-1/section-31020/
7. California Corporations Code § 31521 (2024) – Justia Law, accessed March 28, 2025, https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-corp/title-4/division-5/part-7/section-31521/
8. Statutes of 2024 – Legislative Summaries :: California Secretary of …, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.sos.ca.gov/business-programs/legislation/statutes-2024-legislative-summaries
9. Changes to Business & Professions Code in 2024 – California Tightens the Screws on Employee Noncompete and Nonsolicitation Clauses – Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.aalrr.com/newsroom-alerts-4013
10. New California Business Laws 2024 – San Diego Corporate Law, accessed March 28, 2025, https://sdcorporatelaw.com/business-newsletter/new-california-business-laws-2024/
11. 2024 Instructions for Form 568 Limited Liability Company Tax Booklet – Franchise Tax Board, accessed March 28, 2025, https://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2024/2024-568-booklet.html
12. Legislative Changes in 2024 for Franchisors – DFPI, accessed March 28, 2025, https://dfpi.ca.gov/regulated-industries/franchises/egislative-changes-in-2024-for-franchisors/