Photo Credit: Foto von Markus Spiske auf Unsplash
Florida has enacted a sweeping change to non‑compete regulations, extending enforceable periods from two to four years for high‑earning professionals. Designed to secure Miami’s status as a formidable U.S. finance enclave, the legislation has ignited debate over its long‑term economic and legal consequences.
The new frontier: extended restrictions for top earners
Effective early July 2025, the CHOICE Act allows companies within Florida to impose non‑compete covenants lasting up to four years, doubling the previous statutory limit. The law applies not to all Miami workers but to employees earning at least 200 % of the local average wage, approximately $140,000 in urban areas, who handle proprietary or confidential data.
Key provisions include:
- Garden leave options, where employees remain on payroll (excluding bonuses) but are restricted from competitive work.
- Shifted burden of proof, now resting on former employees to show by “clear and convincing evidence” that enforcement is unfair.
- Presumed enforceability, removing many judicial hurdles previously faced by employers.
Architects of the shift: Citadel and Ken Griffin
The law results from heavy lobbying by Citadel, led by CEO Ken Griffin, which relocated to Miami in 2022 and views non‑compete extension as essential to safeguarding its talent and intellectual capital.
Despite opposition, including think tanks urging Gov. DeSantis to veto the bill, supporters argue the measure is crucial to cementing Florida’s appeal to sophisticated financial firms.
Employer advantage vs. talent retention
Proponents contend that extended non‑competes help protect trade secrets, client relationships, and corporate investments. In Miami’s competitive financial landscape, companies argue these clauses are critical to retaining talent and preventing immediate poaching.
However, critics issue warnings:
- Suppressed mobility: High‑wage professionals may opt to avoid Florida altogether rather than accept long-term restrictions.
- Innovation drag: With talent bound by lengthy contracts, startup growth and creative spin‑outs may suffer.
- International divergence: While most U.S. states and OECD nations limit or ban long-term non‑competes, Florida’s model stands in stark contrast.
Miami’s ambitions: “Wall Street South” or gilded cage?
Miami’s ascent as a financial center relies heavily on attracting top-tier firms and their elite staff. Citadel, Goldman Sachs and others have moved significant operations southward, a trend the state hopes to solidify through employer-friendly reforms.
Yet, the four‑year non‑compete could backfire, deterring precisely the talent profile Florida aims to woo. Research consistently links stringent restrictive covenants to reduced job creation and decreased earning mobility. In a city that thrives on dynamism, this may prove counterproductive.
Examining global and national context
Globally, many jurisdictions favor worker mobility: California, the UK and Australia largely prohibit non‑competes. Even the Federal Trade Commission pushed for a nationwide ban in 2024, though a court blocked the measure.
Against this backdrop, Florida’s policy places the state among the most non‑compete–friendly jurisdictions, raising questions about its long-term strategic viability.
What lies ahead for Miami’s financial hub?
Several pivotal developments will shape the law’s impact:
- Early litigation: Expect challenges to enforcement, particularly for professionals crossing state lines or relocating.
- Talent negotiation: High‑level candidates may demand compensation packages – higher base pay, sign-on bonuses or equity – to offset non‑compete constraints.
- Startup response: Venture capital and emerging finance firms may hesitate to base themselves in Florida if acquiring talent appears too onerous.
Final assessment: strategic risks and blindsides
Florida’s four‑year non‑compete regime reflects a calculated gamble: secure corporate investment and intellectual capital, even at the potential price of talent fluidity. Miami’s elevation as “Wall Street South” depends not only on firm presence, but on sustaining a lively, dynamic labor market.
In the short run, employers gain legal tools; in the long run, the question remains whether extended restrictions will feed or starve Miami’s economic heart.