Since July 1, 2025, Florida employers have had two statutory paths for noncompetes. Section 542.335, Florida Statutes, still governs most restrictive covenants. The Florida CHOICE Act, sections 542.41 through 542.45, adds a second path for higher earners, with restraints of up to four years and a preliminary injunction the court must enter when the Act’s requirements are met.
Who Qualifies
The Act reaches a covered employee: an employee or individual contractor who earns, or is reasonably expected to earn, a salary greater than twice the annual mean wage of the Florida county where the employer has its principal place of business. If the employer’s principal place of business is outside Florida, the employee’s county of residence is used. Section 542.43(3). Salary means base compensation; it excludes discretionary incentives and awards and anticipated but indeterminable pay such as tips, bonuses, and commissions. Section 542.43(10). Health care practitioners are excluded.
These rules apply to an agreement with an employee whose primary place of work is in Florida, regardless of any choice of law clause, and to an agreement with an employer whose principal place of business is in Florida when the agreement is expressly governed by Florida law. Section 542.45(1).
What the Agreement Must Do
A covered noncompete may last up to four years within a geographic area the agreement defines. Section 542.43(6). It is fully enforceable according to its terms only if:
- the employee was advised in writing of the right to seek counsel before signing;
- the employer provided the proposed agreement at least seven days before the offer expired;
- the employee acknowledged in writing that he or she will receive confidential information or customer relationships; and
- the agreement reduces the noncompete period day for day by any nonworking portion of a garden leave notice period, if applicable.
Section 542.45(2) and (3).
What the Employer Gets
On the employer’s application, the court must preliminarily enjoin the employee from providing services to anyone else during the noncompete period, and must enjoin any new employer from engaging the employee. Section 542.45(5)(a) and (b). The court may modify or dissolve the injunction only if the employee or new employer proves one of a few narrow defenses by clear and convincing evidence based on nonconfidential information. The prevailing party recovers reasonable attorney fees and costs. Section 542.45(5)(d).
Compare section 542.335. There, the employer must plead and prove a legitimate business interest and that the restraint is reasonably necessary to protect it. Section 542.335(1)(b) and (c). A restraint on a former employee longer than two years is presumed unreasonable unless it is associated with the sale of a business or an ownership interest, or is predicated on the protection of trade secrets. Section 542.335(1)(d)1. and (e).
What Did Not Change
A restrictive covenant that does not meet the Act’s definitions remains governed by section 542.335. Section 542.45. The FTC’s nationwide noncompete rule is also gone. A federal court set it aside, the FTC voted in September 2025 to dismiss its appeals, and the FTC removed the rule from the Code of Federal Regulations effective February 12, 2026. 91 Fed. Reg. 6507 (Feb. 12, 2026).
What Employers Should Do Now
Identify which employees clear the wage threshold on salary as the Act defines it, build the four requirements above into the offer process, and keep agreements drafted under section 542.335 for everyone else.
Haft Law Group advises Florida employers on drafting and enforcing restrictive covenants. Contact the firm to review your agreements under both statutes.