ERTC Express, a Tampa-based Employee Retention Tax Credit filing service, has been involved in a string of federal lawsuits since early 2024. In most of them the company is the plaintiff, going after clients and business partners for unpaid fees or contract breaches; in a smaller number it has been the defendant, facing a wage claim and a bank suit. The pattern matters because separate federal court rulings have made it unusually hard for dissatisfied ERC clients to sue promoters back, even when they believe the credit should never have been claimed.
Who ERTC Express Is
ERTC Express operates through the domain ertc.com and helps businesses file for the Employee Retention Tax Credit on a contingency-fee basis, meaning clients pay only after a refund arrives.1ERTC Express. ERTC Express Co-founders John Souza and Brian Anderson built the company during the pandemic-era ERC boom and by mid-2023 were hiring aggressively.2Business Observer. Pandemic Financial Relief Firm Seizes Opportunity, Seeks to Hire 100 Employees Souza has since moved on to other ventures and lists ERTC.com as a prior role.3The Org. John Souza – Kingsland University The company holds an F rating from the Better Business Bureau and is not accredited; the BBB cites unanswered complaints and reviews alleging persistent unwanted contact.4Better Business Bureau. ERTC Express BBB Business Profile
Cases ERTC Express Has Filed Against Others
Most of the company’s known court activity involves it suing someone else. The recurring shape is familiar in the ERC industry: a promoter files a claim for a client, a refund arrives, and the parties then fight over fees or the quality of the work.
ERTC Express v. HTS Construction
Filed in the Middle District of Georgia (Case No. 1:24-cv-168) against HTS Construction, Inc. and an individual, Kayla Holton. The defendants filed counterclaims, but Chief District Judge Leslie A. Gardner granted ERTC Express’s motion to dismiss those counterclaims on March 3, 2026.5Leagle. ERTC Express LLC v. HTS Construction Inc The underlying contract claims remain active.6GovInfo. ERTC Express LLC v. HTS Construction Inc
ERTC Express v. Derrick Lee Williams
Filed in January 2024 in the Middle District of Florida (Case No. 8:24-cv-00268), the suit alleged Computer Fraud and Abuse Act violations along with libel and slander claims.7CourtListener. ERTC Express LLC v. Williams A stipulated final judgment on October 23, 2025, awarded ERTC Express $21,581.85 on three of four counts; the fourth was dismissed.8PACER Monitor. ERTC Express LLC v. Williams
ERTC Express v. Calibre International
A contract action filed in the Central District of California (Case No. 2:24-cv-00848) on January 31, 2024, and voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on March 25, 2024, before any substantive rulings.9PACER Monitor. ERTC Express LLC v. Calibre International LLC
ERTC Express v. XBP Global Holdings
Filed October 14, 2025, in the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-08490) against XBP Global Holdings, Inc. and Regulus Group LLC. ERTC Express alleges breach of contract under a Master Services Agreement and Statement of Work, and seeks nearly $10 million.10CourtListener. ERTC Express LLC v. XBP Global Holdings Inc The company sought emergency relief through a proposed temporary restraining order at the outset. Judge Edgardo Ramos is presiding, and the case remained active as of March 2026, with consent orders entered in November 2025 and March 2026.
ERTC Express v. T & M Appliance and Air
The most recent known suit. ERTC Express filed in Hillsborough County, Florida state court on March 2, 2026, and the defendant removed the case to the Middle District of Florida (Case No. 8:26-cv-01125) in April 2026.11PACER Monitor. ERTC Express LLC v. T & M Appliance and Air Inc T & M filed a counterclaim on April 24, 2026, attaching a Client Engagement Agreement that puts the terms of the ERC services contract at the center of the fight.
There is a procedural twist worth flagging if you are in a similar contract dispute with the company. ERTC Express moved to compel arbitration after filing suit in court, and Judge William F. Jung ordered the company to explain why it had not waived arbitration rights by choosing litigation first. The motion is pending. A jury trial is tentatively set for September 2027.
Cases Filed Against ERTC Express
Dukes v. ERTC Express
Charlotte Dukes brought a Fair Labor Standards Act suit against ERTC Express and co-founder John Souza in the Middle District of Florida (Case No. 8:24-cv-00618), alleging denial of overtime pay. Judge Thomas P. Barber approved a joint settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice on October 25, 2024.12PACER Monitor. Dukes v. ERTC Express LLC et al
Transpecos Banks v. ERTC Express
Transpecos Banks, SSB, a Texas savings bank, sued ERTC Express in the Western District of Texas (Case No. 5:24-cv-01463) in December 2024 on claims tied to a negotiable instrument and breach of contract. Judge David A. Ezra denied ERTC Express’s motion to dismiss without prejudice after the bank filed an amended complaint, and Transpecos filed a stipulation of dismissal on May 13, 2025, ending the case.13PACER Monitor. Transpecos Banks SSB v. ERTC Express LLC
If You Are a Client Considering Suing an ERC Promoter
No reported federal ruling has yet addressed a client’s damages suit against ERTC Express specifically. But federal courts elsewhere have made clear how hard these cases are to win. In Greenway Equipment Sales, Inc. v. ERC Specialists, LLC (D. Utah, Case No. 2:24-cv-773), a judge dismissed a client’s RICO and state-law claims against its ERC adviser because the client could not show a concrete financial injury.14Forbes. Judge Dismisses Case Against Employee Retention Credit Provider, Finding No Harm
Greenway had paid its adviser about $73,000 in contingency fees and received roughly $730,000 in ERC refunds. After a separate consultant flagged eligibility concerns, Greenway entered the IRS Voluntary Disclosure Program, repaid 80 percent of the credit, and kept about $146,000. Even after subtracting the adviser’s fee, Greenway came out roughly $73,000 ahead. The court held that a company financially in the black had no injury a federal court could remedy.15Journal of Accountancy. Company Lacks Standing to Sue ERTC Advisers
The court also rejected the argument that fear of a future IRS audit or clawback was a present injury, calling that harm speculative. Money spent on later consultants and lawyers was treated as self-inflicted and could not create standing. A parallel Utah case, Tri-Cities Restoration LLC v. ERC Specialists, reached the same result.16Current Federal Tax Developments. The Concrete Injury Requirement in ERTC Consultant Litigation If you received an ERC refund and used the IRS amnesty program, proving the kind of actual loss courts require may be very difficult.
Why These Disputes Are Landing Now
The ERC industry is under heavy federal pressure, which shapes both sides of these fights. The IRS imposed a processing moratorium in September 2023 and by June 2025 had paid roughly $283 billion on nearly five million claims.17U.S. Government Accountability Office. GAO-26-107456 In July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act cut off IRS refunds for ERC claims covering the third and fourth quarters of 2021 that were filed after January 31, 2024, unless the refund had already been issued before July 4, 2025.18Internal Revenue Service. IRS FAQs Address Employee Retention Credits Under ERC Compliance Provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill The same law added a $1,000-per-instance penalty for promoters who fail new due-diligence standards, extended the 20 percent excessive-refund penalty to payroll tax returns, and created promoter penalties of up to the greater of $200,000 or 75 percent of ERC-related gross income for aiding improper claims.19Plante Moran. How the One Big Beautiful Bill Impacts the ERC
For businesses whose refunds have been delayed or denied, the IRS is now allowing Form 907 to extend the two-year statutory deadline to sue while appeals are pending.20IRS Taxpayer Advocate Service. Protect Your Employee Retention Credit Claim Fraud cases can be pursued indefinitely regardless of the normal statute of limitations. That combination — cut-off refunds, active promoter penalties, and long enforcement tails — is the backdrop against which ERTC Express and its clients are still fighting over who owes whom.