Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Clauses in Florida: What Changed and What Business Owners Need to Know

A Tampa medical device company spends eighteen months training a sales rep on proprietary pricing models and a client list built over a decade. She leaves for a direct competitor six months later. Whether the company can stop her turns on the same question business owners across the state are asking: was there a non-compete clause in Florida that actually holds up, and does it cover what they thought it covered?

Florida has always been friendlier to employers on this front than most states, but the rules shifted meaningfully in 2025. The Florida CHOICE Act took effect on July 1 of that year and layered a new, more aggressive framework on top of the existing statute. Business owners who haven't touched their employment agreements since then are likely working with outdated documents, and employees who assume these clauses are unenforceable are operating on old assumptions too.

The Baseline That Still Applies

Section 542.335 of the Florida Statutes has governed restrictive covenants since the late 1990s, and it remains in effect for any agreement that doesn't qualify under the new CHOICE Act framework. A non-compete under this statute is enforceable if it's in writing, signed, tied to a legitimate business interest such as trade secrets or substantial customer relationships, and reasonable in time, geography, and scope. Courts have generally treated restrictions of six months or less as presumptively reasonable and anything beyond two years as presumptively unreasonable. Most non-competes signed by Florida employees, especially those earning modest to mid-range salaries, will keep being evaluated under this older framework.

What the CHOICE Act Actually Changed

The CHOICE Act didn't replace section 542.335. It created a separate, optional path that gives employers stronger enforcement tools for a specific category of highly paid workers. To qualify as a "covered employee," a worker's salary has to exceed twice the annual mean wage for the relevant Florida county, a threshold that lands somewhere between roughly $80,000 and $150,000 depending on location. Healthcare practitioners are excluded entirely.

For employees who clear that bar, a covered non-compete can run for up to four years, doubling what courts had generally treated as the outer limit under the old statute. A covered garden leave agreement can require an employer to keep paying an employee's full salary and benefits for up to four years while barring them from working elsewhere, even though the employee isn't doing the job anymore.

Getting the benefit of these longer terms isn't automatic. An employer has to advise the employee in writing of the right to consult an attorney, give at least seven days to review the agreement, and have the employee acknowledge in writing that they're receiving confidential information or customer relationships as part of the deal. Skip any of those steps and the agreement falls back to the older, more limited statute.

The four-year term is the headline number, but the more consequential change is how courts handle disputes once filed. A judge is required to issue a preliminary injunction stopping a covered employee from working for a competitor once the employer shows the agreement qualifies and a violation likely occurred. The employee then carries the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that they won't use confidential information or perform similar work, or that the employer breached its own obligations. That flips the usual dynamic where an employer has to prove ongoing harm before a court will freeze the situation, and an employee may find themselves blocked from a new job before the dispute is resolved on the merits.

Non-Solicitation Clauses Follow Different Rules

Non-solicitation agreements restrict a departing employee from pursuing former clients or poaching former coworkers rather than barring them from working in the industry altogether. They get evaluated under the same legitimate-business-interest framework but tend to draw less judicial pushback, since restricting contact with a defined list of clients someone personally serviced is easier to defend than a blanket prohibition on working in the field. Agencies, financial advisory firms, and other sales-driven businesses often get more practical value out of a well-drafted non-solicitation clause than an aggressive non-compete that invites a fight.

What Business Owners Should Actually Do

Reviewing existing agreements against the new framework is the first practical step, since a contract drafted before 2025 won't automatically pick up CHOICE Act protections just because the law changed. Employers who want the longer terms and the injunction advantage need new agreements, or amendments, that satisfy the notice and disclosure requirements from the start, and that means identifying which employees actually clear the compensation threshold before applying that language to them.

For employees, assuming a signed non-compete won't hold up is a risky bet in Florida. Courts here enforce these agreements regularly, and the 2025 changes make that even more true for higher earners. Reading the geographic scope and compensation threshold before signing avoids a far more expensive conversation later.

Building Agreements That Hold Up

Florida's restrictive covenant law rewards precision over aggression. A non-compete clause in Florida that's broader than necessary invites a court to modify it, and one that skips the CHOICE Act's procedural requirements loses the benefit of the new law without gaining anything in return. Whether you're structuring agreements for key employees, negotiating an exit, or facing a dispute over one already in place, the business and employment attorneys at Braslow Legal can help you draft a non-compete clause in Florida that fits your actual risk and holds up when it counts.