As of September 6, 2026. This alert summarizes regulatory developments that may affect real estate, construction, lending, infrastructure, and cross-border commercial activity. The status and final text of proposed measures should be confirmed for each transaction.

Federal agencies are considering a further refinement of the scope of waters subject to the Clean Water Act. For developers, manufacturers, energy businesses, logistics operators, and investors, the immediate issue is not whether every water feature will be regulated in the same way. It is whether a project’s wetlands, drainage features, tributaries, or adjacent waters fall within the operative federal definition at the time permits are sought or work begins.

A narrower federal jurisdictional rule can change the federal permitting analysis, particularly under Clean Water Act Section 404. It does not eliminate environmental diligence. State, local, coastal-zone, stormwater, endangered-species, zoning, and contractual requirements may remain fully applicable. A project can therefore face material approval, mitigation, and schedule risk even where a federal jurisdictional determination changes.

Acquisition and construction teams should identify water-related approvals early, preserve site records, and confirm which authority has jurisdiction. Purchase agreements and project contracts should clearly allocate responsibility for permit applications, agency communications, mitigation obligations, delay costs, and changes in law. Parties should avoid treating a proposed federal change as a completed exemption.

For Turkish investors entering the U.S. market, this analysis belongs in both legal and technical due diligence. A land-use assumption that appears straightforward in one state may be affected by different state wetlands rules, local drainage approvals, or federal funding conditions in another.

Flood risk remains a financing and closing issue, not solely an insurance issue. Where a property securing a federally related loan is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, flood-insurance requirements can affect underwriting, closing deliverables, escrow arrangements, ongoing covenants, and post-closing compliance.

The practical work begins with accurate property and collateral information. Buyers, borrowers, lenders, and servicers should verify the applicable flood determination, policy limits, timing of coverage, and any required notices. Material construction, refinancing, leasehold finance, or changes to collateral can require the analysis to be revisited.

Real estate documents should address who obtains and maintains coverage, how premiums and renewals are handled, and what happens if mapping, property use, or lender requirements change. In a business acquisition with owned or leased facilities, the diligence record should also identify whether flood-insurance obligations are embedded in credit documents, landlord requirements, or government-backed financing.

International buyers should account for the fact that U.S. flood-insurance compliance can intersect with lender conditions and transaction timing. It should not be left to a late-stage insurance review.

Small Business Administration financing can be an important tool for qualifying U.S. operating businesses, acquisitions, equipment purchases, and certain real-estate-related needs. It is also a heavily documented program. Eligibility, ownership, affiliation, citizenship or residency considerations where applicable, business purpose, use of proceeds, and lender underwriting each require fact-specific analysis.

A proposed or changing regulatory environment does not replace the need to confirm the program rules in force when an application is submitted. Borrowers should build their financing plan around complete business records, credible projections, ownership disclosures, and a clear explanation of the intended use of funds.

Letters of intent and purchase agreements should not assume SBA funding is automatic. Financing contingencies, timing provisions, cooperation obligations, and access to diligence materials should reflect the lender’s and program’s requirements. Sellers should be prepared for requests relating to financial records, leases, licenses, environmental matters, and business operations.

Turkish founders and investors considering a U.S. acquisition should obtain tailored advice before relying on SBA financing as a closing source. Entity structure and ownership facts can be outcome-determinative.

Infrastructure work often sits at the intersection of environmental approvals, public procurement, financing covenants, labor requirements, import controls, and supply-chain terms. The same project may involve contractors, equipment suppliers, public agencies, lenders, and cross-border counterparties with different compliance responsibilities.

Commercial agreements should use clear change-in-law, force majeure, price-adjustment, audit, recordkeeping, indemnity, and notice provisions. For imported materials and equipment, parties should also align product classification, origin information, customs documentation, delivery terms, and responsibility for tariffs or other trade measures.

The September 6 developments point to a consistent planning principle: regulatory uncertainty should be translated into transaction controls. Confirm the applicable rule, identify the responsible party, document assumptions, and allocate cost and schedule consequences before signing or starting work. Proposed Clean Water Act changes, flood-insurance requirements, SBA financing conditions, infrastructure obligations, and trade compliance each require a fact-specific analysis.

This publication is for general information only and is not legal advice.