The exceptions carved out seem to undermine the effectiveness of the law significantly, although it's a huge step forward. Dark money in the US seems unimpacted in many ways, but the global merits...
The exceptions carved out seem to undermine the effectiveness of the law significantly, although it's a huge step forward. Dark money in the US seems unimpacted in many ways, but the global merits are substantial.
Additionally, I think it's a shame that the ownership information isn't public, but that only the government gains access to knowing who owns what. That seems like something anyone in society should have the right to know.
I disagree. If you own an abortion clinic in Alabama, there's nothing good that will come from the public knowing you own it. Likewise other businesses that may be seen as immoral, unseemly, etc.,...
Additionally, I think it's a shame that the ownership information isn't public, but that only the government gains access to knowing who owns what. That seems like something anyone in society should have the right to know.
I disagree. If you own an abortion clinic in Alabama, there's nothing good that will come from the public knowing you own it. Likewise other businesses that may be seen as immoral, unseemly, etc., but which are perfectly legal such as strip clubs, liquor stores, adult book stores, gun shops, etc.
I think those types of ownership being public is a necessary evil where the benefits from everything being public outweigh the negatives very substantially. Things like knowing what pies...
I think those types of ownership being public is a necessary evil where the benefits from everything being public outweigh the negatives very substantially.
Things like knowing what pies politicians have their fingers in, for getting at those who facilitate trafficking, preventing corruption, giving people a fair shot at not being conned etc.
Many countries go much further, with things like public databases with records of every incorporated company with owners, executives, board members and full annual accounts for anyone to view. Want the benefits of incorporation and that separate legal system? Then you have to accept that your company is public because that's a part of the conditions for that system.
Under the new rules, companies will be required to provide “beneficial ownership” information to the treasury department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Unit. Anonymous companies, which can be used to hide funds illicitly obtained by criminals and corrupt foreign officials, would be effectively banned.
[...]
The new Corporate Transparency Act, passed with bipartisan support, requires anyone forming a company in the US to provide their name, date of birth, unique identification number and other information. That information can be shared with law enforcement —including those acting on behalf of a foreign law enforcement agency — as well as for national security and intelligence purposes.
Larger companies that employ more than 20 people, have revenues above $5 million and a physical presence in the US, are exempt from the act. Churches, charities and other non-profits are also exempt.
The exceptions carved out seem to undermine the effectiveness of the law significantly, although it's a huge step forward. Dark money in the US seems unimpacted in many ways, but the global merits are substantial.
Additionally, I think it's a shame that the ownership information isn't public, but that only the government gains access to knowing who owns what. That seems like something anyone in society should have the right to know.
It seems that the exceptions are why they were able to pass the law. Someone on Hacker News explained a little more.
I disagree. If you own an abortion clinic in Alabama, there's nothing good that will come from the public knowing you own it. Likewise other businesses that may be seen as immoral, unseemly, etc., but which are perfectly legal such as strip clubs, liquor stores, adult book stores, gun shops, etc.
I think those types of ownership being public is a necessary evil where the benefits from everything being public outweigh the negatives very substantially.
Things like knowing what pies politicians have their fingers in, for getting at those who facilitate trafficking, preventing corruption, giving people a fair shot at not being conned etc.
Many countries go much further, with things like public databases with records of every incorporated company with owners, executives, board members and full annual accounts for anyone to view. Want the benefits of incorporation and that separate legal system? Then you have to accept that your company is public because that's a part of the conditions for that system.
From the article:
[...]