7 ms·

> Why should business owners be anonymous? Why not? Generally EU countries do not like public lists of PII, why should business owners be treated differently?

• shadowgovt 4y ago
  Because they're stewarding private resources that would otherwise be public (such as land) and therefore the public has an interest in them.
  • prvit 4y ago
    Most companies probably do not own resources like land. What actual use do you have for this information? Beyond “it’s nice to know”? Is it not sufficient that you have a service address for the legal entity in case you need to sue it?
    • shadowgovt 4y ago
      Land was an example, not an exclusive example. A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells. And most legal actions against such abuse generally start grassroots; regulators aren't aware there's a problem until people complain. Hiding information from the public makes it harder to notice abuse. Flip the script: when an individual has incorporated and is enjoying the legal protections of being a corporate entity, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society?
      • prvit 4y ago
        When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society? The real question you have to answer is “Why is it necessary for company ownership to be public information?” > A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells What’s wrong here? Even with a perfect UBO registry that private owner could just get together with a couple of their buddies and divvy up that 70%. What legal action are you going to take? Owning 70% of a town’s resources is generally not against the law.
        • shadowgovt 4y ago
          > When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? It's not. They carry a driver's license and law enforcement can reference their name by license plate.
          • prvit 4y ago
            But that information isn’t public, it’s only visible to law enforcement. This is how company ownership information should be treated too.
            • dang 4y ago
              We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33804753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33804753. (This is not about the parent comment—I'm just posting a reply here for clarity because the other post is already several days old.)
              • prvit 4y ago
                I'll just clear my cookies, change my VPN exit and continue posting. What's the point?
                • dang 4y ago
                  There are several points. One is to signal to the community that it's not ok to post like this. Most people don't want to get banned and do genuinely want to use the site as intended. Leaving a public trail of moderation comments and actions helps regulate community behavior, even if it doesn't have that effect on you. Another is that I prefer to (try to) persuade users that it's in their interest not to abuse HN. HN is only interesting because there is a somewhat* higher quality of discussion and content here. When you post aggressively, violate the site guidelines, and so on, you're damaging the ecosystem and contributing to destroying HN as an interesting place. That is not in your interest. I assume that you wouldn't drop a lit match in a dry forest, or dump engine oil in a mountain lake, or throw trash in a park that you enjoy. Why do the equivalent here? (* I don't want to overstate that—a lot of posts also suck. But it's all relative, and there aren't many places on the internet to have the sort of discussion that, at its best, goes on here.)
    • arisAlexis 4y ago
      Most people are not ill why need hospitals? Most people are not criminals why need police?
• 7952 4y ago
  The legitimate purpose is choosing to not trade with a company owned by a particular person. And that facility should be open to anyone without having to jump through hoops.
  • prvit 4y ago
    I really can’t see how your interest in not doing business with companies owned by people you like could possibly outweigh every business owners privacy interests.
    • eurasiantiger 4y ago
      What if the $business is owned by Mark Zuckerberg?
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• miohtama 4y ago
  - To keep politicians in check - To check for conflicts of interest - To prevent corruption https://www.transparency.org/en/news/how-public-beneficial-ownership-registers-advance-anti-corruption https://www.transparency.org/en/news/how-public-beneficial-o...
• arisAlexis 4y ago
  The legitimate use is described in the article