In general I think people have a default right to privacy, but when you want to create and control a new legal entity more powerful and privileged than any huma

In general I think people have a default right to privacy, but when you want to create and control a new legal entity more powerful and privileged than any human, I think it's right that you should surrender some of that privacy. I respectfully submit that becoming an officer of a limited company is far from the powerful, glamorous position you suggest here. Limited companies aren't some sort of magical entity. They're a simple economic and legal construct, with what was supposed to be a very specific purpose. Should those responsible for running companies be known to the legal authorities, so that they can be held accountable for the actions of those companies if they break the law? Sure. But that's still the case anyway. Should those responsible automatically lose all right to the privacy of personal details that would normally be protected by law? I don't see any moral or practical argument for that. We have those privacy laws for a reason, and there is little doubt that personal information that people have been forced to publish has been abused and misused either. I don't think the Trump analogy is particularly compelling. Someone starting a little business here in the UK is hardly the same as someone running to be literally the most powerful person in the world, in a public vote, where their campaign and credibility is fundamentally built upon achievements for which they are unwilling to show supporting evidence.