3 ms·

As a business owner in the EU I disagree. By incorporating, I am publishing my identity (but not my private home address) in return for being granted a legal e

by hnbad 4y ago

As a business owner in the EU I disagree. By incorporating, I am publishing my identity (but not my private home address) in return for being granted a legal entity to do business as and which I can control and use to store surplus value or debt. Controlling the company acts as a political power multiplier, especially if I own multiple companies, layer them or use them to exert influence on other companies. It's entirely fair that the public should have access to this information about me although there needs to be a balance between this right to transparency and my right to privacy, e.g. exposing my home address could put me in personal danger so I have a stronger interest to keep that private as long as my ownership of different companies can be correlated. Consider that even Germany, which is one of the strictest countries in the EU when it comes to privacy, has implemented the directive[1]. [1]: The directive the article refers to is this one, in Germany it is implemented as the Transparenzregister: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018L0843 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
I think I would agree if it was truly open and accessible to the public ( say published on government website somewhere ) and not hidden behind data brokers' paywalls with the understanding that everyone is included ( and I do mean everyone ). The problem is, as it always has been, that there are people and entities, who are above such laws ( usually that short list includes politicians that write them ). I guess what I really was is clear rules of engagement. We don't have that now at all. << (but not my private home address) I am admittedly ignorant of Germany's laws in that area, but in US use of dba with owner's real address is not that uncommon ( although that is a slightly different type of entity to begin with ). That said, US is its own animal anyway. << exposing my home address could put me in personal danger so I have a stronger interest to keep that private as long as my ownership of different companies can be correlated. I could support that argument, but while one database may not have your address listed, correlation ( and likely finding that address ) is likely trivial. Privacy is only privacy, when it actually works. Window dressing to make a legally sound argument defeats its purpose to me.
- ghusto 4y ago
  Isn't this what we're talking about? https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    Um.. I do not want to seem snarky ( and it is not intended as such, but I want to make sure accurate current state is presented ) so please this consider this quote at face value indicating how EU and UK differ: From the article: "The court’s ruling puts it at odds with the UK, which was one of the first countries in the world to introduce a public beneficial ownership register in 2016." The link provided belongs to UK government, which is no longer part of EU, which effectively only proves that some countries took steps like that. edit: missing verb
    - ghusto 4y ago
      Yup, I got that :) What I was asking is if Companies House was the kind of thing we talking about. So yes, the UK has left the EU, but was Companies House brought up at the time to be in compliance with EU regulations — or even, is it the same thing we're talking about, regardless of the UK's EU status. Because if it is, then I'm glad the EU at least is getting rid of things like that.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        Ah, yes. In that case the response is yes.
- sam_lowry_ 4y ago
  This info is public or easily accessible in all EU countries. There are no Elsevier-style data brokers in this business yet. Personal anecdote: I had my company registered to my home address for 13 years while doing online business where I regularly received threats. None showed up at my doorsteps in all these years to insult me in person while literally hundreds if not thosands did insult me online. IMO these luxemburgish barons from the FT story are not physically afraid either, they just want to hide their dirty money in the dark.

by hnbad 4y ago

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

I think I would agree if it was truly open and accessible to the public ( say published on government website somewhere ) and not hidden behind data brokers' paywalls with the understanding that everyone is included ( and I do mean everyone ). The problem is, as it always has been, that there are people and entities, who are above such laws ( usually that short list includes politicians that write them ). I guess what I really was is clear rules of engagement. We don't have that now at all. << (but not my private home address) I am admittedly ignorant of Germany's laws in that area, but in US use of dba with owner's real address is not that uncommon ( although that is a slightly different type of entity to begin with ). That said, US is its own animal anyway. << exposing my home address could put me in personal danger so I have a stronger interest to keep that private as long as my ownership of different companies can be correlated. I could support that argument, but while one database may not have your address listed, correlation ( and likely finding that address ) is likely trivial. Privacy is only privacy, when it actually works. Window dressing to make a legally sound argument defeats its purpose to me.

ghusto 4y ago
Isn't this what we're talking about? https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  Um.. I do not want to seem snarky ( and it is not intended as such, but I want to make sure accurate current state is presented ) so please this consider this quote at face value indicating how EU and UK differ: From the article: "The court’s ruling puts it at odds with the UK, which was one of the first countries in the world to introduce a public beneficial ownership register in 2016." The link provided belongs to UK government, which is no longer part of EU, which effectively only proves that some countries took steps like that. edit: missing verb
  - ghusto 4y ago
    Yup, I got that :) What I was asking is if Companies House was the kind of thing we talking about. So yes, the UK has left the EU, but was Companies House brought up at the time to be in compliance with EU regulations — or even, is it the same thing we're talking about, regardless of the UK's EU status. Because if it is, then I'm glad the EU at least is getting rid of things like that.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      Ah, yes. In that case the response is yes.
sam_lowry_ 4y ago
This info is public or easily accessible in all EU countries. There are no Elsevier-style data brokers in this business yet. Personal anecdote: I had my company registered to my home address for 13 years while doing online business where I regularly received threats. None showed up at my doorsteps in all these years to insult me in person while literally hundreds if not thosands did insult me online. IMO these luxemburgish barons from the FT story are not physically afraid either, they just want to hide their dirty money in the dark.