Legislative proposals like this in an election year work to put candidates on record and fish for contributions. It seems unworkable. The $50M threshold for h

Legislative proposals like this in an election year work to put candidates on record and fish for contributions. It seems unworkable. The $50M threshold for hedge funds is easily circumvented by breaking up funds, and the "on any day" language makes bulk transfers tricky. "Single-family" includes 1-4 units, so all those savers who prefer real estate to the stock market could have their buyers dry up. (No comment on the actual economic or fairness benefit.) However, what could work this year and be even more useful would be to strip out everything except reporting requirements. The government has really no idea what's happening in the housing market or why, and no evidence that could quantify the degree of market control or indicate illegal collusion. This could be combined with anti-money-laundering reporting requirements designed to disclose real estate being used to launder dirty money, with appropriate requirements to disclose the beneficial owners, and detect the effective but unregistered sale of property by selling the owning entity. There's really no policy objection because property already must be registered, and there are no real business confidentiality concerns from the government having this information. If/since the reporting would be limited to real estate, it wouldn't raise the substantial lobbying hackles of all the other businesses relying on shell corporations, and might even garner the support of the big hedge funds seeking to scare off competition.