The idea is that responsibility is held by the CEO/owner in control. So if someone owns companies A and B and they do something illegal through company A, then

The idea is that responsibility is held by the CEO/owner in control. So if someone owns companies A and B and they do something illegal through company A, then it's logical to say that the CEO/owner of company B has committed something illegal (it's the same person!). I understand certain CEOs are elected by their respective boards, so it's then their decision to keep someone like this onboard. I'd also question the bigger picture - how come is a single person allowed to be at head of so many companies. Can they really be an effective CEO in this case?