7 ms·
One additional important detail: if this gets implemented at all, hopefully it does not affect the common practice of having a self-owned LLC owning your home.
by JoshTriplett 10mo ago
One additional important detail: if this gets implemented at all, hopefully it does not affect the common practice of having a self-owned LLC owning your home. This is common for the purposes of keeping your personal name out of public records; it is far too easy to link someone's name and address, and people at risk of doxing can do this to protect themselves.
- mc32 10mo agoThere has to be some nuance. Companies are known to either rent of sometimes own housing for personnel who travel to other offices. Universities typically own housing as well. So maybe it’s something like it can’t be one of the main businesses of the corp to buy up residential housing as an investment tool.
- JoshTriplett 10mo agoI mean, the ideal amount of nuance is to not ban this in the first place"; right now we're talking about damage control for particularly critical subsets of uses. > Universities typically own housing as well. I'd expect that argument to carry negative weight with the folks trying to do this, given the hate they have for universities in general, and the love of privatization.
- OGEnthusiast 10mo ago> critical subsets of uses I don't consider rich people trying to hide their identity to be "critical" at all. Maybe having their address public will be a way to force them to act with consideration of the community instead of just themselves for once while they hide in some anonymous mansion.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- JoshTriplett 10mo ago> rich people What part of "people at risk of doxing" made you jump to "rich people" rather than, for instance, "people in groups commonly attacked"? > force them to act with consideration of the community By doing what, precisely? "Have you tried not being (commonly attacked group here)?"
- sdenton4 10mo agoOnly rich people can afford houses in the US, ergo.
- Forgeties79 10mo ago~65% of the US is rich?
- wyre 10mo agoKeyword was "afford" not own. The average person can not afford to purchase a home (without having to uproot their entire life).
- Forgeties79 10mo agoSome numbers and definitions would go a long way here
- fourseventy 10mo ago[flagged]
- yrxuthst 10mo agoRich people aren't the only ones that want to hide their address. Stalking/DV victims can use this too, or even just a regular person that prefers privacy.
- psunavy03 10mo agoSo basically you're subtly encouraging violence and intimidation, and want that to be easier than trying to find someone's "anonymous mansion."
- impendia 10mo agoI agree in principle, but companies (and individual very rich people) are amazingly inventive when it comes to finding loopholes in the "nuance".
- cmxch 10mo agoSo basically you want to give a loophole for Wall Street to cosplay as regular people. No thanks.
- JoshTriplett 10mo agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46532033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46532033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46532004 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46532004 It costs relatively little to create an LLC. This is not an uncommon pattern for people in groups commonly targeted by hate-motivated doxing and similar attacks. This is not a "rich-person trick", and if you can afford a house, the cost of an LLC is a very tiny expense by comparison.
- guelo 10mo agohate-motivated doxing? That doesn't sound like a real thing except for maybe famous people, so we're basically back to rich people.
- potato3732842 10mo agoThis technique is used by a very solid fraction of people who's job is to do things that are somewhat bad for either a lot of people or very bad for a few people. So your local cops, everyone on every local commission except the secretary, journalists, payday loan and tow company owners, etc.
- JoshTriplett 10mo agoYou are factually incorrect, and attempting to invalidate real people's horrifying experiences. "Existing on the internet" != "famous", and "famous" != "rich".
- beembeem 10mo agoLLC annual registration is up to $800/yr in CA, including foreign LLC's. I don't think $800/yr for privacy is a "very tiny". Not to mention you would need to pay an owner of record, probably a professional, to have their name on the LLC. EDIT: A quick web search shows that an estimated annual cost of $50-$400 for a registered agent in CA. So the cost is closer to $1k/yr.
- bluedino 10mo agoMaybe they can just own one?
- IncreasePosts 10mo agoWhy should you be allowed to create a corporation that has no actual purpose other than a shield for your own private concerns?
- fooker 10mo agoYou should be allowed to do whatever you want, by default. Preventing things only make sense if there's good reason to. Otherwise everything you do, you have to first think about whether you are allowed to, like a slave.
- JoshTriplett 10mo agoIdeally, it should not be possible for random hateful people to easily get name/address records from local governments, but that's unfortunately not the world we live in yet.
- galleywest200 10mo agoThey could just buy it from data brokers.
- darknavi 10mo agoIndeed. I was in Sweden and learned that you can look up someone's address and pay on a government website. I think there are some "are you human" checks, but it's basically all in the clear. It creeped me out a bit and then I was angry when I realized it's the same way in the US, but maybe worse. In the US this is possible too, you just have to pay private data brokers and a bunch of middle men make a cheap buck. Employers sell your pay data, websites sell your address. Everyone makes a buck at your expense.
- IncreasePosts 10mo agoIf you know the region they live in, many counties in the US now let you search property records by name from a simple web form.
- ksherlock 10mo agoHouses are also put into revocable living trust to avoid probate when kicking the bucket.
- klipklop 10mo agoPersonally I feel people and especially corporations/REITs do not have the right to hide what real estate they own. Sure put it in a trust, but the public has the right to know who controls it.
- gbear605 10mo agoI have a friend who has someone who has repeatedly threatened to assault her, and her primary protection is keeping her address hidden from him. Should she never be allowed to own a house at risk of being assaulted?
- jasonfarnon 10mo agoMaybe have a limited exception then, like rape shield laws. You don't need to gut the entire framework for this rare situation. (Plus it would be fun to watch corporate lawyers try to exploit this loophole.)
- JoshTriplett 10mo agoOr maybe just stop telling people what cases are "legitimate" reasons to protect themselves and what cases aren't. I know multiple people who have gotten death threats because of technical comments they made online, or just for having the temerity to exist as a member of a minority group. Not the vague "I'm going to kill you" kind, the "here's a picture of your front door on Google Street View, and an unsolicited pizza, I could SWAT you at any arbitrary 3am, have fun being afraid" type.
- Y_Y 10mo agoI don't feel like the solution to this is having victims set up LLCs.
- b112 10mo agoYou're advocating taking away, a method people have to protect themselves, with a simple "oh, I'm not so sure". How about you make an iron clad promise people will be safe? How about if someone dies because of your minor concerns, you go to jail for life? Would you be so "oh well" then? If not, you're probably not taking people's very lives seriously.
- JumpCrisscross 10mo ago> a self-owned LLC owning your home Trusts are in the same boat. If you're using the LLC as a pass-through, these restrictions won't apply to you unless an orange cat is charged with drafting.
- mmooss 10mo ago> common practice of having a self-owned LLC owning your home. This is common for the purposes of keeping your personal name out of public records I have a hard time believing lots of people care to do that - not many take steps for privacy - or have the resources or time to setup an LLC.
- fooker 10mo ago> or have the resources or time to setup an LLC. Costs about 200$ at most places and can be done online.
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoPeople who have been stalked or are uncomfortable having their details published for the world to find need privacy. Privacy mechanisms aren't just what applies to your or my perspectives, there are millions of other situations. For example, most counties in Texas identify the full legal name(s), phone number(s), and mailing address(es) of every single property owner and their tax payment amount and status. That'd get really weird, real quick for celebrities if there weren't any concealment mechanism. Privacy isn't a binary or continuous thing, but is possible to varying degrees and requires navigating government and business processes carefully.
- mmooss 10mo agoI agree, but most people don't.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- jmyeet 10mo agoOwning your family home through an LLC, depending on your state, is often a bad idea. There are generous protections in most states for your personal home that you lose if it's owned by an LLC. This includes things like a homestead exemption in bankruptcy protection. In Florida, for example, there are better options to keep yourself anonymous. Florida has something called a land trust [1]. [1]: https://www.jimersonfirm.com/blog/2024/04/understanding-the-florida-land-trust-act-when-and-when-not-to-use-a-land-trust/ https://www.jimersonfirm.com/blog/2024/04/understanding-the-...
- sigwinch 10mo agoI feel like mortgage lenders should legitimately wonder why they’re lending to an LLC or a trust rather than an individual. I’m not sure there’s a good answer.
- FinnKuhn 10mo agoIs it not public in the US who owns a company?
- burnt-resistor 10mo agohttps://legalclarity.org/how-can-you-find-out-who-owns-a-business/ https://legalclarity.org/how-can-you-find-out-who-owns-a-bus...