I am a big believer in protecting our privacy and the data that relates to us as private individuals.

Still, the recent changes - both in the US and Europe - significantly limit transparency and are just downright unintelligent.

For years, data protection and financial crime prevention regulations have been conflicting.

The problem is that one of the most effective mitigants against financial crime is transparency. By creating companies and complex ownership structures (especially across borders), criminals have been able to conceal who they are and thereby limit the possibilities of understanding control and ownership structures and detecting suspicious behaviour.

In my view, if you want the various opportunities implied by having your own company, you also have to give up some of your privacy. That's just part of the deal. Remember, by limiting access to public registers, you don't remove the Know Your Customer (KYC) burden from banks and other regulated entities; you just make it harder (and more expensive).

Also, regulators have forgotten that non-regulated companies have plenty of reasons to access these registers to fully understand who they are partnering with in a business deal. Not to mention sanctions compliance, where an effective sanctions screening depends on fully understanding the ownership structure.

And yes, this might be good news for companies like Avallone.io, as those with access can resell the data to those without access.

However, the more expensive we make compliance and fighting financial crime, the less fighting will be done.

‍

***************

WANT MORE? SOME RELATED KYC ARTICLES

Is the Fight Against Financial Crime Falling Apart? The Risks of Less Transparency

United States suspends the Corporate Transparency Act - How are AML and KYC impacted in Regulated Companies?

Why KYC is Essential: Combating the Underlying Crimes in Financial Systems

The EU and Denmark wants to know who really controls your company