Hacker News Reader

Comment by dleslie | Hacker News Reader

It's my understanding that this will hit a wall in Canada, where lawyers can own companies and sit on boards on behalf of clients, and not be compelled to reveal them.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/supreme-court-removes-fintr...

View on HN

That's also true for Nevada. In Nevada, you have to name the ownership of a company when formed, but changes in ownership need not be reported. So creating shells and reselling them is a thing.[1] It's possible to break through that protection with a lawsuit, but it makes it more difficult.

[1] https://incorporate123.co/services/gold-package

Came here to say the same!

I see your link proposes and condones illegal behavior! Similar to Montana vehicle registration sites. Sure, completely legal in Montana. Not in your home state though. It's one thing to know about it and take the risk, it's another for the service provider to actively push it on you. I do wonder what percent of California real estate (tax) fraud is going on with Nevada LLCs.

> it is recommended that you maintain "Nominee Services" so that you do not subject your company to taxation or registration in the State where the "Management" is resident. Most states consider a company to be "operating" in the State from which it is "Managed".

I had never heard of that, and the story you linked does not appear to make or to support the claim that lawyers can "own companies and sit on boards on behalf of clients".

It does suggest that lawyers are not required to keep records of their clients' financial activities, and that they should be exempt from searches for records pertaining to their clients, for fear of the searches violating privilege. It doesn't seem to be a very clear article though on what the previous situation was, or what exactly the court's decision in 2015 impacts.

I googled briefly "lawyer sit on board for me Canada" and "lawyer own business on my behalf Canada", etc., and did not find anything specific about the topic in the first few results, aside from articles stating that most law firms have internal guidelines for their staff to not sit on boards of anything but non profit organizations, or to only take positions on boards with extreme care, but that is all referring to participation in their own capacity/their firm's, not to acting on behalf of a client in a surrogate role in that client's businesses.

...do you happen to know of any sources that make it clear that lawyers do actually do this?

With power of attorney, Canadian lawyers can create businesses, buy properties, and so forth on behalf of their clients[0]. Thanks to this recent ruling, their clients and their holdings do not have to be revealed. I belive that the previous situation was that lawyers had to report who their clients were and what their financial activities were via FINTRAC, as one of the reporting entities[1].

However, British Columbia has found a way around it, for housing, by requiring that the principal _resident_ of properties exist, be unique, and be declared or otherwise the property will be taxed.[2]

Much of this shady stuff isn't common knowledge and so isn't easily searched. A good start is "the Vancouver model", but that will also include BC's casino-based money laundering.

0: https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corpo...

1: https://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/re-ed/intro-eng

2: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/speculation-vacancy...

It would be really nice to create an impenetrable set of shell organizations as an open art/citizenship project. No one who has these complex organizations for a purpose would reveal their structure; but, if a set of holding companies were created for no purpose, it could reveal a lot about methods and approaches that could inform public policy.

Will attorneys also bear the criminal reponsibility of the actions of the company?

hacker : code = lawyer : the law

Is there something similar to this in the US?

Yes, a shell or blind corporation. Lawyer can be listed as agent and officer.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/07061...

I'm familiar with the business press in both Canada an the US, and I think Nominee Trusts work the same in general, plus there's two US states that are hard-core tax havens where this is certainly the case.

Info about "Nominee Trusts":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominee_trust

Reply on news.ycombinator.com