What would you allow? Just one level deep? Two? All you'd be doing is incentivizing the creation of more proxies and more legal fees/inefficiencies to go along with it.
1. It makes it clear how few powerful people are owning everything.
2. It makes it obvious there's something wrong when you see that the 30 different bottles you can buy in front of you are all from coca colla
3. It makes it very obvious that there's something fishy about "chocolate chips by a france by b luxembourg by c switzerland by d ireland by big conglomerate by mondelez international"
As we all know, GitHub is not "by" Microsoft (as in, written by them). It's under their control now, and sure, they've made a lot of changes, but the actual code was written before Microsoft purchased them.
But really it could be anything else including new symbols.
You see, whatever you use would become instantly SO ABUNDANT that this symbol would get a whole new meaning.
I recently (last year) found out that nestle does not have an interest in Purina livestock feed, only the pet feed. It made shopping for feed a lot easier, but I'm still wary. At least Smucker makes pet and animal feed.
I am a firm believer in boycotts, usually indefinite. Nestle, Samsung, and General Electric and all their subsidiaries are my current ones. No one can hold me accountable for any malfeasance by any of those companies as I refuse to give them any money.
You own Microsoft. It's a public company.
Scale matters.
The rest is on journalists to be sure to mention "Microsoft owned Bethesda" more often.
I would also have it that any contract controlling that person's interest is nullified so if you're trying to use a proxy to get around the law you'd have to be very sure you trust them because they are the legal owner.
(Also, any form of equity investing that isn't a tax nightmare. You'd have to love doing K1s.)
I've no idea what a K1 is. Presumably something from your country. If the tax system in your country is so broken it can't cope with humans, you should probably fix it.
No they aren't, that's the point of a defined-benefit system like a pension. You don't own it but instead get guaranteed payments from it.
Owning things involves risk; it's not always good.
So my pension is owned by me. I can buy an annuity from that but there's no reason that can't be a service company owned by a person just like insurance.
Again, it's solvable.