• GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Unironically, yes. You shouldn’t be able to shield your actions under a different corporate umbrella.

    “Oh, guess we can’t fine them much because Twitter is a money pit, so they’ll get to continue breaking the law for cheap”

    Nah, make the fine off of his entire net worth, make him cash in some of that stock so he can finally pay taxes and fines. Make it hurt enough for him to consider not breaking the laws of countries he wants to do business in.

    • tekato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Sounds good in principle, but isn’t the one of the main purposes of creating an LLC or Corporation to shield your personal assets from the company’s finances? Everyone cheers for these policies until you’re the one they’re coming for. I hope you’re as cheerful when the government wipes your personal bank account as consequence of your company’s affairs.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 hours ago

        LLCs shouldn’t exist in the first place.

        A companys owner should always be liable for the laws its company breaks.