Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Updates to US verification requirements

support.stripe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#51

Post by ghaff »

rideontime wrote: post #38
ghaff wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I bought my house many many years ago, I think I got something in the sale agreement about being able to operate a business out of my house provided it was just a mail-order business without associated traffic. (The seller was continuing to live next door.) So I'm not sure about zoning in most places--especially today--but it wouldn't surprise me if there were some restrictions on business-related commercial tra…

In what jurisdiction does the former owner of a property have any say regarding what the new owner does with the property?

In the jurisdiction where they have to actually agree to sell you the property. They gave me a couple of things (e.g. traverse their land to the river). I gave them a couple of things (like making the business aspect explicit and being able to use my driveway to get to their stable). Perfectly normal to have easements and other restrictions/conditions.

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#52

Post by Aurornis »

anticorporate wrote: post #17

I understand there are some larger compliance-related issues that need to be solved and that this seems like it's an unintended consequence of the regulatory requirements put in place to solve this. But there are huge consequences for small business owners in requiring a physical address. I don't need or want anyone to ever physically appear at an address I provide, because providing _any_ address for my business is…

> I don't need or want anyone to ever physically appear at an address I provide,

Is Stripe revealing this address to customers?

This page only says a business address must be provided, not that it will be revealed to customers.

If you have a business, you already have a business address and you're paying taxes somewhere. Why can't you use that address?

> Suddenly if my business exists at my home address, my city wants a local business license and zoning compliance permit, so they can inspect the non-existent physical location and be sure the zero traffic it is generating isn't causing a burden on my neighbors

What country are you in? Do you have any examples of this happening, or is this just a hypothetical you came up with?

Regardless, if your business is registered and you're paying taxes then, again, there's already an address associated with it. Stripe verifying this address isn't going to send local inspectors to your home.

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#53

Post by rickreynoldssf »

hackerfooze wrote: post #40

Another classic issue with draconian regulations that could be easily solved with Web3 payments.

It's not so easy for customers to buy crypto to make these Web3 payments. If your bank is Chase you basically cannot without them closing all your accounts.

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#54

Post by [deleted] »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #36
codetrotter wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A physical biz address does not mean you have to have an office. I’ve been using my home address as the business address of my company ever since I first created it, and before that I did the same for my sole proprietorship.

Something I enjoy doing is looking up the true landlords of managed properties to see if they're absentee. More often than not, their business address gives me their home address somewhere across the country. Just a thought. Nearly every landlord I've had has been an absentee landlord. Quite interesting.

[deleted]

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#55

Post by mytailorisrich »

anticorporate wrote: post #17

I understand there are some larger compliance-related issues that need to be solved and that this seems like it's an unintended consequence of the regulatory requirements put in place to solve this. But there are huge consequences for small business owners in requiring a physical address. I don't need or want anyone to ever physically appear at an address I provide, because providing _any_ address for my business is…

In my jurisdiction, and I suppose many others, a business must provide a physical address in order to incorporate, known as the registered address.

This does not have to be the place of business but is to ensure that legal documents may be served and other official letters delivered.

There are many services offering virtual office addresses for this.

It is not a problem. In fact, would you go into business with a company that has no address?

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#57

Post by Aurornis »

Communitivity wrote: post #4

Many people at RenFaires and music festivals use Stripe. This is going to wipe them out as customers. Also fully remote businesses. It's clear to me Stripe wants brick and mortar businesses, or online businesses that have an office. Which I find sad, because they're abandoning a bunch of customers depending on them. Though it is an opportunity for some startup to cater to those customers.

> Also fully remote businesses.

Fully remote businesses still have a headquarters address.

There's a lot of FUD in this comment section, but any business that is already doing business things is registered for paying taxes, which requires an address.

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#58

Post by ghaff »

hiatus wrote: post #47
rideontime wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what jurisdiction does the former owner of a property have any say regarding what the new owner does with the property?

Any that allows covenants that run with the land. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/covenant_that_runs_with_the_...

I'm am not a property lawyer but I assume that's the case here. I assume were I to sell my property, the buyer couldn't unilaterally forbid my (now different) neighbor from using my driveway and, if they were to sell, the new neighbor couldn't forbid me from walking down to the river. Fortunately, people are pretty reasonable around where I live.

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#59

Post by drpossum »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #28
NewJazz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I never do business in my home, but instead operate out of libraries, coffee shops, or client's locations? Picture a carpet cleaning van parked on the street, for example.

If you're a sole practitioner (what this article is about) - by definition - your business is you. And you are most often in your home. It's not that complicated. You want the benefits of a business while not having to worry about angry customers annoying you at your house. I don't blame you. We all want to have cake and eat it, too.

This isn't about angry customers knowing where you live. This is about angry government since it's for regulatory purposes.

Re: Updates to US verification requirements

#60

Post by drpossum »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #27
djstein wrote: post #7

Mercury also rolled this out recently. got the email yesterday.

Given the timing, I wonder if this has anything to do with compliance of FinCEN's new Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting requirements.

I think this is exactly related to that. Someone was whining in a different post yesterday for similar new requirements from google to publish an app on the Play Store and they felt that was "discriminatory" and devs should "band together to sue them".
Post reply on HN