To be honest: Some enterprises can operate fully within the law without ever experiencing a conflict of interest (example: you sew clothes, and sell them).
Some enterprises operate completely without regard of the law (example: drug smuggling, extortion, slave trade), and correspondingly have to hide a very large part of their operations from law enforcement.
A third category of enterprises has goals that are at least partly in conflict with the goals of laws and regulations. This obviously happens very frequently when said laws and regulations are set up for the protection of employees, farm animals, the environment, customers, market entrants, etc. in their respective role, versus employers in general, mass-production of animal products, exploitation of natural resources, selling of legal stimulants such as alcohol and tobacco. This third kind of company usually only hide part of their operations from law enforcement or the public, because their business model is compatible with compatible goals, but they are often seen (i) suppressing information about certain parts of their business, (ii) practicing aggressive lobbying and (iii) relying heavily on legal counsel in order to stay within the law while pursuing their business activities.
Basic economic sense tells you that retaining lobbyists and legal counsel costs money, hence organizations that don't need it would never spend money on either. "Complex regulatory regimes" usually don't happen by themselves, but because the people making laws are driven (by private or public interests) to assume that it is necessary to influence what companies and individuals do.
