You're saying "doing business with these banks is not illegal, so there's nothing to be concerned about."
The author is saying "doing business with these banks is not illegal, but they lack certain reporting requirements that have been very helpful in revealing illegality, and we should be concerned about that."
The author has given multiple reasons and cited other studies showing why we should be concerned. At this point, I think the burden of proof is on you to explain why the author's concerns are unfounded. Why do you think beneficial ownership registries and similar reporting requirements are not needed?
I haven't addressed the author so my role isn't to make an opinion on their conclusions, only the wording. For example “Evidence” is used in the title as opposed to “Transparency Report” or “Data from server breach”, or any of my other working titles which would be used for literally any other industry.
The author is saying "doing business with these banks is not illegal, but they lack certain reporting requirements that have been very helpful in revealing illegality, and we should be concerned about that."
The author has given multiple reasons and cited other studies showing why we should be concerned. At this point, I think the burden of proof is on you to explain why the author's concerns are unfounded. Why do you think beneficial ownership registries and similar reporting requirements are not needed?