Seems entirely possible for the local government to hold the LLC accountable for following local rules without having to know who's behind the LLC
The meta-conversation going on within these threads is more to the point of folks suggesting hard-to-implement laws about who can own what, and how much of a thing they can own, and what sort of penalties exist to control the way that the population of owners can develop.
All that secondary stuff seems too chaotic to control... better to just -
a> allow for the LLC to do what it was designed for: protect the owner from liability beyond the cost of the house
and, b> let the municipality fine the LLC according to whatever rules exist about whether it's morally reprehensible to remove a renter for failing to pay a fine
The issue is that without knowing who owns the LLC, then you can use a different LLC for each property and skirt rules around taxes and other restrictions on multiple property ownership.
It would, but it wouldn’t help with a lot of the scenarios in the article, which sound legal but potentially unreasonable. The property owner or owning entity does not have to suffer reputational damage for executing a legal but inhumane/distasteful eviction.
It is already kinda deranged that one's name and other details become public records in many states as soon as you buy property or start a company.
EDIT: Surprising number of downvotes in a forum that often focuses on privacy concerns!