I don't get it. Most companies registered in the state I live in, for example, are not actually located here. They simply receive mail through their registered agent there. Why would this be news?
On the other hand, most of the companies registered in Delaware are not trying to dodge US federal regulations. Polymarket is prohibited from operating in the US market. Nevertheless they have a substantial customer base in the US, and the part left unsaid in the NPR story, is that they’re probably also headquartered in the US. Almost definitely a violation of either gambling or securities regulations.
It is indeed already normal for rich people to do things that are sketchy as hell.<p>Maybe let's make it not normal?
They acknowledge this in the article as well, surprisingly enough.<p>> Corporate law experts say while there is nothing illegal about housing a business inside a shell company, the practice is often a strategic move to protect a firm's wealth or shield it against lawsuits and action from government regulators.<p>What is the thought process of someone writing this? Does this article have any meaningful or critical thought behind it?
They’re avoiding editorializing. PBS news has the same dry “facts only” flavor. Legitimate reporting takes the high road; corpo-media too often take the low road.
Unfortunately human information consumers tend to gravitate toward sources of maximum opinion.
It isn’t newsworthy for people who believe the laws around corporate transparency and accountability are good enough.<p>Many people do not, which is why it is noteworthy, even if it is standard.
I guess we're scratching our heads, and even we clicked.
Because NPR dislikes polymarket and thinks that reporting this will discredit them.
> Why would this be news?<p>Mostly because international litigation is, let's say, fraught issues (as in "good luck!")
[dead]
If you follow Apple's official address to a lawyer's office in Delaware, don't be surprised that Tim Cook isn't there to greet you.
Apple is registered in California, as both their website ( <a href="https://investor.apple.com/faq/default.aspx" rel="nofollow">https://investor.apple.com/faq/default.aspx</a> ) and their most recent form 8-K ( <a href="https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/beb2c243-4eda-4029-b91d-123de22558be.html" rel="nofollow">https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/beb2c24...</a> ) confirm.
For what it's worth the only "official address" I could find was Apple Park in Cupertino.
What happened to the quality of NPR over the last dozen or so years it's just gotten worse and worse.
to be fair, empty non-existing official office is nothing new. iirc, Delaware has a warehouse that's official residence of hundreds of corporations (for tax reasons)<p>I don't understand the rest of the article, tho... It complains that company that (officially) left the US market and already blocks US ips from participating... isn't doing enough? Officially there's no ground to demand more<p>If you really want to solve the problem - start hunting down unofficial means. Investigate influencers that started mentioning Polymarket out of the blue. Look into news outlets that decided to start mentioning polymarket as supposed proxy of popular opinion. Start advertizing campaigns against gambling addiction the same way as against smoking
There's an easy way for polymarket to have a nice office in a nice city in USA: legalize it there and have nice enough regulations and incentives for it to move there.<p>It would help a lot actually for protecting people's money instead of driving it offshore.<p>But it doesn't look like making USA compete in this $15B market is NPR's goal with this article.
Why are Americans allowed to invest in a business that would be illegal if based in the US? Why can they be patrons? Idgi
So Polymarket is a Web3 outfit?
I'm sure this is true for thousands and thousands of companies.
Polymarket engages in scammy behavior?? Wait, isn’t that their entire business model?
"the wildly popular prediction market site that has flourished in President Trump's second term."<p>I stopped reading here, as the only purpose I could see for this intro is to prime the reader negatively before any argument.
Water is wet