A STAK is nothing more than a foundation which is made to hold shares. Nowadays foundations are reported in the UBO register as far as I know, hence, I do not see how it would be anonymous? It can certainly make sense from a tax planning perspective.
If you read the article it says that the setup can give out certificates when using a nominee director. And there is no ubo for that matter if i read it correctly
I do not see where/how a nominee giving out certificates means that there would no longer be an UBO for the STAK? Maybe if the nominee also holds the certificates but idk. Seems questionable.
1. holding (in)directly an ownership of more than 25%
2. being able to (in)directly exercise more than 25% of the votes in decision-making regarding amendments to the foundation's articles of association
3. being able to exercise actual control over the foundation (other than by being a statutory director of the foundation)
1. isnt possible with the STAK due to its nature which leaves 2 and 3.
When that doesnt produce a UBO everyone will be UBO.