The fallacy here is that the justification for enforced KYC is if there is a net benefit to it.
Plain and simple--it is coercion. It is forcing two parties acting privately with their own resources to change their actions, with threats of violence.
Idea: would it make sense to build a report on a bona fide FULL COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF KYC? On the "benefits" side, all documented foiled criminal activity, plus estimated avoided criminal activity. On the "costs" side, the staff & infrastructure required for KYC, the estimated costs of criminal activity (e.g. identity theft) enabled by leaks/hacks of personal data, as well as estimated loss of privacy.
nostr:npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx nostr:npub1cn4t4cd78nm900qc2hhqte5aa8c9njm6qkfzw95tszufwcwtcnsq7g3vle
Discussion
There are plenty of coercive rules that parties acting privately with their own resources must follow, I don't think that will change any time soon. The report I am thinking of is something that could actually be taken into consideration by governments/lawmakers.