[Ancapistani]

The comment I was replying to was specifically about undercover cops.

That said - in the US, confidential informants are also paid directly by the agency or police department. While they sometimes (often?) paid in cash, the purpose and disbursement of those funds is closely tracked internally and auditable.

They're _not_ using shell companies to hide the fact that they're paying people for information. SPLC is. Why?

If paying in cash is sufficient for law enforcement, why would it be a problem for the SPLC? It seem clear to me that the intent is to hide the fact that they're doing it at all, not to protect the identities of their informants.