That doesn't make sense for me. First, US lawmakers don't really think that far ahead. But more tellingly, this isn't a universal requirement - it just applies to business transactions that can't otherwise be audited.
I think it's no more than what it appears to be: a ham-handed way to shore up the traceability of money flow.
The better to tax it, my dear. Presumably. I'm not saying I agree with it - I don't. Just that it's a smaller leap of faith in my opinion to believe that's the motivation.
I think it's no more than what it appears to be: a ham-handed way to shore up the traceability of money flow.