This paper offers a fresh perspective on fundamental issues in using official incorporation records to  corroborate the identity of corporate entities by comparing two publicly-available sets of information,  namely, business registry incorporation records and reference data from the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI)  system, with some focus on the monitoring function performed by LEI issuers as agents for LEI data  users. Three modes of analysis are used to consider these issues, high-level analysis of LEI system data about U.S. entities with LEIs, interviews conducted with U.S. business registries, and entity-level  comparisons of business registry and LEI records for entities with LEIs incorporated in the states of Ohio  and Massachusetts. The fresh perspective provided here includes attention to key comparison issues such  as truncation of Legal Names in official records; significant state-level variation in requirements to  provide business address information in incorporation records or periodic reports; recognition that some key business register data may not be readily available or available only at a cost; whether in this context  enhancements can be made to the expectations for, and disclosures by, LEI issuers in their monitoring  role; and to what extent the high incidence of non-renewal of LEIs might play a role in the quality of LEI  reference data. The paper develops measures of scope and degree for many key issues that can arise in  using business registry information within an identity-corroboration context. The exceptional  transparency of the LEI system allows for detailed comparisons that connect its data quality and value  proposition with its sources and methods.