I'm no expert but I understand that undo-ing transactions is pretty trivial if you use multi-sig. The owner and the bank (or government) can each have a signature, and a chargeback can occur when both signatories agree to execute it.
By the way, the law already has ways of punishing irreversible actions (i.e. murder, destruction of property).
Evading tax laws or conducting illicit transactions is a core appeal of crypto, and obfuscating identifiers in crypto to achieve those ends is what crypto tumblers are all about.
> I'm no expert but I understand that undo-ing transactions is pretty trivial if you use multi-sig.
Per [1] multi-sig only lets you require multiple signatures to create a transaction, reducing the chance you do something stupid, so sort of like a physical check that requires multiple physical signatures. Multi sig doesn't let you (or the other signers) reverse the transaction once it is complete.
For that, you must contact the recipient and convince them to return the crypto, hopefully by asking them nicely.
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2020/11/10/multisignature-wall...
It is not about immutability or what level of transparency the ledger has, it is about control and who can influence both business as usual contract execution and exception handling. It is a power struggle. Don't miss the forest for the trees.