Generally speaking adding a hop between a KYC exchange and your main wallet isn't going to do much privacy-wise. If you do exchange ---> temporary wallet ---> main wallet, then any surveillance company with knowledge that the funds sent to the temporary wallet belong to you will be able to infer that those sent to the main wallet also do, especially if the transaction from the temporary wallet to the main wallet is trivial to interpret1.
Additionally coin control, however sophisticated, will never alleviate the fact that the KYC exchange holds a record of how much corn you bought. For instance, if your worry re. KYC is expropriation a la 6102, then the State would still know that you own at least the amount reported by KYC exchanges, and could come take it.
I think a common practice is to keep KYC and non-KYC stacks hermetically separated. It has the added benefit that KYC coins might be useful in the future, e.g. for any transaction that requires proof of origin (such as buying a house).
Footnotes
For example this recent transaction is probably a self-transfer because it transforms exactly one input into exactly one output. The odds of a transaction between two parties not involving any change output are thin, since it'd require the sending party to possess a UTXO that is very close to the amount requested by the receiving party. ↩
Thank you, I appreciate the clarity in your explanation's. Learned a few things for sure. Going to think more about how I handle my KYC / NON KYC moving forward
exchange ---> temporary wallet ---> main wallet
, then any surveillance company with knowledge that the funds sent to thetemporary wallet
belong to you will be able to infer that those sent to themain wallet
also do, especially if the transaction from thetemporary wallet
to themain wallet
is trivial to interpret1.Footnotes