I believe Mike, we're saying the same thing here. Your assertion on the Garn St Germain Act is correct.
However, although no trustee is required to be named, users of anonymity trusts should anticipate objections from a future title company based on the proposition that a trust is not a legal entity—which it technically is not, even though trusts often act as if they are in fact legal entities. A trust is actually a contractual relationship, not an entity. Accordingly, one should be prepared to re-execute and re-record a deed which properly includes the name of the trustee.
In the case of anonymity, it is preferable to have a trustee as the public face as the trustee searchable and it provides an extra layer of protection. However, the existence of trustee does not change the beneficial ownership so long as the owner is named as the beneficiary of the trust. The beneficiary is not required to be named in a public recording. The private documentation of the beneficial interest in the Series LLC (which is the instrument to which I'm referring) is recorded as such. As far as reporting to the state, this also depends on if you are using a house of cards LLC system along with a Land Trust, in which you set up separate bank accounts and LLC's for each asset to be protected, or you are using a layered anonymous land trust combined with a Series LLC, and it depends on which of the 18 states you have chosen to do that in as only 18 states allow for a Series structure. I prefer Texas because of the business-friendly taxation and environment for owners in that State.
The truth is that a land trust on its own does not defeat due-on-sale because a land trust invariably contemplates a transfer of rights of occupancy—so due-on-sale provisions remain effective and enforceable. However, with careful planning, the due-on-sale clause is not triggered.