Perhaps the OP meant "nigh", which is archaic, and means the same as "near".
Even then, "nigh beneficial owner" and "near beneficial owner" are awkward constructions that would have broken the continuity of my reading comprehension.
But surely one is or is not a "beneficial owner". Being nearly a beneficial owner is the same as not being a beneficial owner at all.
I think "nigh" is meant to modify "owner", not "beneficial". I think the lawyer saying is saying that the KSA figuratively owns Twitter, and that Twitter benefits from that relationship. Golden handcuffs, basically.
That is the most awkward phrasing I've seen in a long time. I'm not even sure it's grammatically correct. I would've expected "beneficial nigh-owner" or something like that.
Even then, "nigh beneficial owner" and "near beneficial owner" are awkward constructions that would have broken the continuity of my reading comprehension.
But surely one is or is not a "beneficial owner". Being nearly a beneficial owner is the same as not being a beneficial owner at all.