Gaffer wrote: Spoken like a true capitalist. I would, however, require that you also pay a destination tax as well. Perhaps an end-destination certification with prison term penalties?
In that case, my first move would be to structure the Canadian intermediary as an agent for the recipient, not the sender. Want to send money to your mother in Mexico? Have her open herself an account with MexiCan(tm), and send money to her account. That way, for the sender's purposes, the "end destination" is Canada (or the Caymans, or whatever other low-regulation jurisdiction you choose to place the intermediary). What the recipient chooses to do with that money once it's in Canada is their business.
Point is, whatever structure you use to set up a country-specific remittance tax, people will find a way to avoid the tax, because there will always be a way to make money by helping people to avoid it.
My point is that national will can overcome a lot. It isn’t worth arguing about really
I try to make this point to my students.
1. ‘A’ oughta be illegal. Law ‘Anti-A’ gets passed.
2. I’ll just do ‘B’ to get around law ‘Anti-A’.
1. Then I’ll make that activity illegal. Law ‘Anti-B’ gets passed.
2. Then I’ll do ‘C’ to get around law ‘Anti-B’.
1. Then I’ll make that activity illegal. Law ‘Anti-C’ gets passed.
{repeat}
Eventually, many, many innocent people get swept up in all the various anti-whatever laws; the government gets stronger and controls more of our lives; and the original activity ‘A’ still goes on (potentially at a lower rate).