Connect with us

Business

Canada can – and should – crack down on trade-based money laundering

Published

11 minute read

From the Macdonald Laurier Institute

By Jamie Ferrill for Inside Policy

Neglecting to take decisive action enables organized criminal networks whose activities cause significant harm on our streets and those of our international partners.

Financial crime bears considerable political and economic risk. For the incoming Trump administration, the threat that transnational organized crime and the illicit financial flows pose to global financial stability is a top priority. The threat of tariffs by the Trump administration makes the costs to Canada in enabling global financial crime all too apparent. In addition to the cost of tariffs themselves, the associated reputational risk and loss of confidence in Canada’s financial system has implications for investments, credit, supply chains, and bilateral co-operation and agreements.

Canada’s proximity to major international markets, stable economy, high standard of living, and strong institutions and frameworks make it an attractive place to do business: for both legitimate and criminal enterprises.

Trade is a key contributing sector for Canada’s economic security. It represents two-thirds of Canada’s GDP, and exports alone support nearly 3.3 million Canadian jobs. Trade is also highly vulnerable to criminal exploitation. Ineffective oversight, regulatory complexity, and lagging technology adoption, coupled with a lack of export controls, make it possible to move vast proceeds of crimes, such as those from drug trafficking, human trafficking, corruption, and tax evasion through the global trade system.

These vulnerabilities are well-known by transnational organized crime groups. They are able to effectively move billions of dollars of dirty money through the global trade system every year, a method commonly referred to as Trade-Based Money Laundering (TBML).

While any statistics must be interpreted with caution, evidence shows that TBML is a prevalent method of money laundering.

What is it?

There are several types of Trade-Based Financial Crimes such as terrorism financing through trade, sanctions evasion, and simply trade fraud. However, the TBML definition is necessarily specific. Essentially here, TBML is a money laundering method: the processing of criminal proceeds to disguise their illegal origin. TBML involves the movement of value through the global trade system to obfuscate the illicit origin. This is usually done through document fraud: undervaluing, overvaluing, phantom shipping, or multiple invoicing. Different techniques employ different aspects of the supply chain. And TBML may be just one method used within larger money laundering operations.

By way of example, US authorities allege that two Chinese nationals living in Chicago laundered tens of millions of dollars for the Sinaloa and Jalisco Cartels. Drugs were smuggled into the United States and sold throughout the country. The proceeds from these sales were collected by the Chinese nationals. Those proceeds were used to purchase bulk electronics in the United States, which were then shipped – with a falsified value – to co-conspirators in China, who sold them locally. The legitimacy provided by the electronics sales and the trade transaction provide cover to “clean” proceeds from precursor crime.

Either the importer and/or the exporter of the goods can shift value. Chances here are the electronics shipped were undervalued: on leaving the country, they are declared at a (much) lower value than they are actually worth. The importer in China pays the undervalued invoice, then sells the goods for what they are worth. The profit from those electronics now appears clean, since it was used for a “legitimate” sale. The ensuing value gap can be transferred informally or stored as illicit wealth. The value has now shifted, without fiat currency leaving the country of origin.

But the cycle does not stop there. The value and money itself continue to traverse around the world, through various intermediaries such as financial institutions or cryptocurrency exchanges. It then goes right back into the system and enables the very crimes and organized crime groups that generated it in the first place. It is, in short, the business model of organized crime.

The Canadian problem

Ultimately, the proceeds of crime that have been legitimised through TBML (and other money laundering methods) supports the criminal enterprises that generated the value in the first place. In the example, these are prolific cartels who have been behind the fentanyl crisis, migrant trafficking and abuse, corruption, and widespread violence that destabilizes communities and undermines governments across North America and beyond.

With new actors, drug routes, and ways of doing business, the cartels are very much active in Canada. The Sinaloa cartel in particular has established a significant presence in Canada where it controls the cocaine market, manufactures and distributes fentanyl, and is embedded in local criminal networks. This increases Canada’s role as a strategic location for drug trafficking and a base to export abroad, notably to Europe, the US, and Australia.

Hells Angels, Red Scorpions, ’Ndrangheta, and other organized crime groups are also exploiting Canada’s strategic location using their transnational links. These groups are active in criminal activities that generate proceeds of crime, which they launder through Canadian institutions. From drug trafficking to extortion to human and sex trafficking, the foundation of organized crime relies on generating and maximizing profits. The proceeds generally need to be laundered; otherwise, there are direct lines back to the criminal organizations. They are, without a doubt, exploiting the trade sector; the very sector that provides so much economic security for Canada.

Canada’s regulation, reporting, and prosecution record for money laundering is notoriously weak. Its record for regulation, reporting, and prosecution for trade-based financial crimes, namely here TBML, is even weaker.

As financial institutions and other regulated entities face increased scrutiny following the TD Bank scandal and the Cullen Commission’s inquiry into money laundering in BC, more criminal activity is likely to be displaced into the trade sector and the institutions it comprises.

TBML is difficult for financial institutions to detect, especially given that 80 per cent of trade is done through open accounts. It exploits established trade structures that are meant to protect the system –like documentation and invoicing processes – by manipulating transactions outside traditional payment systems, which requires more sophisticated anti-money laundering strategies to address these hidden vulnerabilities.

Addressing the problem

Trade is a gaping vulnerability. Yet, it attracts minimal attention in countering transnational financial crime. Containing the fentanyl crisis for one requires a collaborative effort to bolster supply chains and the trade sector against financial crime. This means global cooperation, technological advances (such as blockchain technology), appropriate resourcing, more scrutiny on high-risk countries and shippers, and regulatory innovation.

But political will is in short supply. The federal government’s Budget 2024 and the resulting proposed Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorism Financing Act will grant CBSA new authorities to counter TBML, but limited resources to make good on them. And CBSA cannot do it alone.

Transnational organized crime and the illicit financial flows that support it poses a threat to global financial stability. The enabling of financial crime hurts Canada’s reputation abroad. With a new political regime emerging in the US, Canada cannot afford to be seen as a weak link. Loss of confidence in a country and its financial system has implications for investments, credit, supply chains, and bilateral cooperation and agreements.

By neglecting to take decisive action, we inadvertently enable organized criminal networks whose activities cause significant harm on our streets and those of our international partners. With profits as their primary driver, it is imperative that we scrutinize financial pathways to disrupt these illicit operations effectively.

Organized crime groups are not bound by privacy laws, bureaucracy, political agendas, and government budgets. They are continually evolving and staying many steps ahead of what Canada is equipped to control: technologically, geographically, strategically, logistically, and tactically. Without appropriate regulations, technological advances, and resources in place, we will continue to be a laggard in countering financial crime.

More systematic change is needed across regulatory frameworks, law enforcement coordination and resourcing, and international partnerships to strengthen oversight, close loopholes, and enhance detection and disruption.  It would be a low-cost signal to the Trump administration that Canada is committed to upping its game.


Jamie Ferrill is senior lecturer in Financial Crime at Charles Sturt University and co-editor of Dirty Money: Financial Crime in Canada.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Carney Admits Deficit Will Top $61.9 Billion, Unveils New Housing Bureaucracy

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

The Prime Minister said this year’s shortfall will exceed last year’s $61.9B as Ottawa creates Build Canada Homes to expand affordable housing.

Prime Minister Mark Carney just admitted that this year’s federal budget deficit will be “substantial” larger than last year’s $61.9 billion shortfall. Speaking in Nepean ahead of Parliament’s return yesterday, Carney defended the red ink as the cost of what he called “nation-building” investments in housing, defense, and protection from global trade shocks.

Lets recap for those at home not keeping score, the federal government ran a $61.9 billion deficit last year. It was supposed to be closer to $40 billion, but like every Liberal promise, the reality was far worse. That single number, that $61.9 billion hole, was a turning point. It destroyed what little credibility Justin Trudeau had left, and it forced his own finance minister, Chrystia Freeland, to walk away.

Now, let’s pause here. Chrystia Freeland didn’t just “move on.” She resigned in December 2024 after a bitter clash with Trudeau. She couldn’t defend the runaway spending anymore, couldn’t keep pretending the numbers added up. And when your own finance minister, the person who signed off on the books, decides she can’t be part of the game, and yet she’s ok with Carney spending more???

But here’s the part that’s truly insane. Just last week, those same media outlets were floating headlines about the Liberals preparing an “austerity budget.” The Globe and Mail literally told us Carney was weighing “austerity” alongside “investments.” CTV reported the government’s own House Leader was warning Canadians about “tough choices” ahead of the fall budget. Austerity! After sixty billion dollars in red ink.

And these idiots actually had the gall to use that word, “austerity” while the country drowns in debt, while the deficit is climbing even higher, and while Carney is out there hiring new bureaucrats and creating brand-new agencies with billions of your dollars. You can’t make this up.

And speaking of spin, let’s get to the real show. Because once Carney slipped and admitted the deficit was going to be bigger, he launched into the propaganda portion of the presser, the part where he pretends to be solving the housing crisis. And what’s the solution? You guessed it. Another federal agency. A brand-new bureaucracy carved out of CMHC. Because in Carney’s Canada, the answer to too much red tape is… more red tape.

They’re calling it Build Canada Homes. Sounds nice. It gets $13 billion of your money on day one. It has a mandate to “plan, finance, and build homes.” And who’s running it? Anna Belo — a former Toronto deputy mayor turned private-sector consultant. Because nothing says “housing affordability” like another revolving-door insider cashing a taxpayer-funded paycheck.

The agency’s first big ideas? Modular housing, a $1.5 billion “rental protection fund,” and lots of partnerships with provinces, municipalities, and Indigenous groups. In other words: buzzwords. More meetings. More layers of government. More bureaucracy.

And then, as if to drive the joke home, Carney rolled out his housing minister. Who is it? Gregor Robertson. Yes, the same Gregor Robertson who, as mayor of Vancouver, presided over one of the worst housing affordability collapses in Canadian history. The man under whose watch prices skyrocketed, taxes doubled, and working families were driven out of the city. That’s the expert. That’s the guy they put in charge. Yeah, he’s got “experience” all right. Eye roll.

Even Pierre Poilievre saw straight through it. Speaking to his caucus on Parliament Hill ahead of the fall sitting, the Conservative leader mocked Carney’s shiny new agency as just another layer of government that won’t build homes.

“After six months in office, not a single home has been built. Instead, he’s created another bureaucracy. Meanwhile, CMHC’s own forecast shows homebuilding will fall 13%. In the GTA, it’s already down by half. That is the Carney record.”

Poilievre tied the criticism to Carney’s broader record of announcements without results, comparing the “nation-building” pitch to the agency’s empty promise: new logos, new titles, no shovels in the ground.

This is the Liberal solution in a nutshell: take a crisis they helped create, build another layer of bureaucracy, and put the very people who caused the problem in charge of fixing it. And then tell you, with a straight face, that this time, it’ll be different.

And here’s the kicker. Every dollar of this so-called “nation-building” deficit is a dollar borrowed against your future. Last year alone, interest payments on the debt blew past PBO’s estimate of $49.1 billion… THAT’S MORE than Ottawa spends on health care transfers.

Lets be clear, thank God the fall session is back. Because here’s the truth: these Liberals only shine when the press is playing duck and cover for them. When it’s just press conferences, glossy slogans, and clapping seals, they look untouchable. But the moment Parliament is sitting, the moment committees start pulling threads, the whole show falls apart.

Remember what happened when they had just two days of committee hearings on that ferry contract? Over a billion dollars, handed to China, while they were busy telling Canadians “Canada First.” They were humiliated. Because when the facts are out in the open, when the spin stops working, this government has nothing left to stand on.

This fall will be no different. Mark Carney can rebrand deficits as “nation-building,” he can launch new bureaucracies and hire insiders at half a million dollars a year, but once Question Period starts, none of that will save him. The reality is simple: this government is not long for the world. And soon enough, we’ll see real austerity… Not because they choose it, but because they’ve run out of money and credibility to keep the game going.

By Dan Knight · Hundreds of paid subscribers
I’m an independent Canadian journalist exposing corruption, delivering unfiltered truths and untold stories.
Join me on Substack for fearless reporting that goes beyond headlines
Continue Reading

Artificial Intelligence

What are data centers and why do they matter?

Published on

From The Center Square

By

Data centers may not be visible to most Americans, but they are shaping everything from electricity use to how communities grow.

These facilities house the servers that process nearly all digital activity, from online shopping and streaming to banking and health care. As the backbone of artificial intelligence and cloud computing, they have expanded at a pace few other industries can match.

Research from Synergy Research Group shows the number of hyperscale data centers worldwide doubled in just five years, reaching 1,136 by the end of 2024. The U.S. now accounts for 54% of that total capacity, more than China and Europe combined. Northern Virginia and the Beijing metro area together make up about 20% of the global market.

John Dinsdale, chief analyst with Synergy Research, said in an email to The Center Square that a simple way to describe data centers is to think of them as part of a food chain.

“At the bottom of the food chain, you’re sitting at your desk with a desktop PC or laptop. All the computing power is on your device,” Dinsdale said.

The next step up is a small office server room, which provides shared storage and applications for employees.

“Next up the chain, you can go two different directions (or use a mix),” he explained.

One option is a colocation data center, where companies lease space instead of running their own physical facilities. That model can support a multitude of customers from a single operator, such as Equinix.

The other option is to move to public cloud computing.

“You buy access to computing resources only when you need them, and you only pay for what you use,” Dinsdale said.

Providers like Amazon, Microsoft and Google run massive data centers that support tens of thousands of servers. From the customer perspective, it may feel like having a private system, but in reality, these servers are shared resources supporting many organizations.

Cloud providers now operate at a scale that was “unthinkable ten years ago” and are referred to in the industry as hyperscale, Dinsdale added. These global networks of data centers support millions of customers and users.

“The advent of AI is pushing those data centers to the next level — way more sophisticated technology, and data centers that need to become a lot more powerful,” he said.

What is a data center?

At its simplest, a data center is a secure building filled with rows of servers that store, process and move information across the internet. Almost every digital action passes through them.

“A data center is like a library of server computers that both stores and processes a lot of internet and cloud data we use every day,” said Dr. Ali Mehrizi-Sani, director of the Power and Energy Center at Virginia Tech told The Center Square. “Imagine having thousands of high-performance computers working nonstop doing heavy calculations with their fans on. That will need a lot of power.”

Some are small enough to serve a hospital or university. Others, known as hyperscale facilities, belong to companies such as Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Meta, with footprints large enough to be measured in megawatts of electricity use.

How big is the industry?

Synergy’s analysis shows how dominant the U.S. has become. Fourteen of the world’s top 20 hyperscale data center markets are in the U.S., including Northern Virginia, Dallas and Silicon Valley. Other global hotspots include Greater Beijing, Dublin and Singapore.

In 2024 alone, 137 new hyperscale centers came online, continuing a steady pace of growth. Average facility size is also climbing. Synergy forecasts that total capacity could double again in less than four years, with 130 to 140 new hyperscale centers added annually.

The world’s largest operators are American technology giants. Amazon, Microsoft and Google together account for 59% of hyperscale capacity, followed by Meta, Apple, and companies such as Alibaba, Tencent and ByteDance.

How much power do they use?

Large data centers run by the top firms typically require 30 to 100 megawatts of power. To put that into perspective, one megawatt can power about 750 homes. That means a 50-70 megawatt facility consumes as much electricity as a small city.

“Building one data center is like adding an entirely new town to the grid,” Mehrizi-Sani said. “In fact, in Virginia, data centers already consume about 25% of the electricity in the state. In the United States, that number is about 3 to 4%.”

That demand requires extensive coordination with utilities.

“Data centers connect to the power grid much like other large loads, like factories and even towns do,” Mehrizi-Sani said. “Because they need so much electric power, utilities have to upgrade substations, lines and transformers to support them. Utilities also have to upgrade their control and protection equipment to accommodate the consumption of data centers.”

If not planned carefully, he added, new facilities can strain local power delivery and generation capacity. That is why every major project must undergo engineering reviews before connecting to the grid.

Why now?

The rapid rise of AI has supercharged an already fast-growing sector. Training models and running cloud services requires enormous computing power, which means facilities are being built faster and larger.

“AI and cloud drive the need to data centers,” Mehrizi-Sani said. “Training AI models and running cloud services require massive computing power, which means new data centers have to be built faster and larger than before.”

Dinsdale noted in a report that the industry’s scale has shifted sharply.

“The big difference now is the increased scale of growth. Historically the average size of new data centers was increasing gradually, but this trend has become supercharged in the last few quarters as companies build out AI-oriented infrastructure,” he said.

Why certain states lead the market

Different states and regions offer different advantages. According to a July 2025 report by Synergy Energy Group, Virginia became the leading hub because of relatively low electricity costs when the industry was expanding, availability of land in the early years and proximity to federal agencies and contractors.

Texas and California are also major markets, for reasons ranging from abundant energy to the presence of technology companies.

Internationally, Synergy’s analysis shows that China and Europe each account for about a third of the remaining capacity. Analysts expect growth to spread to other U.S. regions, including the South and Midwest, while markets in India, Australia, Spain and Saudi Arabia increase their share globally.

What is at stake?

For most Americans, data centers are invisible but indispensable. Almost everything digital depends on them.

“Streaming movies, online banking, virtual meetings and classes, weather forecasts, navigation apps, social media like Instagram, online storage and even some healthcare services” all run through data centers, Mehrizi-Sani said.

Synergy’s forecast suggests the trend is unlikely to slow.

“It is also very clear that the United States will continue to dwarf all other countries and regions as the main home for hyperscale infrastructure,” Dinsdale said.

This story is the first in a Center Square series examining how data centers are reshaping electricity demand, costs, tax incentives, the environment and national security.

Continue Reading

Trending

X