Migrant remittances 'top $100bn'

I wonder how much is sent from the UK. Particularly as I know someone who does so.

"BBC NEWS

Migrant remittances 'top $100bn'

Migrant workers are sending $100bn home every year in what has become the biggest source of foreign funds for developing countries, the IMF says.

In its World Economic Outlook, the International Monetary Fund said remittances beat foreign investment, aid and exports in magnitude.

Inflows of $100bn for 90 developing countries in 2003 were up 25% on

2002 - with a similar rise expected in 2004.

But it warned that transaction costs are still too high.

Unlike aid and investment, remittances have stayed high despite downturns in the world economy.

The World Bank in particular believes that the stereotype of money flowing from rich countries to poorer ones is only part of the picture.

"My own belief is that South-South flows are a lot larger than North-South flows," said World Bank economist Dilip Ratha.

Easing the flow

Governments in both host and recipient countries needed to do more to ease the flow, which IMF and World Bank staff have previously said is a key source of money for driving growth and development.

A typical deal to send $200 back to relatives in a migrant worker's home country costs between $15 and $26 on average, the IMF said.

Some host countries are taking action. The UK, for example, estimates the cost of sending money from the UK at anything from £2.50 to as much as £40 for a transaction involving £100.

It has published its findings on a website, Sendmoneyhome.org, in order to help equip people with the information to seek better deals.

High costs and a mistrust of official systems often persuades people to use informal money transfer mechanisms such as the South Asian hawala network, the IMF noted.

Governments are often wary of informal networks, given their usefulness to money launderers and suspicions that they can be used to aid terrorist finance.

The IMF said regulation of such networks needed to be "carefully thought out, so that these flows can be better monitored without causing them to dry up or go further underground".

Story from BBC NEWS:

formatting link
Published: 2005/04/08 08:42:40 GMT"

Reply to
Daytona
Loading thread data ...

Unlike charity "poor people in rich countries etc" at least you know the funds are getting to where they are needed (if they weren't needed they wouldn't be sent!). Hopefully it makes an impact on world poverty.

I've certainly noticed "Western Union" signs proliferating (along with ethnic grocery stores) in this area of SE London Since were are never going to control immigration unless we ban tourism we have to hope that the extra funds can make "home" bearable enough for indigenous people to remain in.

Reply to
Troy Steadman

I thought they were for eBay scammers?

Reply to
Tumbleweed

We should also remember that because this money is going abroad it is not cascading down the UK economy employing people here. It may be 'a good thing' because it helps poor people abroad but it also 'a bad thing' becAUse it reduces employment here. Robert

Reply to
Robert

It also increases employment here. It is the motivation behind the best and the boldest coming here to earn it so they can send it back to the weak and feeble. With so many highly motivated people here from so many parts of the world we have the expertise and the local knowledge to trade in these incipient markets. That will knock-on into more employment here because both sides gain in a trading partnership.

Reply to
Troy Steadman

No, eBay's ineffectual complaints procedure is for eBay scammers.

Reply to
Alex

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.