Banking networks have have long been established in major world currencies and have more competitive banking industries and rates. Find the most competitive rates online. More »
Send a pre-paid MasterCard through a service such a Payoneer allowing the recipient to find a local transfer agent. There will soon be more ATMs worldwide than human agents. More »
In some cases, digital currencies are more stable than local ones. Some states have restrictive tariffs and laws designed to protect weak currencies. Buy some Bitcoin locally to send in overseas. More »
Have a look to see where your best job opportunities lie internationally. Help determine your value by understanding global working standards in your field. More »
In recent years, the prices of commodities such as oil, gas, sugar, copper, and iron ore have been in a free fall. According to Bloomberg Business, a 46% decline in resource prices has been witnessed since 2011, and we should expect more. With the slowing down Chinese economy, the commodity prices are in for a deeper dive.
As the prices continue to slump, many exporting countries are experiencing financial distress. The decline in commodity prices is eating on their net export revenues, hence pushing them towards a recession. On the other hand, importing countries are experiencing a boom as their disposable income increases with the fall in commodity prices.
How then does the current slump in resource prices affect the exchange market? Even though there is no rule to determine the correlation between currencies and commodities, the relationship cannot be ignored. For instance, the current slump in oil prices has seen the Canadian dollar and the Russian Ruble decline in value. Other currencies affected by the fall in oil prices include the Brazilian Real, Norwegian Krone, and the Colombian Peso.
The decline shows a strong correlation between a country’s major export and the value of its currency in the foreign exchange market. In the case of Canada, as the fourth largest exporter of crude oil, a decline in oil prices is likely to result in the weakening of the Canadian dollar. The decline in revenues from oil will weaken the currency in the exchange markets.
When it comes to importing countries, a slump in resource prices can mean two things. First, the decline in commodity prices means reduced expenses and hence higher profits for companies. With the increased revenues, the importing countries will get a chance to improve their current accounts hence strengthening the value of their currency in the foreign exchange markets.
Among the greatest importers of oil, the Chinese Yuan should be blossoming in the current oil prices, but due the slowing economy, things are different. India, which imports 75% of its oil is expected to ease its current account deficits if the oil prices maintain their low.
On the other hand, a slump in commodity prices can mean deflation to importing countries. A decline in commodity prices results in a decline in related product prices, thus encouraging exports and discouraging imports. In the long run, all factors considered, this leads to the strengthening of the given currency.
As the resource prices continue to tumble, there is a likelihood of a decline in remittances from the affected economies. For instance, in the wake of the falling oil prices, the remittances from Indian citizens working in major oil producing countries has declined. The World Bank warns that if the oil prices are to remain low, the remittance flow from the Gulf Cooperation Council will decline further. Even when India is benefiting from an increase in disposable income, the decline in remittances to the country is a reason to worry.
The main reason for the decline in remittances is the weakening of a currency of the affected economy. When the prices of exports fall, the decline in revenues is likely to weaken the position of a given currency in the global foreign markets.
For instance, the weakening of Russia economy is affecting the economies of neighboring countries as a result of the declining remittances, trade and investments. The areas most affected by the slowing Russia economy include Central Asia and Caucasus. Given that most developing countries depend on remittances from developed nations, the plummeting oil prices have a negative effect on the stability of their currencies.
Even as some countries continue to enjoy the increase in disposable income as a result of the slump in resource prices, there is a reason to worry. As the commodity markets continue to plummet, there is a likelihood of a contagious financial disaster to the global economy. When coupled with other factors as the crumbling China economy, the prices are likely to go down further leading to more trouble.
As analysts continue to encourage investors that this is the best time to buy commodities, there is a reason to be more careful. Unless the Chinese markets stabilize, the commodity prices are likely to crumble further.
The word telegraphic transfer is a nostalgic term in banking and finance because it refers to a time when sending money in any way electronic was unusual. In the early history of banking all bookkeeping was done manually, money transfers were done in cash or cheque and transactions were accounted for on paper ledgers. Then came electricity, cable communication and telegraphic transfers were born.
Telegraphic transfer is when one party remits to another electronically. It was first done using cables and now get used to identify any electronic funds transfer. In many parts of the world, it is said as a form sarcasm toward the reminiscence of aristocratic society, as a sort of snub. Prior to the internet, transferring money electronically was reserved to the elite in large important transactions but today more and more people are accessing it. Electronic payments still being relatively new, we have yet to witness the bulk of it historical societal change. Money was electronic and now is digitizing.
The first idea of electronic money came in 1880 when renown American scientist Edward Bellamy suggested accounting for transactions on a card but technology was not yet mature enough to support the application. It wasn’t until Diners Club International issued the first universal payment card that the movement developed steam. In 1957 came Americard (better known as Visa), then in 1966 came Master Charge (known as MasterCard) and in 1968 came the Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) which allowed for what is known today as EFT (Electronic Funds Transfer). Up until the mid 1990s, the developed world gradually transitioned over to electronic payment systems. Pop culture started depicting electronic payments as more mainstream and mass adoption to root.
1981 sparked the official beginning of the digital revolution with the first use of internet protocol. Large financial institutions at this time started implementing digital payment networks and international settlement became faster. This is when securitization began, the cabal of large institutions started not only digitizing money but investments and all forms of economic value. In turning these formally illiquid values transactable, the established financial community increased trade and became more interwoven but this did not stop the digitizing of assets.
Despite large regular financial market panics, money has continued to move faster and faster while markets digitized. Long gone are the days of physical stock exchanges and trading is mostly done on computer and often through the use of algorithm (within developed centres). The Internet being peer to peer, one would think that markets would have decentralized with increasing use but we are yet to see this on a large scale. Even today, much of the worlds exchange of money and securities is done on proprietary networks that are centrally owned. Innovations in payment networks has been made and the technology is now existent to start decentralizing financial markets.
Transaction authentication has long been the primary obstacle to removing third parties to individual transactions. By the very nature of a financial exchange you need to confirm that an exchange of value has been made and in early times this was done with a unique and hard to replicate physical token (a currency). When electronic ledgers appeared, a settling agent and clearing house was required to confirm that a unit of trade was not spent twice and was in fact transferred.
Since the introduction of HasCash in 1997 and the latter expansion into Bitcoin in 2009, encryption has successfully solved this issue. No longer do you need any witness to you transactions as they are automatically accounted for in a public ledger and authenticated by the entire network using cryptology. This has sprung a entirely new sub sector within finance that revolves around peer to peer trade based on encryption as enthenticators to trust. Entire markets such as Coinffein have sprung up to exchange digital currencies without a third party.
Many insiders today, are referring to the underlining technology of Bitcoin (the blockchain) in the same light as Linux was viewed. Many suggest that it has the potential to impact financial markets in the very way that many aspects of the Linux OS has impacted electronics. The Linux architecture is present in some way, shape or form in just about every computerized devise and has been built upon to serve a wide variety applications in just about every industry. Linux changed computers forever because it was a base an architecture that could be improved upon. The blockchain shares that commonality with Linux.
Telegraphic transfers are simply electronic transfers. To know where we are going it’s important to know where we have been. We have come from a place exclusive use to a more and more open economy. I would anticipate this continue and the only logical directory would be to have a larger number of people take more control over their units of trade and thus their measurement of wealth. The exchange of value is becoming more peer to peer and this has the potential to empower money people. We are currently witnessing a turning point in our economic history and spotting the opportunity is often half the battle.
Sending money overseas is getting cheaper. There’s no question that for many migrant workers that there are new ways to send money back home, but in order to save people will need to start changing their financial habits. Part of what has traditionally restricted people to send money around the world with ease is that the traditional banking system is not standardised across the world. Yes, it is pretty standard across many western and developed economies but many less developed and rural regions of the world do not have the same rules to transacting. To understand this, it’s firstly important to understand what the role of banking is.
A bank is an agent who settles a transaction. Accounting for your balances is simply a by-product of settling your transactions but has become standard in the industrialized world. The primary role of a bank is to authenticate the monetary trade between to parties and exists in more primitive forms throughout the world. Within traditional western banking, the settlement of transactions and account registration go hand in hand but in many less developed regions, account registration is not so formalized. Take an individual money changer in a less economically developed or rural of the world.
Informal money exchanges are the norm across many countries and account access is achieved through a third party exchanges or money brokers. These are people who less formally exchange money but operate in the field. They will send money abroad converting cash to credit under their won accounts. This inherently conflicts with western KYC and anti-money laundering/terrorist financing regulation because of its less formal nature. It also ends up increasing overall rates for the end user. Money brokers in less developed regions have have professional networks across the world but the way that their western counter-parties interact with traditional institutions is problematic. Their entire business model can’t comply with traditional regulation by its inherent nature of informal dealings. This is only one of several opportunities that lie for operators within the field. Political relations have also been an obstacle for agents remitting internationally but is less of a controllable factor for money exchange businesses.
The way that foreign remittance is currently getting cheaper is through the improved access to global financial markets whether formal or informal by end users. People only need access to the internet to have access to a financial markets to trade Dollars for Euro or even M-Pesa for Bitcoin. SMS technologies are even now evolving to include payment services which is granting access to using sophisticated devices. This is huge for two thirds of the world because they can now access global financial markets cheaply.
What this means for much of the world is they will now have access to financial services because the new types of institutions are setting up using digital currencies. These are for the most part, currencies that are designed to be crowd sourced meaning anyone can transact in them without needing any outside authority. This is a less formalized process which is better suitable for less formal economies, countries or regions. A the moment, the bulk or the infrastructure is needed for intermediaries (agents or brokers) between the digital economy and the formal financial system, but it is coming.
For people who do currently do have access to banking in first world nations, sending money abroad has also changed. We now have companies like Payonner and CurrencyFair who are specializing in foreign remittance and have cut cost significantly for end users by not having physical branches. CurerncyFair is an internet company designed for the new online world. They focus on providing excellent rates for remittance within more developed countries. This has lowered cost significantly by focusing large efforts in developed economies with online payments. Payonner on the other hand is a little different than traditional money exchange. With them, you basically send money anywhere that has postal service and ATMs. They will send pre-paid MasterCars anywhere in the world and it can be refilled. It’s like sending a cheque to your family back home and they can actually cash it then use it whenever you refill it. For sending money to less developed areas, Payonner can be a good option because the intermediary can literally be a bank machine or point of sale (POS).
What I’m suggesting, is that to save money when remitting payments back home, understand that the entire industry is blossoming and becoming more competitive. New type of financial institutions are starting up worldwide to meet your need, regardless what they are. No longer does your remittance have to be a side operation of your bank because you can deal with a wider variety specialist that can connect to world markets. Understand your needs and the most suitable company will save you the most money sending foreign remittance.
The rise to prominence of bitcoin has produced a lot of talk around the world for its supposed potential to transform the global remittance industry. This is no small feat, having a potential of $430 billion in global trade. Given that this online currency is almost as easy to implement as sending mail is, it’s hard to believe that only fringe attention has been given. There has been tremendous talk of it’s growing potential, however, despite all the promise, the platform for the use of bitcoin and other digital currencies is yet to be adopted on a wide international scale.
Looking at the figures
Looking at the Philippines as example, a country that receives the third highest amount of remittances in the world. The figures are quite interesting. In 2013, the Philippines received $26 billion worth in remittances. In 2014, the figure rose to $27.5 billion. At the moment, the annual growth of the remittance industry in the country is between 1 and 2 billion dollars annually. Behind Philippines comes Mexico, which enjoyed a $23 billion windfall in 2013. However, Mexico’s stake in the remittance has been on the decline since the beginning slowing of main street in the US starting in 2008.
For both Philippines and Mexico, the bulk of this money seems to originate from the United States. 98% of Mexico’s remittances come from the States while the Philippines obtains 30% of its total from the same source. Taking a closer look on the other hand, tells you that over $10 billion of the Philippines’ totals does not actually come from the US; it is simply re-routed there from countries in Europe, Australia and Asia.
What this tells us is that despite seeing a slow down the US economy, financial services in the US remained healthy. The United State having the world reserve currency is still the financial hub of the world. Many of the world financial institutions funnel economic trade through its American financial centres and this is a factor when transferring money. Not only does this make put transactions under US regulation it also increases transactional fees. The current monetary and economic system is still fairly centralized and lacks commercial diversity. The industry is ripe for innovation.
Putting the argument in perspective
It is not easy to imagine a bitcoin company starting from scratch and beating established money transfer services like Money Gram or Western Union. However, it is very possible to start a bitcoin transfer service to serve a small, targeted clientele. Establishing yourself if you do not have the financial wherewithal to open branches around the world can be an issue but through global collaboration, peer networks can be created? Independent businesses will have to work together to build a divers money transfer landscape. You will also have to assume that most of the migrant populations in many countries do not understand or care about the machinations of crypto currency, but this will slowly evolve.
Rebit (Philippines), Bitpesa (Africa) and Airbit (Indonesia) are some of the services that receive and convert bitcoins into currency ,sending them out to recipients at the end . There are no risks here because the final user is never gets to handle any part of the transaction.
The snag here is that to make a transfer, a client has to first convert currency to bitcoins. This technicality allows for the inclusion of an informal intermediary, a strategy that could potentially put a different business out of work. From the outset, this assertion seems laughable, but it is far from it. An in-depth look will give you an exact picture.
How it works
Bitcoin companies do not keep a supply all the time. They find sources of the crypto currency mostly when there is demand. Once they get a hold of a batch, they will try to sell enough to make payouts to the beneficiaries of their customers. A trader who knows their way around can manage to sell a decent amount of bitcoins for cash and make a decent profit. Though in harsher times, breaking even is always appreciated.
Whether the operation is on or off ramp, there will always be a need to integrate technologies that make transacting in bitcoins easier. The problem however, is that only the countries with the best banking infrastructures will benefit from a setup like this. Sample this: in the Philippines, there is a markedly higher number of pawnshops than there are ATM machines while in India, money transfer services are very informal in approach. Dealers will have to integrate within these existing systems.
Legal aspects of the transfer of BTC’s
Some countries around the world will require that any business wishing to trade in bitcoins to obtain a license, and even then, the procedures are not exactly straightforward. In the United States, very few companies have managed to obtain licensing in every state because the costs are simply outrageous. In the ASEAN region, the costs will be in the tens of thousands of dollars while authorities in the Middle East will ask for between one and two billion dollars. Apart from financial implications, these start ups have to comply with anti-laundering rules that complicate everything all over again.
At this point, we are about to start a race, with $42 billion worth of global savings at stake. The good thing is that after all, we do not need a central authority to trade in bitcoins. The nature of the currency will make it easier for decentralized brokerages to exist in each country. This strategy may not topple giants like Western union, but it will make such transfer entities stand up and take notice.
Swiss bank have for a long time been iconic for big wealth and pseudonymous for privacy. Popular movies have long depicted Swiss numbered bank accounts as being no questions asked lock boxes to store your ill gotten gains but Swiss banking has changed.
Remember the days of those James Bond villains carrying the steel briefcase with a telephone in it ready to receive the wire for that big extortion? At one point in history, Switzerland had one the most developed and secretive banking sectors of the world. It’s wasn’t by any means unsupervised but was infamously secretive. During World War 2 Swiss banks were known to carry accounts for both sides of the conflict, to everyone from victims of war to high ranking official and pillagers alike. Parts of high French society were exposed to have made large deposits to evade French taxes when Swiss banks were actively financing the Germans. In 1934 the Swiss government restructured regulation on banking through the Federal Act on Banks and Savings Banks granting account holders privacy from all non-Swiss third parties. Individual accounts were, and still are identified by number and every number corresponds with another number to identify the client. It’s a form of natural encryption which is the basis of many important digital currencies today (encrypted digitally of course). This form of encryption, is only as private as its intermediary settling the transaction which until the 1990s was the bank itself.
Banking in Switzerland today is supervised by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). Over the last decade due to overwhelming political pressure from many G20 nations, repeals to an important law that was granting much of the privacy were discussed. In 2009, Swiss authorities indicated that changes were to be made to a certain portion of the act, where banks would only reveal private information in cases of serious crimes, tax evasion not being one of them. In 2013, authorities further indicated that they were going to align with standard G20 banking practices but no material change has been made since.
The loophole mentioned by many G20 economic pundits relies on the fact that in Switzerland the act of not reporting earned income is considered tax evasion and not tax fraud. Authorities simply don’t view tax evasion as a serious enough offence to breech privacy. From a Swiss stand point, its makes economic sense because they are earning domestic deposits while reducing a foreign countries tax base. Switzerland is definitely the rich guy on the block.
Since 2009, there have been many lawsuits directed toward Swiss banks (such as UBS for $780M) but an increase of political pressure has been applied on Swiss banking authorities and privacy has been breached. Foreign governments have been successful in lobbying Swiss banking authorities to reveal information making other banking jurisdictions more attractive. With the current global climate, these havens will move around. Switzerland has comparatively vast political clout.
You’re better off going to Switzerland to ski because now a days, if you are looking to hide ill gotten gain, Switzerland is not at the top of your list.
This nostalgic subject brings up an interesting topic in economics and it’s the role of privacy within our transaction system and our world. What amount of privacy is acceptable and in what circumstances? What is money laundering if not hiding wealth accumulated from what would be considered shady activities. I think that with evolution of our financial system and communication, these subjects are going to become increasingly important as mining your data is progressing in use and effectiveness. How private should your money be?
When was the last time you bought something with cash?
The difference between being fortunate and challenged has long depended on geography but today with growing communication capacity, global markets are at peoples disposal and prosperity is seeing less physical boundaries. Over one third of the world on the other hand, still does not have access to banking. In terms of essential services, I agree that banking is no more important than postal services , but maybe the reason with there’s no postal service is because there is no bank. Hey let’s be honest here, some places also just don’t want postal service.
In the case of those villages who want postal service, if we were to build a bank, would they then have the prosperity to have postal services? Obviously not and that’s why there aren’t bank everywhere. Of course, I am writing in allegory where the postal services signifies prosperity. People in these villages do have mobile phone though and with Moors Law and electronics continuously getting cheaper, entire generations are leap-frogging in technology. Imagine someone only ever have called someone using a cellphone or even voip. Those people are a growing number.
In saying that, cellphones and the internet have now become the ultimate postal service and what is banking if not a postal service for money. Well at it’s core, that’s what it should be…
People are now increasingly getting access to banking not through traditional brick and mortar but through technological platforms such as mobile banking and even bitcoin. I think what is particularly interesting is that some of these technologies make current established models obsolete. I think that it is definitely fitting that the third world usher in these new technologies of trade.
As seen by the World Bank Global Findex, the reaches of banking are spreading in all sorts of ways. One comes to wonder how this leap-frog in technological platforms will influence their prosperity…
With the advent and growth of the internet, we have seen an explosion in online businesses and services. Some that have change our way of living. Some that even have changed us so much that they have rendered traditional businesses and even entire industries obsolete. Take movie rentals for example; with the digitization of film and peer to peer sharing, the film industry has had to evolves or risk failure. Now people don’y use DVDs as their primary viewing medium which has opened the doors to services like Netflix and Youtube.
Our financial system is currently going through what the film industry went through in the early 2000s. Money is changing and fast. Not only are financial markets increasing in volatility but but the transfer of cash is occurring more frequently and beyond more borders. Traditional, international money transfer were cumbersome due to the lack of efficient trade and trust networks, making it expensive and less attractive to less affluent people.
Things are slowly starting to change, but not by coincidence. Technology is evolving and international networks are growing independently of incumbent financial infrastructure. Bank are no longer the only service in town for people to send money abroad. An entire generation of internet companies based on both traditional financial model and progressive peer to peer technologies are taking foothold in the money transfer industry and it is driving prices down worldwide.
In the past one would use a bank to place a wire to send money abroad. Depending on the country, settlement of wire transactions could take up to 15 days and fees could and fees could escalate upwards of $100. Another would use a bricks and mortar money transfer company such as Western Union or Money Gram and would physically send money or remit through a branch. This for a long time was the most efficient method to send money abroad as it was cheaper and faster. Being, what were bricks and mortar businesses prior to internet, these companies were based on physical networks of branches which are still relevant today, but a new type of financial institution has emerged; The digital financial institution. These companies don’t have physical branches and thus have lower costs and tighter margins. You save money.
An Example of such companies is Payoneer.com
This is a company that has designed its entire business model on being fast, efficient and cheap. Because they are primarily a digital facing institution they they’re able to provide some of the most competitive transfer rates both on and off the internet. Traditional bank are essentially leaving the business of foreign remittance because they know they can’t compete. Traditional money transfer businesses are still relevant but less for remittance because these new digital companies are more efficient for small and more regular transactions.
Payonner.com is interesting because it is designed for the online experience. You can choose to have the recipient of your money transfer receive a pre-paid Mastercard payable in local currency as to directly give spendable credits. This eases the experience because even though it’s not always relevant, you are more likely to be near a banking machine than actual bank. They also have a seamless process for identifying you. All you have to do is enter the numbers on your local identification. These types of processes are built specifically to be international and work within as many countries as possible. The entire company and site wasn’t build for one country but all of them. Why should an international money transfer company be specialist in any country when their business is sending money to any country. They need to equally know them all.
Trust is an obvious factor when sending money anywhere so I recommend building a relationship with a company to do your transactions. Choose a few different companies and start with smaller transaction to build that relationship but know that newer type of businesses are changing the experience of sending money abroad. In your research, I say give them a chance.
Canada’s new fiscal budget was released this week. Being a federal election year, the Conservative Party of Canada has tried to sell the budget as being more centered than ever before. Within it they talk about tax free investing, large scale infrastructure investment, to income tax cuts and the balancing of the fiscal budget. Doesn’t this just seam all right, in the perfect world?
Despite having practically frozen investment to the health and education sector, the federal government is still providing large scale stimulus. Much of it in infrastructure. Like any traditional government budget, it is way over sold. Take the contributions to foreign remittance infrastructure for example. It was highlighted in the budget as being a sector of the economy that had to evolve as fees are generally high and service quality is generally low. The Conservative Party of Canada highlighted that they will be investing to this sector of the economy. How much, you may ask? $5 million over 5 years.
It is very much a positive contribution to understand that many immigrants to Canada remit back home to help their family and should have access to fair and adequate services. So $5 million over 5 years, what’s the deal?
I think that the size of the contribution is actually quite suitable as this sector has significant technological opportunities for businesses to thrive. At the moment, the environment in many developed countries is underdeveloped as it relates to money transfer businesses. In many cases, regulation has gotten in the way but with the advent of block-chain technologies, the entire industry has the opportunity to evolve to reduce fees and increase trust exponentially. Transferring value is something that should be practically free. The evolution of the internet is slowly (or rapidly in some cases) decentralizing our society and the exchange of value is following suit. Trading systems are opening up and more international competition is joining the marketplace. This is what is going to reduce fees and better service for foreign remitters.
Within this budget, the amount of money contributed to the industry was absolutely irrelevant in my opinion. Much of the Canadian media have been quick to point out that the budget contained plans to invest toward remittance infrastructure and this contribution, albeit a good thing for the sector, is not what it needs. Our financial and payment system requires finesse as it relates to regulation. At them moment, much regulation is designed for a none digital world and actually impedes innovation, as companies utilizing new digital systems for exchanging value and identification run into stiff KYC (Know-Your-Client) and AML (Anti-Money Laundering) regulation. This regulation needs to be revamped for our changing economy and that is when the remittance industry will evolve. To add, this issue is not just a Canadian issue but many developed countries have similarly archaic financial regulation.
I’m not saying I have all the answers to the issues presented as they are fairly complex. I am saying that many developed countries need to review their financial regulation to make sure it fits a digital world.
Need to send money to India? It should be noted that sending money to India involves a high amount of government related restrictions. Financial Institutions in India are divided in two categories, of which the first type involves regulatory institutions and the second type refers to the intermediaries. The regulators are responsible for governing all the divisions of the Indian financial system. These regulatory institutions are responsible for maintaining the transparency and the national interest in the operations of the institutions under their supervision. Apart from the Regulatory bodies, there are the Intermediaries that include the banking and non-banking financial institutions. Taken from this tight economic situation, that all transactions are regulated, you are more likely to pay extra fees when sending money to and from India. This is exactly why you need to know the best way to get the best worth for your rupee, at all times. The good news is that it can well be accomplished once you know the ins and outs of the Indian Government.
If you need to send money to India you can do so by using a bank wire transfer which is considered the most practical way of sending money to the State Bank of India or any other bank in India. As for Wire Transfer as one of the most common ways to make international money transfer, upon sending your wire transfer to the State bank of India via your bank, it is likely that you will be charged an expensive transfer fee and offered poor rates of currency exchange. Online Transfer is similarly considered a most practical way to send money to India. All you need is an internet connection and use of local banking services to transfer money to an account in India. This method is especially recommended if you do regular transfer of funds, as it enable one to avoid steep banking charges. So we must know that some Banks and money transfer firms charge more than what meets the eye. We thus need to find the most cost-efficient of money transfer services in the light of India’s economic situation.
For example, Xendpay can make sending money to India more cost-efficient. Highly experienced at sending money to the State bank of India, Xendpay claims to offer the lowest rate to India, given that all transactions are still authorized by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). There are numerous other institutions to choose from, such as Western Union, Xoom, Remit2India, Axisbank, and Moneygram. Now, as a result of the collaboration of the Department of Posts, Government of India with the Western Union Financial Services and MoneyGram International, a state of the art International Money transfer Service is available through the Post Offices in India. This service enables instantaneous remittance of money from around 195 countries and territories to India, wherewith recipients can collect the money almost instantaneously. Another option is Transfer Wise, which offers no hidden fees, so you get more rupees every time. If you reside in Europe and need to send money to India then Money2India Europe is highly recommended. Money2India Europe simplifies money transfers from 17 Eurozone countries to India with minimal costs.