I do this in my day job -- international tax lawyer.<p>As the saying goes, &quot;science may one day accomplish this, but it hasn&#x27;t done so yet.&quot; In theory you can write enough code and SOPs to mirror the laws of multiple countries.<p>Unfortunately, laws change.<p>Further, even if the laws remain static, the facts change. People do the weirdest thing -- they change their minds, they do new stuff. Your code and SOPs will have to be adapted.<p>In theory you can write code and SOPs to handle current law, keep up with changes in the law, and accommodate human frailties, indecision, and mistakes.<p>Then in order to make the code and SOPs profitable, you must push enough customers through the pipeline at a high enough price in order to make a profit.<p>It is here that I think you fail in your quest. I happen to know -- from talking to trustees in the Cook Islands -- the approximate number of asset protection trusts established every year. It is a number whose small size surprised me. This tells me the market for international business structures is small.<p>The market is especially small after you chase away all of the bullshit artists who want to do skanky stuff offshore. Those doors are closing all the time. It&#x27;s that &quot;the law changes&quot; thing I talked about.<p>So. Legitimate users of offshore structures. Small number.<p>Your cost to build a system with software instead of humans. Big number.<p>The actual tax benefits to companies like those on HN that are larger than a breadbox and smaller than the Hoover Dam -- not a big economic benefit to the income statement. (Hint: it involves the time value of money, which means that you have to be pushing a lot of dollars through the pipes to make the present value&#x2F;future value numbers to look like &quot;jackpot!&quot;).<p>Sorry.  I&#x27;m probably just a crusty old incumbent ripe for disruption.<p>Or there is another possibility -- humans, even at $1,000&#x2F;hour, are cheaper than code.