I can give you one example that is becoming increasingly complex. It's what we call transfer pricing. If you have a corporation that owns a company in Canada and owns a company in the U.S., and they do business between those two corporations, say, one sells part of the product to the other one, at what price do you establish that? What price do you charge? Corporations will try to ensure that the profits go to the jurisdiction that has the lowest tax rate. That is I think a given. Anybody will tell you that, and it's not because they're trying to do something illegal. It's good business to do that.
If the tax rates are lower in the U.S. jurisdiction, there could be an incentive to keep the price low from Canada to the U.S., so when it's ultimately sold in the U.S., the profits are larger in the U.S. The Canadian tax experts have to look at that and ask whether the price being charged is a fair one. Often there will not be market comparators to deal with, because if you're an interrelated company, if you're selling wood to a paper company or widgets or components of widgets to the ultimate distributor, you may not have a market comparator for that. They have to really know the industry. They have to know all the transfer pricing roles, and not only will they be arguing, if you will, with the corporation, but they will be arguing in that case with the U.S. tax authorities as well.
It becomes very complex and requires a lot of economists. That was an issue we raised previously, that we didn't think they had enough economic expertise. They've brought on more economists to help them do this type of work, but you really need a very high level of expertise to deal with these costs.