medication

A proposal to tax remittances sent by individuals without Social Security numbers has passed the House and is now before the Senate. At 3.5%, the levy was initially expected to raise $26 billion over the next decade.

Changes made by the Senate on Saturday greatly narrowed the scope, so the tax would be 1%, and the yield only $10 billion over the next decade. However, the goals have remained the same: deter undocumented migration and recoup funds from those working outside legal status who send money to their families back home.

It might seem like easy money to tax migrants, but that doesn’t make it smart policy. The proposed tax risks undermining both financial transparency and national security. The policy would push billions of dollars into unregulated channels such as cryptocurrency exchanges, make law enforcement’s job harder and ultimately hurt the very communities the United States seeks to stabilize abroad for geopolitical reasons.

The U.S. is the world’s largest source of remittances, and Mexico has the highest dependency on them; 97% of the money Mexican expats send back home comes from the States ($64.75 billion in 2024). A 1% tax on remittances to Mexico alone could take much-needed funds away from migrants and their families and divert it to the state. While this might sound like a straightforward revenue win, the real-world impacts are more complicated and the slippery slope of allowing for remittance tax can have unintended negative consequences for everyone.

First, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has already condemned the measure and said the government will “mobilize” against it. Other countries across Latin America and Southeast Asia, where remittances account for as much as 25% of GDP, are sounding alarms. The U.S. has long relied on economic diplomacy to build goodwill, and taxing remittances could erode that, making it harder to partner on border security, anti-trafficking efforts and the war on drugs.

Next, taxing formal transfers doesn’t stop people from sending money home, it just changes how they send it. And often, the next-best option is far worse. In states like Oklahoma, even modest fees led to a surge in informal money transfers. Similarly, the proposed federal tax, which some lawmakers have said should be up to 15%, is going to push migrants to remit through alternative systems including Chinese- or Russian-owned fintech companies, crypto platforms and cash-based means that operate outside the formal financial system. These underground methods are notoriously difficult to monitor and are exploited for money laundering, organized crime and terrorism financing. While most migrants are simply trying to support their families, moving funds through black market systems exposes them to the risk of being unknowingly entangled in illicit activity.

Federal agencies and academic experts have long cautioned that informal remittance systems complicate efforts to track illicit financial flows. When remittances are pushed out of the formal system, it becomes significantly harder to enforce safeguards designed to prevent money from being diverted to criminal or extremist actors. A federal remittance tax risks accelerating this shift underground, weakening oversight and inadvertently expanding a shadow market where the lines between legitimate and illegitimate transfers are increasingly blurred.

Meanwhile, enforcing such a policy brings its own set of problems. To begin, it outsources immigration enforcement to banks and wire services. A clerk at Western Union could soon be legislated to ask whether a sender has a Social Security number, flag suspicious transfers and carry out new compliance systems. These are all new responsibilities that might lead to an increase of transfer fees, which in the U.S. are already around 6%, increasing the burden on senders. Thus, the tax is a costly and complex undertaking — one that will affect legal residents and U.S. citizens, who even though not subject to the federal tax would still be paying the higher fees to subsidize companies’ compliance.

None of this excuses illegal migration. The U.S. has a right and responsibility to enforce its laws and protect its borders. But not every enforcement tool is effective, and they all deserve scrutiny.

Take the hypothetical example of a grandmother living in Arroyo Seco, Mexico, where one in four households receives U.S. remittances and remittance flows supersede the annual municipal budget. Her son, an undocumented migrant in the U.S., sends $400 a month to help with rent, medication and her grandchildren’s basic needs. An almost 10% levy (combining the proposed tax and transfer fees) would claw back $40 monthly, enough to force her to skip medication for herself or meals for the children. Multiply this story by millions, and you begin to see that this kind of economic destabilization doesn’t just erode household resilience but also weakens entire communities, fuels migration pressures and creates openings for criminal networks and authoritarian states to exploit financial desperation.

Taxing remittances won’t reduce undocumented migration but could fuel more. And it will drive flows underground, forcing families to rely on riskier and less accountable financial channels — such as unlicensed money transmitters operating through apps like WeChat Pay, which lack consumer protections and operate under opaque governance frameworks tied to foreign state interests. It will also burden and disincentivize the very institutions that make lawful transactions possible.

While the remittance tax might score political points, the long-term risk as well as geopolitical and institutional damages might not be worth the $10 billion.

Yvonne Su is the director of the Centre for Refugee Studies and an assistant professor of equity studies at York University in Toronto.

Millions of Brits are preparing for summer holidays but a leading pharmacist is warning that some everyday UK prescriptions could be banned overseas

As the UK anticipates the summer holiday season, a leading pharmacist has issued a crucial warning to those planning to travel with medicines. Peter Thnoia of PillTime urges holidaymakers to think ahead or face potential complications due to stringent drug regulations in various destinations.

Highlighting that common UK prescriptions could be prohibited abroad, Peter is alerting travellers about the danger of leaving medication arrangements to the last minute. With school holidays approaching, he stresses the necessity for people to order their medications no less than a fortnight prior to departure.

Peter also underscores the significance of carrying appropriate documents for your medication to avoid the inconvenience of confiscation at the airport. He prompts tourists to research the specific pharmaceutical laws of their destination, particularly as certain meds like Co-codamol may be restricted in some countries, reports the Liverpool Echo.

Peter urges people going abroad to process their prescription orders at least two weeks before their holidays and alert their GP of any unusual early requests. “We’d always recommend people put in their prescription requests around two weeks before, but if you’re ordering earlier than normal, your GP might flag or reject the request,” Peter advises.

“If that’s the case, then you need to contact your GP in good time, explaining your holiday, so they can approve the request.” With over a quarter-century of experience in the pharmacy sector, Peter highlights that many people leave prescriptions until the last minute, causing unnecessary stress before a trip.

“Pharmacies are accustomed to busy periods, but late requests add pressure for everyone,” he said. “Ordering well in advance helps us deliver your medication without any hitches – and gives you peace of mind as your holiday draws near.”

However, it’s not just about timely ordering. Peter also advises travellers on the correct way to carry medication to avoid complications at security or border control.

“Always keep your medication in your hand luggage, in its original packaging with the prescription label intact,” he says. “Security staff may need to verify it, particularly if it’s liquid or regulated,” he added. “If you’re unsure, ask your doctor or pharmacist for a supporting letter. This can be particularly useful when travelling with larger quantities.”

When going abroad with medication, it is essential to confirm that you can transport it legally and safely. Always keep your medication in its original packaging, complete with the prescription label, and include a doctor’s letter if necessary. Make sure to pack your medication in your hand luggage for easy access and to reduce the chances of loss or damage. Review the regulations of the airline and the destination country, particularly concerning controlled substances and liquids exceeding 100ml.

What medication could cause issues?

As the six-week holiday period approaches, Peter shares a simple tip to ensure your holiday goes ‘without a hitch’. He says: “Know the rules of the country you’re travelling to, because you’d be surprised how many everyday tablets are banned or regulated abroad.”

He went on to say: “For example, Co-codamol is available over the counter and in supermarkets here in the UK. But in Greece, the codeine element is treated as a controlled drug – so you can only bring it into the country with a prescription and a doctor’s note.”

Open Prescribing data reveals that more than 3.5 million prescriptions for Co-codamol have been issued in the first quarter of this year (January-March 2025). While lower strengths of Co-codamol can be purchased without a prescription in the UK, higher doses necessitate one.

This implies that millions of Brits who depend on this medication for pain relief could potentially run afoul of foreign laws if they take their medication abroad. Some countries have restrictions or outright bans on drugs like codeine, tramadol, and loperamide.

• Japan: Has intricate regulations concerning prescription and over-the-counter drugs. Some widely used allergy and cold treatments, including those with pseudoephedrine, are either prohibited or necessitate special authorisation. Attempting to bring in banned drugs may lead to arrest.
• Indonesia: Prohibits medications that contain codeine and tramadol.
• Qatar: Certain over-the-counter cold treatments require a prescription.
• India, Pakistan, Turkey: Maintain stringent lists of banned medications, and travellers are advised to consult their respective embassies prior to carrying any drugs.
• United Arab Emirates: Enforces strict regulations on numerous prescription medications, including those with codeine, tramadol, and specific anxiety drugs.

Certain countries also enforce stringent regulations on medications containing pseudoephedrine and other components commonly found in cold and allergy remedies. Pseudoephedrine, a key ingredient in decongestants such as Sudafed, is often regulated due to concerns about its potential misuse in the illegal production of substances, particularly methamphetamine.

What should you do?

Peter recommends: “If you’re unsure whether your medication is restricted in the country you’re travelling to, then check the official embassy website for your destination. It will explain exactly what you can and cannot bring into the country. It’s always best to be safe and check before you travel so that you have all the essential medication you need to make sure your holiday is as enjoyable as possible.”

Do consult with your GP regarding any trips abroad and the medicines you’ll need to bring along. Your doctor can provide a letter explaining why certain medications are necessary and may offer alternative solutions if needed.

Always carry medications in their original containers with labels visible. It’s also wise to request any permits or certificates in good time before setting off. Be prepared for inspections at customs by declaring any medication, which might mean enduring some delays.

WEIGHT loss jabs could prevent a medication taken by millions of women from working – and increase patients’ risk of cancer.

The British Menopause Society said the jabs could cause hormone imbalance in women taking hormone replacement therapy (HRT), particularly for those with obesity, putting them “at increased risk of womb cancer”.

1

It follows warnings to women on weight loss medications to take effective contraception, as the jabs could render the pill less effective.

That’s because weight loss drugs Wegovy and Mounjaro – as well as diabetes jab Ozempic – can delay the absorption of pills taken orally, as well slowing down the passage of food through the gut.

Guidance suggests women taking HRT in pill form may also be at risk.

The British Menopause Society (BMS) told doctors to closely monitor menopausal women on HRT who are also using weight-loss jabs.

The treatment tops up the hormones oestrogen and progesterone, which dip to low levels as the menopause approaches.

Data from 2023-24 showed that 2.6 million women in England rely on the drugs to alleviate hot flushes, night sweats, difficulty sleeping and mood changes.

“During the last two years, since semaglutide and tirzepatide [the active ingredients in Wegovy and Mounjaro] received licenses for weight loss, there has been an increase in uptake of these medications through private clinics, while NHS prescribing is limited to specialist weight management services,” the BMS guidance stated.

“There are no current data available about numbers of women receiving HRT concurrently with semaglutide or tirzepatide.”

The most common form of HRT is a progesterone pill alongside a skin patch or gel to deliver oestrogen, but some people opt for a combined pill.

Progesterone balances out the effects of oestrogen, which on its own stimulates the growth of the womb lining, and can cause “abnormal cells and cancer” to grow.

The menopause experts expressed concern over the loss of the progesterone’s protective effect on the womb as a result of weight loss jabs.

They recommended that doctors move women taking progesterone orally to an intrauterine device, such as a Mirena coil, or increase their dose of progesterone.

Prof Annice Mukherjee, a consultant endocrinologist and member of the society’s medical advisory council, who led on the guidance, told The Telegraph that a hormone imbalance could put women “at increased risk of womb cancer” – particularly if they are obese.

“Oestrogen is almost always given through the skin for HRT in women living with obesity, but progesterone is frequently given as a tablet, and that formulation is thought to be the safest route for women who have complicated health issues,” she said.

“If we then start one of these injectable weight-loss drugs, then you’re preferentially stopping absorption of the progestogen that’s coming in orally, but you’re allowing plenty of the oestrogen through the skin.

“The rules are very clear that if you give a very high dose of oestrogen and you don’t give enough progesterone, however that happens, you’re putting that woman at risk of womb cancer,” she said.

Prof Mukherjee said there was currently a “culture of putting women on very high doses of oestrogen”, which can make the womb lining thicken.

“It’s like having a lawn in a woman’s womb. Oestrogen makes the lawn grow. Progestogen cuts the lawn. But if it’s not being cut, it grows thicker, and then you can get abnormal cells and cancer.”

But she also stressed that the biggest risk factor for womb cancer was obesity – meaning that on the whole, weight loss jabs can cut the risk of disease.

“These drugs reduce the risk of cancer,” Prof Mukherjee said.

“But if they are prescribed to a woman who’s on oestrogen through the skin, and she might already have womb thickening because she’s living with obesity, and she’s not absorbing the progesterone because she’s been put on a weight-loss injection, she’s potentially getting loads of oestrogen on top of her thickened womb lining, and that could potentially unmask cancers that are there or drive an early cancer to a more advanced stage.”

The BMS put together the guidelines after calls from GPs for advice to give to patients.

Dr Janet Barter, the president of the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, told The Telegraph that weight loss jabs can cause side effects such as “vomiting and severe diarrhoea in some patients”.

“Obviously this could render any medication, such as HRT tablets or oral contraception, ineffective if there hasn’t been enough time for them to be fully absorbed,” she said.

“If these side-effects are occurring, then people should discuss the matter with their doctor or specialist clinician to find the combination of drugs that’s right for them.”

Sun Health has contacted Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly – the makers of Wegovy and Mounjaro – for comment.

It follows warnings from the Medicines and Healthcare products Agency (MHRA) that GLP-1 weight loss drugs could reduce the absorption of contraceptives, due to the fact they slow down the emptying of the stomach.

The watchdog also said the jabs should not be used during pregnancy, while trying to conceive or breastfeeding, over fears they could lead to miscarriage or birth defects.

The MHRA explained: “This is because there is not enough safety data to know whether taking the medicine could cause harm to the baby.”

Dr Bassel Wattar, a consultant gynaecologist and medical director of clinical trials at Anglia Ruskin University, told The Sun: “It’s not the medication itself, but the weight loss that helps regulate a woman’s hormones allowing her ovaries to function properly again.

“Pregnancy is more of a happy side effect.”