At what point does a cross-border advisory setup become too complex to justify?

Looking for some perspective from people who deal with cross-border tax and residency structuring.

Over the past couple of years, I’ve been building a platform focused on investment migration (residency / citizenship programs), covering jurisdictions like United Arab Emirates, Portugal, Greece, and Caribbean programs such as Dominica.

The intent has always been compliance first working through local partners in each jurisdiction, aligning with legal pathways, and making sure clients understand that residency ≠ tax residency in many cases.

What I’ve found in practice is that the real complexity isn’t explaining programs, but:

Coordinating with local providers across jurisdictions

Navigating differences in tax residency rules

Managing client expectations around substance, reporting, and timelines

Ensuring everything stays within legal/compliance boundaries

At this point, I’ve built out a working setup:

Partner network across multiple countries

A structured inquiry/qualification flow

Consistent inbound interest from people exploring relocation options

But I’m trying to decide whether it makes sense to keep scaling something like this, given the operational and compliance overhead, or step back and let someone more deeply specialized in cross-border tax take it further.

For those working in this area:

How do you evaluate when a multi-jurisdiction setup becomes too complex to manage efficiently?

Do you prefer building these structures internally, or collaborating/plugging into existing networks?

Genuinely interested in how others approach this from a tax perspective.