**Canada** is certainly *not* "too localized".  Nor would be the U.S., the U.K., Australia, etc.  Considering a country to be too localized for a Q&A site that talks about business and taxes and laws would be like Stack Overflow considering a programming language to be too localized and removing it from a question so it could be answered all in pseudo-code.

If the question is asked by a Canadian and pertains to him doing business in Canada, then let's provide the best answer in that context that we can.

There will be a variety of experts on board here — from all kinds of countries — and the most useful answers are those that don't gloss over **important details**.  Tax jurisdiction is certainly an important detail when discussing invoicing and what is acceptable documentation.

Does that mean there may be similar questions but each for a different country or tax jurisdiction?

**Yes** and **let's embrace it**.

We handle these issues just fine over at the [Personal Finance & Money Stack Exchange](http://money.stackexchange.com) using location tags (and simply mentioning where you are, right in a question) and I invite anybody who is concerned about location tagging to drop by for a friendly visit :-)  We've hashed out these issues over a few years and have a good grip on when a question needs a location tag specified, and when it doesn't.  We have questions for the [U.S.][1], [Canada][2], [U.K.][3], [Australia][4], [India][5] .. and plenty of questions where *location didn't matter*.

**Experts should ask for the location to be disclosed _ *when it matters substantively*** _, and the OP should oblige, or else the question may be closed as *not a real question*, since it is **too broad** and not answerable in the current form.

---
Also, have a look at Joel Spolsky's post at [The Wikipedia of Long Tail Programming Questions](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/01/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/) and Jeff Atwood's post [Dr. Strangedupe: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying And Love Duplication](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/dr-strangedupe-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-duplication/).  Quoting from that one:

> It’s far more common to have many subtle variations of a question. I
> think that’s OK, because that’s how the world works. Trying to
> shoehorn a bunch of semi-related things into one arbitrary container
> in service of some Highlander-ish “there can be only one” rule is
> ultimately harmful. Remember: while there are aspects of wiki to our
> system, we are not Wikipedia. There is not one canonical question
> about every possible subject. Rather, there are many.

... much of that applies to the situation we're discussing here.

  [1]: https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/united-states
  [2]: https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/canada
  [3]: https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/united-kingdom
  [4]: https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/australia
  [5]: https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/india