topt

I think @ukrules posted a similar solution (for him) in one of the other threads.

Beat me to it and yes the specific article was discussed extensively at the time.......

I was more referring to your "discussion" with @NoDisplayName but good to see you multitasking your OECD comments.........

You have already been called out in another thread about your fixation on supposed OECD insistence on global taxation. Not sure why you keep banging on about it - even after you said you would stay quiet.........

No it is not evasion. It may be avoidance which is legal. I pay tax on some UK income but I also have offshore income on which, prior to Thailand's change last year, was completely untaxed.

This was discussed (argued.......555) at length in one or more of the original tax threads. From memory the supposed conclusion was that whichever method you decided on was acceptable as you would have to present it to the RD if it was ever queried. I seem to remember @JimGant being heavily involved in the discussion. Apologies if I have that wrong.

I think this is more the issue and there does not seem to be any will to try and control it. "Scams" are going to get potentially worse so that as you say you have no idea what is real or not.......

The discussion is about a proposal. It hasn't been ratified yet. Nothing has currently changed from the rules supposedly in place from 1/1/24.

Specifically Pitbulls? Doubtful as they have been banned in the UK for a few years now. XL Bully was recently added to the banned list as they are/were an issue but of course it does happen with other breeds as well.

This reminded me of a guy I saw yesterday at the lights on Third and Klang in Pattaya about 6.15pm. Big guy on a largish ADV bike with a large box on the back, Thai lady between him and the box. His bare right foot was hovering above the ground - I could not see his left. Unless you had a medical reason why would you drive a motorbike with no footwear........

I think it is a little more nuanced then that...... From Reuters re yesterday finish - https://www.reuters.com/business/us-stock-futures-muted-trumps-tax-bill-stokes-debt-concerns-2025-05-22/

Looks like he doesn't even have enough money for a pair of "thongs" - let alone a visa........

Good luck with that.....I think China hold rather a large amount of said securities........

Seems like I know them a little better than you........ Your original link and the article your thread is based on does not mention global or world wide taxation. It mentions "residence based"......but does not really define what income. Sounds like a soundbite specific for OECD pandering to me. I think I have already proved the incorrect inconsistency in the Examiner article so please don't try quoting that again. It may well be that Thailand moves to a global based system but that has not happened yet and is not specifically referred to by the government spokesperson for the potential new legislation being talked about.

Was really my point. Thread heading, even with the question mark, is totally confusing. Not the first time unfortunately with this poster.

Why do you continue to post inaccurate stuff about global tax? The statement made by an "anonymous source" is currently incorrect as almost anybody who has followed the tax discussions should know. Even later in the article it states - So the article contradicts itself., Both articles were discussed in several of the other threads before you decided to muddy the waters with your completely baseless headline.

And my comment was for both of you as mine is as he said. Get over yourself

Yes

That one is in Birmingham - according to the article...... Cricklewood is in North London............and used to be a bit of a ....hole. No idea what it is like now but seems a strange place for a foreign leader to visit.......

They reversed a directive that had been in place for 35 years so did not need to pass a new law. Now they are suggesting they will be reversing it back but the devil will be in the details. It is up to you to prove it if asked.

Agreed.

The statement you quoted from the Examiner is factually incorrect and a different quote to what was in the Bangkok post. Also the Examiner says this later in the piece - So no global taxation yet.

He is referring to extra benefits which may be due. These may be limited dependent on savings you have. The pension itself is not reduced. Not specifically linked to "pensions" in general. However if you can save 250k why do you need benefits........

The Massgrave site linked to in the Register article I posted earlier explains it all very clearly - https://massgrave.dev/windows10_eol

You do not specify what kind of policies you have looked at. I am not sure if World Nomads still offer but you used to be able to get long stay/backpacker (but decent limits) for from memory up to 18 months to start. There used to be a couple of other similar options. I had one years ago with World Wide Insurance before moving to Nomads but that was many years ago. In-patient costs in Thailand have rocketed in the last couple of years and major international health insurers have unfortunately been jacking their prices as a result.