TigerandDog

Firstly the IO was WRONG with her interpretation of the rule. Secondly see Dr Jack's post with a copy of the actual rules hereunder: Please note it clearly says FILING date NOT extension date Thirdly you can post an admission to all in this forum for posting incorrect/misleading information based on an IO's wrong interpretation of the rules and stating they are correct.

not correct Tod. Dr Jack gave the correct information.

CM are now requiring 12 months bank statements in addition to the usual passbook copies.

Hogan is just as big a pathological liar as the orange turd, and also a convicted felon. I guess he'll run with the MAGA Republicans

Bob, finally a comment from you that makes sense.

What country in farangland? In Australia once a couple, whether married or de-facto, have been together for 1 year or longer the lady is entitled to 50% of whatever her partner owns, viz house, money etc. I guess it all depends on the particular faranglands laws about separations after a long term de-facto relationship. The farang concerned should be making sure of the law with regards to de-facto relationships and in his country how that will impact him financially after the separation.

There's no dairy industry in Thailand, like in the west. Pretty much all the milk is imported, hence the prices. Australia has a strong dairy industry and the average price there is AUD $2.40 (59.2 baht) per litre. So your 2 litre bottle would cost around 118 baht (AUD $4.80) but its actually cheaper than that in Thailand. We buy our milk in the 5 litre bottles for average price of 237 baht (AUD$9.59 - AUD $1.92 per litre), which equates to 47.4 baht per litre. Not that expensive really.

I also do online 90 reports and after my new passport was issued my online 90 day report was rejected. Went in person, as per the reason for rejection, and was told that the first 90 day report after transferring the stamps to my new passport must be in person. After that online is ok again.

Thailand age of consent for males & females is 15. So no statutory rape involved.

I have to do the same at CM every extension and I find the IO's are more pleasant when they see you've been here for quite a while and that it's not your first or second extension they tend not to come up with all the ridiculous extras they sometimes ask for. This year the IO (female) that checked my paperwork saw all the extension copies and said "wow you've been here a long time". Instead of giving me a queue number she just told me to go inside and wait for my name to be called. She took the paperwork to the IO issuing the extensions, 20 minutes later called for the photo and then waited to receive my passport back form another friendly IO who said see you again next year. Can't complain about that kind of service.

not correct. It's a deduction that can be claimed against your total assessable income. You have the option of either reducing your assessable income by 50% of your employment related expenses up to a maximum of 100k OR you claim your employment related expenses. You cannot claim both. This deduction has nothing to do with the tax free threshold, it just reduces the amount your tax is calculated against. e.g. Your income for the year is 240k. You claim the 100k employment expenses as a deduction. Your tax is then calculated against the balance of 140k. As the 140k falls below the tax free threshold of 150k, no tax would be payable.

Just shows you know nothing about how a real democracy works. The ONLY reason the UK, Canada & other countries (e.g Australia & New Zealand) don't use a simple majority is because the citizens are NOT voting for an individual to be the leader of their country. They vote for members of a political party in their respective electorates (that part the yanks get right) and the party that wins the majority of seats, either in their own rite or by forming a coalition, which the yanks also get right when it comes to the House and Senate, in the lower house of their parliament becomes the govt and the leader of the party (who must be an elected politician, not an individual who hasn't been elected to the parliament by his constituents) becomes the Prime Minister and leads the country. The US electoral system needs to change how the President is elected by having presidential candidates stand for election in their own electorates and their respective party chooses the party leader from among it's elected members and the party with the majority in the House their party leader is automatically the President until either the party decides to change leader or the next election.

apparently there's are 2 states (Maine & Vermont) where a felon can still vote. So those 2 states are out of step with the rest of the country. As I said it's a stupid electoral system, in fact it's not even a true democracy. How can it be, when the candidate that wins the popular vote (the will of the people) gets shafted by the ridiculous electoral college BS.

This is just another example of the ludicrous electoral system in the USA. Convicted felons cannot vote yet they can run for president. How f'ing dumb is the American electoral system.

more selective editing to support your comment. You need to read the ENTIRE article particularly this section - ""Matthew's temper has always been an issue," one neighbour said on the condition of anonymity" So as I stated and you selectively omitted again, it wasn't just the security guards who were aware of his temper, the neighbours were too.