Anon999

My spouse and I entered Thailand in Oct 2004 under his retirement visa. It appears that will be no tax on the money we brought in from overseas since our stay for 2004 is less than 180 days.

Would really appreciate if someone could tell me what we should do about our tax situation i.e. do we have to submit our Thai tax form (and declare no taxable income) in any event so that we can prove that we have cleared our taxes for 2004 when we apply to renew our retirement visa in Sept 2005?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My understanding is that you can bring money into Thailand from savings without paying tax. So bring in money on i.e. 1st January that is enough to live on until 1st January next year, hence no tax due as it is considered savings. However, if you bring money in once a month or twice a year it is considered to be from earnings and liable to Thai tax.

If you are from a country with a contra tax agreement (UK) then you pay no tax in either country if you just do the once a year trick.

Hope that helps.

Does anyone know of a decent hotel, fancy or not so fancy, in Maha Sarakham?

A workmate of mine from the US is going there on business and needs a hotel. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Suggest he tries Roi Et it is 25 miles (40km) from Maha Sarakham, however, unless he has a car it may be a it tricky getting to Maha Sarakham. There is the Roi Et City Hotel and the Phetcharat Garden Hotel 66 4351 9000 many farang stay there maybe because it is cheaper. If he wants to stay in Khon Kaen the Charoen Thani Princess 66 4322 0400 is fine and not expensive.

The hotels in Maha Sarakham can be found by looking at www.tourismthailand.org/province.php?id=50&region=northeast&gref=7

I will ask my gf today if she can recommend one, she lives in Roi Et. If so I'll post it.

Would it not have made sense to increase the price of premium gasoline at the same time to offset the remaining diesel subsidy.  Would have eliminated the balance of 150+ million baht of state funded subsidy, and made some motorists think twice about not using the subway/skytrain or the buses.

It would also make sense to keep the increases on premium gasoline until previous subsidies were recaptured.  This would not have ANY effect on the GDP.

It is ridiculous what people here pay for gasoline, and then complain about traffic congestion and pollution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With light crude trading at over US$57 a barrel, having reached US$57.45, because of worse than expected depleted stocks in the USA and the threat of a strike in Nigeria it does not look hopeful that the price will go down in the near future. Sixty US$ a barrel is a more likely scenario which could happen if there is a cold snap to increase demand.

This is not a short term problem as expanding economies like China and India are making massive extra demands on the supply of crude oil. Alternative energy sources are just not available and/or viable yet. So what is the solution? Someone has to come up with an answer before we all come to a grinding halt. Not to mention how much a litre will cost by then?

In the meantime the price of petrol will have to increase as it is the only way to get people to look at other travel options and reduce unnecessary journeys. If it gets more people onto public transport and results in less traffic and polution then the savings will be significant. However, in every country people become married to their cars and many I am sure would rather divorce their wife than stop using their car.

I think they are saying,  'Given the blurred legal parameters, something along these lines could easily happen to even a nice type of guy, and 'there but for the grace of God go I'.

The Thai law seems pretty unclear on what you can do at 16, 17, 18.....and even after 155 posts on this topic, I still don't know either.

Moog how can you equate a nice type of guy with being a sex tourist? As he is old enough to be her great grandfather and had been taking nud_e (pornographic) photo's of her and other children/minors it does not make sense. So I do not think 'they' are saying that.

From your comments do I take it you are 61?

In my book a 'nice type of guy' does not get caught in a hotel room naked, with a naked schoolgirl who had been in school uniform. Anyone who's into that is a pervert, if they just stick to adults then no problem. Sometimes young girls try to lead men on but in this case it seems not and if they do then give them a very wide berth.

But this arrest is on legal grounds. He's in custody and that is that. Justice will be done according to the law.

Moral/ethical debate is redundant here and opinions are fixed and nobody will be persuaded (so breath is being wasted).

If tourists want to take their chances with 16 year olds they do so at their own risk. In the past farangs have had a jolly good run on gamine Thai girls, - sometimes they have been knived. Its a jungle. You take the bad with the good.

Nobody here has the influence to change the Law in Thailand, whether fair or unfair.

The Moog your're absolutely right, however, it is the attitude that prevails which makes it sound as though it's OK to do this in Thailand because all the young girls are whores.

Why do these perverts come to Thailand? Because they believe it is easier to get away with it than on their own country. That maybe so but it does not mean that farangs should condone their activities. Unless of course you do not care about what Thais think about us? Tarred with the same brush, etc.

Respect is something that can only be earned and the sort of remarks made by some people do not help. Maybe the same people who complain about being treated as second class citizens. I wonder why???

Whether the Thais put their own house in order is not up to us. However, things can change if you show by example and do not condone the activities of sex tourists or for that matter any resident farangs who do the same thing.

It seems to me that this forum is populated by a large number of perverts who do not have of have had 16 year old daughters. Unless of course you are all happy for YOUR 16 year old daughter to have sex, paid or otherwise, with a 61 year old man with a record of sexual assault and weapons offences. From some of the posts it would appear that he would be welcome as a son-in-law.

Maybe someone can explain their own morals on this as it appears that you were dragged up with an amoral attitude.

Regardless of the law the real question is how many of you who are being blase about this will be looking for sex with sixteen year olds in school uniform when you are 61? Let's hope you all get locked up and have the key thrown away before then.

Furthermore you cannot assume she's a trollope bearing in mind he had already tried it on with her twice before he was arrested.

Just for the record I had a Thai wife for 16 years and have Thai relatives and friends in England and Thailand.

Sleazy Thailand blame the farang. 16 year old hoes are on every corner of Suk

She probably has a kid already with an upcountry cop.

You are totally out of order and it shows exactly how you think. The vast majority of Thai students are not whores but people like you are just what we all need like a hole in the head.

that's a little harsh. not one to be pedantic... unsure.gif but to refer to foot it would have to be pedi-, and not pedo-. also, the oxford dictionary recognises pedo- as US spelling of paedo-.

Looking in the Chambers dictionary it says 'pedo- see paedo. The only other words beginning 'pedo' are pedology which is the study of soils and pedometer for measuring distance walked.

As far as tricking boys into sex acts is concerned the clergy seem to have succeeded at it for centuries.

There's lots of talk about blame for the scale of the disaster but this is not the time for it.

All efforts now would be better directed at helping to solve the short term problems. No matter how little each individual is able to do.

After all the emotions have settled down and with proper examination of all the information that was availble beforehand then blame should be apportioned. The press, radio and TV will have more time to report it and those deemed responsible should be brought to account. Whoever it was, no matter. Just hit all of them with the full force of the law for mass murder.

Maybe someone who is on the spot could come up with some ideas on how to organise something on behalf of all the relatives and friends who have lost loved ones.

A concerted effort is much more effectrive than individual voices in the wilderness which is what may well happen if everyone is left to their own devices.

Haven't heared this since my father died (last year) and my colleges wanted to make him believe that.

First of all: no one has to die in pain of lung cancer.

Second: the study on passive smoking leading to lung cancer is as proved as inhaling CO2 would lead to a carcinoma.

I resign on this useless discussion...

Depends which type of lung cancer! The one my wife had does not respond to treatment and you have just 8 months to live after it exits the lungs. Then is spreads itself including into the throat so your intake of food is slowly reduced and then it becomes impossible to drink too.

Pain! Even on 24 hour drip there is pain.

You should try watching someone die slowly in front of your eyes.

It seems that smokers are just obnoxious. Even if a close family member contracts lung cancer from passive smoking, culminating in a very painful death, they still continue. Care about other peoples health? No chance. They make everyones clothes stink like a filthy ashtray to boot. I'm an ex-smoker but I've had more sense for a long time.

[/i]Sad to see someone is so bitter after 16 years. All the energy in the bitterness would be better focussed on the children.

Worse things have happened to some of us!