pentagara

Who watches this stuff anyway? RT is the Russian government's public relations channel, fully funded by the state (and probably Gasprom). It's like watching AlJazeera reporting about Qatari politics, Fox about right-wing US politics, asking Biden about the effectiveness of Bidenomics while expecting unbiased information, or watching a Nestle ad to inform yourself about helathy food products ('eat candy, it's full of calcium and vitamins').

You're correct, the US does not take part in the data exchange / CRS scheme of the OECD since the US was able to get the same information on their own citizens via FATCA from foreign banks. The US was able to do this via coercion (either you foreign bank agree to FATCA reporting or we collect 30% of all your US dollar transactions as pentalty --> basically a non-compliant bank / financial intermediary would go bankrupt within a few hours then, since the 30% penalty is not on the bank's profit, but on the transaction amount of any US dollar transaction of any of their clients). This requirement of foreign banks to report bank account information (balances, dividends, interest, and employment income arriving in the account) to the IRS annually is also the reason why most international banks decided to get rid of US retail customers. The reporting effort is too high (i.e. more extensive compared to CRS), and the potential fines imposed by the US on the non-compliant banks are a real deterrant. The point of FATCA was that US citizens become unable to evade tax by keeping their money in foreing accounts ("I have a Swiss account to protect me from IRS payments..." --> That's mute since FATCA). FATCA is one way though (global countries --> to US IRS). It's not bi-directional. The US won't send any information to Thailand. Other countries couldn't coerce international banks to give them the bank information on their citizens this way, however, since their own currency is less relevant internationally (also goes for Euro countries). As a result, other countries agreed to hand out information only if they get information in return (i.e. information exchange). Example: The UK gets information on their residens from other countries' banks (e.g. Thailand, Switzerland, etc. --> Google for OECD CRS countries) and UK banks send information to these countries in return (e.g. Thailand, Switzerland, etc.) on these countries residents, as per UK law. In other words: The US is now a great tax haven for non-US citizens, much better than any of the previous tax havens, since they don't report anything to anyone abroad. The US basically is the new Switzerland.

UK taxes worldwide income if you're a tax resident of the UK. If they work in the middle east, they likely don't live in the UK more than 183 days per year, so they likely are not a UK tax resident. People who are not tax residents of the UK are not taxed in the UK on their global income. It doesn't matter if they are UK nationals. Nationality only matters in the US and Eritrea, because these two nations tax their nationals wherever they reside.

They do. Because they also get data from Thai banks in return. If you open a bank account in Thailand as a foreigner, banks now have to ask for your foreign tax number (TIN). Based on this they transfer your bank account information to your home country's tax authority (year end balance, interests, dividents, etc.).

Correct. The KYC forms also state that you have to declare any other foreign residencies to the bank if they exist and also inform the bank as soon as your tax residency status changes. If you stay in Thailand more than 180 days in a tax year nevertheless, i.e. become a tax resident, then you would simply be liable of tax evasion in Thailand (in case the rule discussed here actually goes into effect one day, it's not ineffect yet after all). If the tax authority then for some reason finds out, then you'd be on the hook to proof to them that you don't stay 180 days in the country and if you can't then you'd be fined on top of the tax. How could they find out? E.g. by someone telling them, or if they one day get the border crossing data once they introduce the electronic gates for non-Thai passport holders at the border as well. That's how it works in other counries, so Thailand likely would handle it the same way. Furthermore, banks are legally obliged to run checks based on indicators. This seems to be a bit more restrictive for US citizens/tax persons covered by FATCA than for the OECD CRS. Checks include bank account/card transaction data, phone numbers, and such.

Tax residence status and immigration residence status are not linked. You don't get immigration residency priviliges in a country just because you are obliged to pay tax in a specific country. If at all, it works the way round: You apply for a visa, the immigration department checks if you have paid tax or forwards the information to the revenue department that you have stayed in the country more than 180 days --> handled this way by some countries. The latter will become easier in the future: Once the passport stamping is replaced by the machines entering your border crossing in a database (like in the US, EU soon, Singapore, etc.), all the tax department needs is an extract of that database to check whether you are liable to report your global income. Since the machines work based on biometric data, the passport number is irrelevant by the way. Technology makes our lifes (and the lifes of governments) so much easier.

No need. The agency that ensures that Thailand gets the required information already exists and is called OECD. Thailand is just leverages that one, it joined the CRS scheme in 2023 with the first reporting conducted on financial information covering 2022. If they hadn't joined, they actually would have been bullied by the rich countries ('grey tax jurisdictions'), since the point is that the rich countries get information on all the global bank accounts and incomes of their tax residents. The associated hacking skill is called CRS, where banks / financial intermediaries automatically are legally required to report to the foreign tax authorities based on TIN. Thailand is simply leveraging this infrastructure created by other rich tax desperate countries. The concept was initiated by Obama (FATCA) to ensure US citizens can't escape paying tax on their foreign inome. The concept was then picked up in principle by all countries that are OECD members (CRS/AEOI).

Well, in this case, luckily you're not a person, but a platform corporation, since the 1 billion baht revenue (not income) number applies to those. My sympathy for corporations like airbnb, aliexpress, lazada, shopee, amazon and the like is indeed limited haha. In case you're an individual ('human'): The 1bn Baht limit doesn't apply to you. You would have to declare from 1 THB income if this change goes into effect and if you stay in Thailand more than 180 days. Then you'd have to pay tax as per tax code on this declared income. Yes, I feel sympathy.

It's extremely bad manners, since the consequence is that a high perentage of tables remain empty at the busiest times while people stand in line getting their food. This poor behaviour likely was imported from Singapore. There it's very common that during rush hours a third of tables are occupied by tissues and office badges and not by people eating. People who reserve the tables occupy the tables around 30% longer (first waiting in line and then when they eat), compared to people who don't block seats. So to to be able to seat the same number of people, an operator has only two options: - increase seating capacity by 30%, so there are enough empty tables to 'seat' all those tissue papers and office badges - outlaw this self-centered behaviour.

If collection by airlines, the only way is to add it to airport taxes and security fees that are part of the ticket. In this case, there is no differentiation if you're a tourist, permanent resident, work permit holder or a Thai citizen. Everyone with a airplane ticket will have to pay it. It would be a tax on the ticket with no differentiation. Technically it would be like the carbon tax charged by some countries, airport fees and security fees charged at all airports and such. Unless Thailand thinks it can change global airfare ticketing procesures and IT systems. It cannot be linked to nationality and visa status. Furthermore, it would not cover land crossings. The idea of giving everyone entering Thailand health insurance by paying 300 THB at entry is also ridiculously dangerous, since then people would have the right to go to a Thai hospital for free, covered by Thailand within the insurance limits. There's no way you could cover the costs for that with 300 THB. You'd need health checks, exclusions such as no payment in case of preexisting conditions and more. In other words: Thailand would make a substantial loss. That's why no country does it.

The US doesn't participate in CRS, they have enforced FATCA reporting globally instead.

Singapore today is in every way as multi-cultural as Thailand from a white person's perspective, just with more rules. As a foreigner, you are categorized in three buckets (citizen, permanent resident and other - the latter can be tourist or tax paying employee with visa) plus your race. The three buckets determine, which price you pay in anything that is public service or health care (3-tierd pricing in SG vs. 2-tierd pricing in Thailand). To become a permanent resident (or citizen) in Singapore you have to strengthen the ethnic status quo and cohesion of society. On your first visa application you state your race and you're categorized accordingly. Singapore is majority ethnic Han-Chinese, followed by Malay and Indian. Whites are a single digit percentage. Accordingly, if you want to become permanent resident nowadays as an employee on Employment Pass coming from Mainland China working eg. in one of the 'Singaporean', mainland Chinese founded tech companies (or also any other respected company), you'll easily get it after completing your first round of full year taxes about 1.5 years in. These days, as a white person, you won't get it even after living and working in Singapore for 10 years on an Employment Pass. Forget about ever being able to retire in Singapore, even if you buy property at the inflated 60% stamp duty you have to pay as someone who just works there, but is not considered a permanent resident. After ending your job, you are a tourist and are required to leave. You will never become a permanent resident or citizen in today's Singapore, unless you're a billionaire trying to evade US taxes. Then they do grant you citizenship, since that is the one and only exception (i.e. bringing lots of money to Singapore, in the 100m USD range and up). Mind you, things in Singapore have changed massively in this regard since the immigration wave of about 2009. It's one of the most xenophobic countries I've ever been to so far (as a white person, admittedly). It's also a very friendly country, as long as you know your place. You'll just never be part of it. Singapore in this sense is very, very Southeast Asian.

Yeah, that surprised me as well, but the index seems to be focused on power and not geography. The US is not a South American country either, but they have overthrown governments there and installed the dictators that were most favorable to their economic interests. So I guess few would debate that the US is among the most important South American powers. Considering the extensive permanent military presence of the US in Asia, the index doesn't seem to be fully off, I suppose.