pentagara

Just now, Everyman said:

 

Ain’t going to happen. Countries like the US aren’t going to hand over massive amounts of intelligence on their own citizens to any tin pot foreign regime that asks for it.

 

Imagine China searching such a database for patterns consistent with foreign spying, or using it to dig up dirt on presidentially candidates and leaking it to the press.

 

Even in the U.S the government couldn’t get Trump’s financial records without a subpoena. 

 

This had gone far enough into paranoia land. You all need to take some Xanax, have a Chang in your favorite lady bar and forget about this for a couple years so you can see that nothing will happen. If it makes you feel better, pick a lady bar in Angeles city so you don’t spend more than 180 days in a year in Thailand. 

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.

2 minutes ago, BritScot said:

I think you are wrong about the UK! I have friends who work in the middle East who do not pay tax uk or otherwise, tax free income. Unless you mean living in the uk and earning money from outwith the uk, no one is checking Unless your prominent and do your own tax returns. 

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.).

8 minutes ago, ujayujay said:

No country in the world will share the income of its citizens in their own country with the Thai government.....baaaaah   

1 minute ago, gearbox said:

AFAIK the Australian banks will provide the CRS data only if the customer declares another tax residency in the KYC forms. I never declared any foreign country tax residency....and how would I know if I'm a tax resident if it is still 6th of June? I may decide tomorrow that I'm going somewhere else until the end of the year.

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.

20 minutes ago, jonclark said:

So I guess that means all of the foreigners who are currently classed as 'guests' can now claim residency. I am surprised that the ultra-nationalists have not put the brakes on the whole idea of using the words foreigner and resident in the same sentence...

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.

7 minutes ago, sabaijai said:

I wonder how the Thai government intends to track income an individual earns but does not remit to Thailand. They'll have to establish a whole new gov't department with a staff of thousands skilled in espionage and hacking.

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).

1 minute ago, Chongalulu said:

So it's an "I'm alright Jack” from you. No sympathy for us 1 billion baht per year paupers? Selfish! 😡 

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.

23 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

One of the reasons it didn't happen before was because the airlines said no.

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.

39 minutes ago, mokwit said:

Common Reporting Standard.

 

The Common Reporting Standard (CRS), developed in response to the G20 request and approved by the OECD Council on 15 July 2014, calls on jurisdictions to obtain information from their financial institutions and automatically exchange that information with other jurisdictions on an annual basis.

 

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=Common+Reporting+standard

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

48 minutes ago, SportRider said:

Agreed.  Thailand is not as multicultural or as welcoming in the way that places like Singapore are, for example, where I had PR.

 

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.

36 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I was totally unaware the US was in Asia. I must brush up on my geography. 

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.

2 hours ago, DrPhibes said:

Wait, wait, wait,

 

Can the Governor override the government?  The government edict opening on Sept 1st does not allow schools to open up in deep red zones, not on the list of what can open.  What's going on here?

 

My son is in his 1st year of college at KMUTT and has been online at home here in Chiang Mai since no idiot would open a deep red zone to schooling without vaccinations and some advance notice.  Now we have to get him to BKK ASAP?  Gotta call the school.

KMUTT is considered a university and not a school with school children. The rules on online classes are up to the university and most likely will be unchanged.

The governor did not overrule the national government. Based on the regulation published in the royal gazette (which is what makes something a law - and that's what counts, not any news reports or interviews), the national government left the rules for restaurants and schools up to the governors to decide.

7 hours ago, misterphil said:

I am waiting to return to Thailand when its no quarantine for fully vaxed people. Just like most of the worlds policy. 

There's barely any country that offers no quarantine for fully vaxed. Israel reintoduced quarantine, the US doesn't allow any non-resident entries from many countries including all of Europe, vaccinated or not. European countries let in some non-residents that are vaccinated, but whether it's quarantine free depends on the country you go to and where you're from. Bad luck if you're in Thailand and want to go to the UK for example. In Asia, good luck entering anywhere, be it with or without quarantine or vaccination.

3 hours ago, cclub75 said:

 

At least, we have a "timeline"... 2 weeks per 2 weeks. ???? It helps.

 

The main problem is : even with 70 or 80 % of the population fully vaccinated... the virus could still be there.

 

Look at Israel (or Malta, or UAE etc.)

 

Massive (and early) vaccination program (started december 19) with Pfizer.

 

 

 

The idea that "vaccine = end of the problem = going back to normal" is deeply flawed.

 

Confronted to thoses facts (the vaccine do not prevent transmission and contamination, the herd immunity with a virus that mutates/recombines a lot and that has animal reservoirs is a fiction) countries start to think "differently" like Iceland or the UK... The virus will always be there, it's okay.

 

But I'm very concerned about Thailand... i'm not sure they can think out of the box... The "zero Covid" ideology is very strong in Asia and South-East Asia.

 

Add to this... the tense political situation (factorized by the economic and social situation)...

 

That's not a good cocktail recipe...

There's no country that I am aware of that lifted restrictions successfully (i.e. no major increase in hospitalizations or deaths) without having the vast majority of the population fully vaccinated (>>70% of adults, two jabs). This includes Iceland, UK and Israel. Thailand either has to do a major lockdown with systematic contact tracing and testing, or muddle through until >50% of the full population are double vaccinated +2 weeks. That's the threshold that's been observed with other countries. Below 50% double vaccinated, there was no major impact.

2 hours ago, Scheduler said:

I believe the current Delta surge in America is an example of how quickly unvaccinated people are contracting the Delta variant.  I believe, based on the predominant types of vaccines being applied, we are in for a very rough and dangerous ride.

 

unvaccinated and vaccinated, since vaccinated people that are infected with delta will spread it as well, they just won't feel they are sick themselves

12 hours ago, XJPSX said:

We are currently living the largest ever clinical trial of drugs that have not had long term effects determined. In this case humans are the lab rats.

So what do you call a 'natural' infection with the virus and studying its impact on a subject? Is that a non-lab rat experiment? In that case I'd rather be the lab rat, where I get a muzzled virus or a replica to train on first. It's good to have volunteers for natural infections though, from a scientific perspective.

Yes, the used test kits are highly infectious, especially if the test result is "negative". Reason: They are "covid" tests. So it's great to know that the guidelines will have a similar impact as the guidelines for the disposal of face masks.

1 hour ago, roobaa01 said:

@ubonjoe i was also passed the 14 days time after the second vaccination jab plus a pcr test 72 hours prior to arrival with an immunity rate 95 % . Whereas thais mostly jabbed with sinovac rating 51 %.

 

CHEER

ROOBAA01

 

To change Thai immigration rules, you would need to convince the politicians and government officials responsible for them. Members of this forum cannot change Thai regulation.

Irrespective, just with regards to the stated numbers: Efficacy of Pfizer against delta is somewhere around 60-70% based on Israel data. So there's a 30-40% chance you're a spreader and infect unvaccinated people if you've been exposed to delta, with the likelihood increasing with your age. So you're a problem as long as Thai are not vaccinated themselves.

The main benefit of Thailand is actually that they let you in at all as a non-resident. The US and most other countries don't, whatever one's vaccine documents say. In the US it's even difficult to reenter if you are a foreigner and have a US work permit. Vaccine status is completely irrelevant for them.

13 minutes ago, Robs5ct said:

Maybe she just thinks she's covered ?

I guess she will not get any money from Emirates and I think there's no insurance covering a quarantine for free or small money.

 

 

Some US insurers seem to cover unexpected quarantine (Crum & Forster Safe Travels International Coat Saver) also for Non-Residents. Getting insurance from a third country might be have unexpected complications though. The Thai embassy might not to accept it.

The policy wording does not require a positive Covid test for quarantine coverage though:

https://www.insubuy.com/covid19-travel-insurance-with-quarantine-coverage/

"“Quarantine” means Your strict isolation imposed by a Government authority or Physician to prevent the  
spread of disease. "

Plus the price is a fraction of the Thai insurances.

Anyone else know an insurance that would make sense for the sandbox?

5 minutes ago, Robs5ct said:

As far as I understand Emirates "Multi-risk insurance" they just pay - like all other insurances - only if you are detected positive. If you go to quarantine without being tested positive you pay by yourself.

 

Based on the (full) article on Phuket News they do:

"I was lucky to be flying with Emirates which includes such an insurance, but not everyone is coming with this airline."

Unfortunately I can't use Emirates, they don't fly to Phuket from my location.

Axa confirmed to me by email, that their rather expensive AXA Sawasdee insurance does not cover involuntary quarantine for the Phuket sandbox. This is in contrast to the free insurance provided by Emirates to passengers for example.

So if Thai authorities put you in ALQ since you were sitting too close to a positive case on the plane in their opinion, AXA pays nothing. All costs are to be paid by yourself.

You might as well get a cheap insurance instead. Most (much, much cheaper) insurers from one's home country wouldn't cover this unexpected Thai quarantine either, since there is no medical justification. I naively thought, reputable insurance companies in Thailand for tourists cover this very Thai risk. AXA Thailand doesn't.

The cheaper ones from the Thai insurance aassociation probably don't cover this either, but at least they're only about half the cost of the AXA Covid insurance:

https://covid19.tgia.org/

So the AXA insurance is way more expensive, but just as useless for the sandbox.

Does anyone know if there are insurers other than Emirates that cover Thai quarantine risk for the sandbox?

Note: See also

Just now, smedly said:

no it doesn't 

 

sorry but your whole post is based on ..............................mostly "your opinion" without any hard facts or studies for most of it

 

It really is just an opinion piece which of course you are fully entitled to have - but lets be clear about what it is.

fully agreed, there's a lack of data.