BKKBike09

The Thai RD does not require tax to be collected on foreign earnings brought into Thailand, as long as the remittances happen in a subsequent tax year to that in which the funds were earned. How do they know in what year a particular remittance was earned? Unless a transfer specifically comes from an employer each month for roughly the same amount then it is very hard to know and they don't care [on basis, I suspect, that it's all money flowing into the local economy].

20-100 baht depending. When you look at it in terms of 50p-£2.50 [replace with your preferred currency] it's not exactly going to break the bank is it? If you get good service in a restaurant, give the tip directly to the waiter/waitress who served you. Then they can pocket it. Leave it on the table or in the bill folder and the restaurant gets it.

What's the betting that the 'double vaxxed' requirement will be changed at the eleventh hour to double vaxxed with last shot no more than 6 months before date of entry ... if longer, then antibody titre test also required!

Finally! The quicker this is the standard for all M-Pass lanes, the better. Barriers on auto gates are pointless and cause massive queues at busy times when a car gets stuck for whatever reason.

Also make sure that the name of the owner on the chanote matches the name of the person selling. Sometimes Person A sells to Person B, but Person B doesn't want to pay the transfer fees so takes the chanote but doesn't register the transfer. You have to pay whoever is listed on the chanote even if there's a sale and purchase contract between Person A and Person B showing that A has paid B in full for the land on X date. What Land Office? If Phuket or Samui, be particularly wary because of issues with non-development zone land illegally used for building and re-titled with "assistance" from the local Land Office. There's a good online system for looking up chanote on Land Dept web site: if you have the title number etc you can search for the plot. https://landsmaps.dol.go.th/

Indeed. You should expand that sentence though to read: "It can be nerve wracking without the adequate approach / attitude, and are not employed by your own company". Those of use who are fortunate enough to have PR and own or control the company for which we work have it easy. No yearly visa hassles and no fear of unwanted unemployment. I truly feel for the many applicants who face years of being wedded to a job/employer they hate, yet trapped because of the need for a continuous WP / tax returns etc.

You may not.

It's been 25 years since I last visited Phu Thok. Magical place. It's definitely worth getting there early in the morning before the heat of the day makes the climb up more of an effort. The first time I went, 30 years ago, there was no restriction on access. I didn't get there till late afternoon (via public transport from Nong Khai, which was a real slog) but it meant I got the benefit of seeing the sunset from the temple. Couldn't go down because there was nowhere to stay and no transport, so the monks put me up for the night. Woke up to the sound of gibbons at 4 am. When I went back in the mid 90s there was a gate for access at the start of the trail up: it was only opened between certain times and locked at night. No idea if that's the case and it was a long time ago. Phu Thok is absolutely worth visiting for the stellar views from the walkways on the upper levels, but maybe there are Covid restrictions in place at the moment and it's shut to visitors? The waterfall (Jed See) didn't have much water in it when I went (dry season) but looks like it should be good at the moment.

You may well be right. Under UK Tax Law, 'residence' and 'domicile' are distinct i.e. one can be Non-Resident for tax purposes but still be regarded as having domicile by virtue of ties such as property ownership, bank accounts etc, which becomes relevant in certain tax situations (such as inheritance by a non-domiciled spouse). The original Thai clause says: ไปอยู่ในต่ำงประเทศโดยไม่มีภูมิลำเนำในประเทศไทยเป็นเวลำเกินห้ำปี The Thai Revenue Department has a guidance leaflet about residence which, at its simplest, defines it simply as having your name in a household registration: ภูมิลําเนาก็คือ การมีชื่ออยู่ในทะเบียนบ้านนั่นเอง i should think that, in practice, this clause wouldn't ever get used. Making use of foreign passport would be much easier to prove if the authorities really wanted to make a problem. Links below to Thai version of Nationality Act 2008 and the RD Residence Guidance. I was looking at the Thai version on the Council of State web site - https://www.krisdika.go.th/home - but the specific link won't paste into here; the Prachuab one below is fine though) http://www.prachuapkhirikhan.go.th/_2018/files/com_rules/2020-05_cc948a135159863.pdf http://webinter.rd.go.th/region1/fileadmin/pdf/336-55.pdf

The first part of my post on Page 1 of this thread, with the relevant sentence now highlighted: "What's your friend waiting for? Forget any proactive police action (won't happen). Your friend needs to demand the police call the dog owner to come to the police station to sort out the problem. Your friend at the minimum needs to get something on record showing the owner of the dog admitting that he/she owns the dog and that his/her dog attacked your friend. Then if no compensation is forthcoming, your friend can make a fuss on social media and not be accused of defamation (or not so easily)." No-one gives a rat's a55 about a "dog bites man" story without details of who owns the dog etc. Have you got those details? A photo of the dog inside the compound of the house where it is kept doesn't prove anything unless you have a photo or video of that dog actually attacking your friend. Knowing how people are these days with their phone obsessions, however I won't be surprised to hear that the witness thoughtfully videoed your friend being savaged by a pitbull before helping him (a video would make better news as well) ... If your friend can't PROVE exactly which dog attacked him, he should think carefully before saying "it was this one".

What's your friend waiting for? Forget any proactive police action (won't happen). Your friend needs to demand the police call the dog owner to come to the police station to sort out the problem. Your friend at the minimum needs to get something on record showing the owner of the dog admitting that he/she owns the dog and that his/her dog attacked your friend. Then if no compensation is forthcoming, your friend can make a fuss on social media and not be accused of defamation (or not so easily). A neighbour of mine had a vicious mutt that used to get out of the compound and chase and bite people. No-one did anything about it. One day it bit a motorcycle delivery guy. Owner said to the guy "not my fault; you shouldn't have upset my dog". Two days later dog had been fed poisoned food and that was the end of it ... That's generally how locals deal with vicious dogs. I imagine they probably also check for CCTV before doing anything incriminating though.

Exactly that. One should never forget that many laws in Thailand are loosely or poorly drafted (often intentionally) and leave many matters "or as may be decided by the competent official / the Minister etc etc". This, in turn, makes it very hard to second-guess how any particular case or set of circumstances may be pursued by the authorities.

Indeed intentions can change (qv Prince Charles having 'no intention' to marry CPB) but it is a criminal offence under UK law to make knowingly a false declaration. Sure, in practice UK won't do anything about this particular matter. My point however was that the letter the BE now issues instead of a declaration signed by the applicant basically shouts out to the Thai authorities - "it's up to you to make sure this person gives up UK citizenship". Leaving the country is absolutely the responsibility of the airlines but, as Dogmatix says, IOs can often go through a passport just for the sake of it. After all, that's part of their job - spotting problems with travel documents. Again my point is simply that, in my case as a white dude waving a shiny new Thai passport, an IO is much more likely to take an interest. Absolutely - you've thought it through and if you had to make a choice, have no problems choosing Thai. Again, my point is just that I think it would be unwise for anyone to follow the nationality path and not be prepared to make that choice.

I think it's just temporary during the dog-days of minimal international travel. All those IOs need to do something.

With respect, I believe you are mistaken. Clause 19.2 of the 2008 Act is clear. Section 19. The Minister shall have the power to revoke Thai nationality of a person who acquires Thai nationality by naturalization, if it appears that: (1) the naturalization is effected by concealment of facts or making false statement of essential facts; (2) there is evidence indicating that the naturalized person still uses his or her former nationality; (3) having committed any act prejudicial to the national security or conflicting with the interests of the State or amounting to an insult to the nation; (4) having committed any act in contrary to the public order or good morals; (5) having resided aboard without having a domicile in Thailand for more than (5) having resided aboard without having a domicile in Thailand for more than five years; (6) having retained the nationality of the country at war with Thailand. http://web.krisdika.go.th/data//document/ext810/810050_0001.pdf

The UK doesn't care. Thailand requires that you give up your other nationality. In practice, the Thai authorities have never requested proof that this has been done. However ... I've lived in Thailand on and off (mostly on) since the late 1980s. Just because something has never been done before here despite being on the statute books does not mean that it will never happen. TM30 reporting strikes me as quite a good example of this. In the past (pre about mid 2018) the British Embassy would issue a formal declaration that X has sworn an oath in person before a Consular Officer that he/she intends to renounce British nationality if granted Thai nationality. That oath was quite significant in the sense that to make a false declaration was an offence under UK law. However, nowadays the Embassy doesn't offer this service. Instead they issue a letter by post stating that X has told the Embassy that he/she he/she intends to renounce British nationality if granted Thai nationality BUT the Embassy then helpfully adds that the Embassy has no way of verifying if this happens and also that UK permits dual nationality. IMHO, this letter basically says to the Thai authorities "this person has said they'll do this but maybe they won't", which makes it perhaps harder for the Thai authorities to turn a blind eye. So, I say to everyone who applies for Thai nationality: you may very well be able to get away with not giving up your original nationality if your country doesn't care BUT you should be prepared also to give it up. If that is not an option for you, think very carefully because if you get Thai nationality and then have to give it up, in true snakes and ladders fashion you go back to being Joe Blow on a Tourist Visa. If you previously held PR (as I do), that's gone. This is why PR - much maligned by many - is still a good half-way house option for anyone who wants to live long-term in Thailand and is eligible to apply (3 years on WP required etc) - it doesn't affect citizenship. In the case of the UK, there is a get out of jail card in that the Nationality Act (1991 I think) allows for people born before the Act who are forced to give up UK citizenship to get a second nationality, to get back UK nationality (a one-time gig). So, if you were born in the 1980s or earlier, that is an option. I'm sure many people will say that I am over-thinking and that there are so many tens of thousands of naturalised Thais that this will never come to pass. They may well be correct. But it would be foolish, in these days of ever greater online data exchange between governments and between departments at a national level, not to consider it. Pre-Covid, a benefit of a Thai passport was using the e-channels. This meant no physical inspection of a passport by an Immigration Officer. Since Covid, the e-channels have all been U/S and everyone goes through a manual inspection on leaving Thailand. I'm not sure how a white dude - or any apparently non-ethnic Thai - would explain to a Thai IO why his Thai passport doesn't have a UK visa, if the IO chose to ask. The only explanation would be that person has a second, non-Thai, passport. Pair that with an IO who's having a bad day for whatever reason and things could quickly become very sticky. I have heard of some naturalised Thais who will not fly direct to UK / USA or whatever for this reason, but will instead always transit through Hong Kong or Singapore or somewhere that does not require a visa for Thai nationals to enter. That way, the journey our of Thailand can be presented as a simple "I'm off to Hong Kong" trip. Strikes me as a lot of hassle but one can understand why some people might choose to do this.

As others have said, it depends. Officially 4, but some are able to swing it with 2. My company (registered in Bangkok for nearly 20 years) has two foreign directors (me + 1 other) who both have PR, are both married to Thais for many years etc. We've been fine with 2 Thai staff per WP for several years now. Previously we had another director who was married to a non-Thai and because of that Labour Dept insisted that every WP required 4 staff. That was a pain. I've just had my WP renewed and - in time honoured "who'd a guessed it" fashion - this time apparently the message came from on high at the LD that next year we may not be allowed to have only 2 Thai staff per work permit and that the decision is to be based on whatever visa each WP holder had when first applying for the WP. How they come up with this stuff beats me ... but hopefully by this time next year I'll have my Thai ID and this sort of nonsense will fade into distant memory.

Thanks for the tip. I'll give the hospital a ring.

Sadly I don't have a Vax ID - all I have is a piece of paper given to me by the hospital (Phayathai 2) which has the Lot No / Serial No of the dose administered there. Neither of those are 13 digit numbers.

You may well be right. However, for those of us who have had a first shot in a different country, it's not possible (yet) to get that recognised and added to the domestic Thailand certificate. I had my second shot here (at Phyathai 2) and I've got nothing official to prove it. Maybe I could get something if I was registered on the MorPhrom App, but I can't get that to work despite having PR and a 13-digit ID number. Frankly the easiest way to get round this is to have a third shot here in Thailand so that the Thai records show two shots. Rather stupidly, I thought I'd be civic-minded and tell the folk here that I didn't need my second shot because I'd already had one in the UK, so they could give that dose to someone else. Plan B was to go to UK in Oct/Nov and get a third shot there, so I'd have a full UK vax record which I suspect will be more acceptable for international travel than a full Thai record. Of course, Red List 'n all now makes that unlikely. Ho hum.

Good to know that they were happy to endorse your existing international certificate - but doesn't the way they've completed it make it appear that you've only had one shot (because it only lists one date)?

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe my staff said THB 50. I don't remember. Not going to break the bank either way.

I'd suggest trying to verify before travel with the embassy of the country concerned whether the Thai MOPH-issued certificate is acceptable. It should be, because it's an international standard. However, call me jaded if you like, but I can easily see a situation in somewhere like the Philippines where officials at the airport claim that it is not acceptable but that for a "fee" of USD 100 they will issue an endorsement to allow you in. I used the Thai issued certificate for Yellow Fever when going to Goma DRC from Rwanda a few years back. The DRC officials said I didn't have some other vaccination that was mandatory (Meningitis?) but for USD100 they could give me the shot there and then. It was a complete con: the only mandatory vaccine was Yellow Fever, and like I was really going to let some dude in a dusty room without glass in the window stick a needle in me ... stood my ground but wasted an hour. (Next trip a few months later I flew in to Goma and the 'missing' vaccination wasn't mentioned, although they tried a different scam that time relating to my visa).

The following video from the MOPH CDC explains in simple terms how to apply for the Travel Certificate. The video is in Thai but has English sub-titles. It makes it sound simple. While it is not hugely complicated, it is quite time-consuming because it requires in-person application, unless you can authorise someone to apply on your behalf. One of my staff did it for me, at the main MOPH building. I believe it cost THB 150 in official fees. The video says that the main requirements are: 1. Passport + signed copy 2. Vaccination Record + signed copy (original record from wherever in Thailand 2nd dose was given) However, in my case I asked for it after 1 dose here: I already had one dose in UK. The certificate was issued showing only the shot given in Thailand; they will not (at present at least) accept and register any previous overseas vaccinations. Also, it's not possible to add the Covid vaccination record to an existing International Certificate of Vaccination, even if issued in Thailand (I already have one). I've posted pics of both Certificates below; both are equally flimsy and low-tech - don't get it wet!

This will be introduced. As with many other legal requirements in Thailand, it will not be enforced, or only for a very brief period of time. However government will be able to say "it's not our fault if people break the rules". And from time to time, the authorities will raid some hapless restaurant and fine staff and patrons for breaking the law.