rockingrobin

9 minutes ago, markaoffy said:

There will be 350 million a week extra available, which the UK can spend on the NHS or elsewhere it decides !But the remain losers would rather keep paying billions into the wasteful EU to spend on their wasteful projects. Interesting that the 12 billion a year in overseas aid doesn’t seem to bother the major political parties! Madness

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

They will not be extra 350 million a week available. The rebate never leaves the treasury, and approx ,1 billion of the monies we send to the EU is part of the UK 's foreign aid commitment. This amount still have to be spent on foreign aid as it is enshrined in UK domestic  law

36 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

How you or I might interpret what's written on that bus today is one thing, how a majority of people interpreted it at the time is something else entirely. As we all well know that was no accident, the sign was intended to mislead and it did so perfectly, that's therefore why the facts of the matter must now be regarded as new information for large portions of the electorate.

The bus did not state Let's fund the NHS

It stated Let's fund the NHS instead

The use of the term instead makes the meaning explicit.Even a child can comprehend this. If I was to say let's go to Paris , I  am sure they would realize that what I actual mean is Blackpool

2 hours ago, orientalist said:

 

Looking at the UK summary of the double taxation treaty, it seems crystal clear that "there is no relief for state pension" (as opposed to government pensions).

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/538047/Digest_of_Double_Taxation_Treaties.pdf

 

According to the HMRC , the state pension unlike occupational pensions is not derived from employment , and thus not an employment derived income , for double tax treaty purposes. 

It is unclear to me , under thai revenue code which part if any of the assessable income it falls within.

59 minutes ago, ThaiPauly said:

Would that mean that I would have to pay tax in Thailand on the property I own and  rent out in the UK?

 

I already pay tax on this as the rental income exceeds the 11,600 pa, the base rate for paying income tax.

So would I have to pay tax twice?

 

I am confused !!

This would be covered in the DTT .

32 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Some inputs:

 

Here's the actual Thai tax code in English: http://www.rd.go.th/publish/37748.0.html

 

Regarding pensions: by means of tax treaties, the UK and US both disallow other countries from taxing Social Security and State Pension payments.

 

Number 8 on the link: refers to non-taxable income by virtue of non-residency (<180 days). 

In the link you provided , does anybody know what is meant by special pension , as described under section 42  , sub section (12)

12 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Don't know where you are trying to go with that response. 

I was exporting to Europe before the single market came into being and being a small company the paperwork was a nightmare. Probably not so bad for the larger company that could fund an export department, I had to do it myself.

Are you trying to suggest that under a WTO RTA that the paperwork would be no more than at present. Some seem to think otherwise.

 

The stark warning from Westminster’s public accounts committee said the number of customs declarations which HM Revenue and Customs must process each year could increase almost five-fold – from 55m to 225m – after leaving the bloc. 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-customs-system-eu-withdrawal-bill-date-times-catastrophic-uk-borders-european-a8053591.html

 

At this point in time, the UK has no WTO trade agreements in place. They were all removed when the EU became a WTO member and started to negotiate on behalf of all EU members. Any new agreements will need to be agreed by WTO members, until then it would be the default arrangement, an outcome that frightens most businessmen.

The No Deal advocates justify their position by stating other countries rely on WTO rules, but forget to mention that every member of the WTO has some kind of regional or bilateral agreements in place.

31 minutes ago, alant said:

Since you think it is stupid, tell me if you spend more money than your income every year could you continue that for all time. Would your bank cut you off? Just look at Greece that is posible if you do not adress the simple fact that if your outgoings exceed your income there will be trouble ahead.

Unfortunately many an economist believe you can get round this by issuing bonds thus what is now termed "Quantitative easing" ie printing money which I am sure you know is a major source of currency devaluation.

Is there the chance we will lose some of our exports because the EU tariffs will make them more expensive? Yes of course. The UK government may introduce tariffs on goods from the EU or it may not but the UK is a big market Angela et al will have to deal with the German car makers and their powerful lobby. Does it mean a lower £? it shouldn't but the speculators may well use the opportunity to devalue the currency. That of course will cancel out the effect of the higher export prices due to tariffs so industry could gain back all of its lost market (if it actually loses it which I doubt) so your trade argument would be null and void.

The loss of a safety net is a scare tactic, it is the EU that has prevented the UK from saving industry threatened with economic problems as per the steel production problems of a couple of years ago.

A recent document revealed it was the EU that are blocking negotiations as they are very worried the UK will have a significant trade advantage in a less regulated non protectionist market which is what the EU is now. 

The talk of tariif issues misses the point, In reality tariffs are almost non existent and have very limited affect , unless considered in the realms of countervailing measures , and sector protection.

As explained by the UK car manufacturers giving evidence to the BEIS committee yesterday , the real issue is NTB and TBT

Honda production in the UK imports parts from the EU and Japan, with regards to the EU imports the delay at the ports is minutes, However this is increased to 2/3 days for parts arriving from Japan. They mitigate against this by holding a months worth of stock for parts from Japan than the 1 hour for EU parts. If the delay to parts from EU was similiar to that of Japan it would be very challenging.

12 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

And when the UK government withdraws the Personal Allowance from expats?

 

Many expats already use the nil rate band in Thailand to reclaim the tax on their savings deposits which is entirely within the rules. But if UK earnings are going to be taxed in Thailand, and the UK PA is removed, it will be a significant hit to the income of many expat pensioners. People will argue of course that those are the rules so the pensioner must pay his tax regardless and they would be right. But the rules also state that expats should inform the UK authorities they have left the UK so that NHS eligibility and state pension increases can be cancelled and that also would be right, in practice however only very few do so! Yes I know, two wrongs don't make a right but for the moment this is more about convention than rules.

There is a double taxation treaty in force between the UK and Thailand

41 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Partington - in your opinion, is there a downside risk to providing UK Revenue with a Thai ID number even though Thailand is not a party to the international agreement? I have in mind specifically that UK Revenue would, by passing along details of earned income, be a catalyst for Thai Revenue to attempt to tax it sooner rather later.

The UK Thailand double taxation treaty has a clause which allows for the transfer of information

19 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I saw John Redwood on the news last night and he was trying to make out how simple it was in the past to trade under WTO rules and it wouldn't be a problem.

It may not have been a problem for some but there were many small companies that just would not export to the EU because of the red tape. I personally carried goods from the UK to the south of France and know first hand what was involved.

Should the UK go backwards then many companies are likely to stop exporting with a significant loss of jobs.

All WTO members have a Regional trade agreement in force

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm

2 hours ago, smedly said:

The N.Ireland border with the Republic of Ireland was an issue created by Brussels to in some way throw another spanner in the works, it is an EU border no matter what way you spin it, most of the people living on the Island of Ireland don't want it to be an issue.............Brussels made it an issue, so were does that leave things ?. well like I keep saying, it is the EU that keep blocking any attempt at a resolution not the UK - so lets be clear about that  - THE EU IS BLOCKING IT

 

Come January the EU will have to put a plan in place for how they want to manage their border with the UK who will be a foreign country come March 2019

 

Two foreign countries ........................ that is the reality of the situation

 

The Republic of Ireland will not be allowed to have any special arrangement with the UK unless something changes

 

The EU has many land borders with foregn countries and they are about to get another one, I am sure the Republic of Ireland and the UK would prefer something that works but while the EU is insisting on Enforcing their borders then it is up to them "Not the UK" to make concessions

 

The UK has sat at the table and gone through the process, end of December that process will have gone as far as it can go.

 

No more time wasting, and as I keep saying, the EU number one objective is to stop the UK leaving the EU, they think that they can push the UK into meltdown and boy are they trying, anyone that doesn't see what is going on in UK politics and the forces behind it, what they have done is underestimate the resolve of the British people........we have had enough of this BS

 

The EEC was fine when it all started out but now it has turned into a huge undemocratic monster power grab and the British people have had enough, we had a vote and the message was clear - stick your undemocratic EU debacle right up where the sun doesn't shine......a very firm middle figure to these vile unelected people

 

and as for Scotland lol what a joke that is..........a vote for an independent Scotland .... right ? but at the same time they haven't the (deleted)  to actually be independent ................. they want to make sure they have handouts from Brussels because they know they cannot go it alone, what sort of independence is that, sorry but the stupidity is astounding, I honestly wish there was a vote across the whole of the UK as to whether we should allow Scotland to stay in, oh but wait they already had a vote

 

The NI border issue was created by the consevative government declaration that the UK and NI is leaving the SM. 

If NI was to remain within the SM regime then all the border issues disappears.

It is the UK's position of NI leaving the SM and still want to maintain an invisible border .

39 minutes ago, lungbing said:

First, and possible most important, if this woman entered Iran on her Irainian passport then she is an Iranian in Iran and the UK foreign Secretary shouldn't interfere in what they would consider an internal matter.
Second. Although she does hold dual nationality Iran might not recognise that and consider her to only be an Iranian citizen.
Third. Even a regime like that would not bother somebody who just entered the country and only visited friends AND NOTHING ELSE.  We don't know what she did or where she went in Iran.
Fourth. Her husband is a Labour party activist, and of course he's going to try to embarrass the UK government.
Finally Boris didn't make the statement up on the spot, he was repeating what his Foreign Office
researchers had told him.  Maybe they were trying to embarrass the government.

 

We don't know the whole story here, and probably never will.

The UK government position is that the woman was on holiday, and holiday only

The UN also requested her release from arbitrary detention 

18 minutes ago, smedly said:

The UK will leave the SM and CU - that is a given and it is impossible for any other outcome, but what is negociated in its place will be similar in function but perhaps not in name

The issue is that as a matter of EU law and WTO the UK will become a third country and that means a border where one does not exist at present.

Let's assume the non discrimination and MFN do not exist. Accepting that both the UK and EU aspirations of an invisible border and the UK government position of leaving march 2019.

The art 50 does not commit anybody to achieve a trade deal during the withdrawal negotations, only to take the future framework into account. 

Now consider that the NI border issue is dealt with as part of the future trade deal, but this trade deal is not completed before the UK leaves the EU, or the trade deal is rected by other member states,

4 minutes ago, smedly said:

Northern Ireland is part of the UK, there is no treaty - I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and quite frankly neither do you. It is the EU that are preventing/blocking any sort of arrangement with it's border with the UK

 

The Financial bill is what the EU are demanding and yet they are unwilling to detail what the demand is and how they calculate it

 

It was the EU/Germany that came up with the ridiculous preconditions the UK had no choice but to run with it, but since it is going nowhere and wasting time the UK will have to move forward either way - that will happen in January

 

Perhaps at some future date the EU will come back to the table to talk trade but is of course if the EU still exists long enough 

 

 

The UK had the opportunity to set out the terms of the negotitions when the withdrawal notification was sent, and was advised to do so by Sir Ivan Rogers

This failure allowed the EU to seize the initiative.

It was known pre ref that there would be financial commitments to pay.  Saying the EU are not providing details as to be incorrect   otherwise how could DD go through them line by line .

With regards NI , T.May insistamce that the UK will leave the SM and CU as onewill result in the UK and NI becoming a third country and thus a border between NI and ROI. Any agreement reached either by s FTA or WTO is problematic, nor only in the timing, but also with non discrimination rules

33 minutes ago, Lokie said:

A scarier thing is if Corbyn, Abbott and all the loony lefts got in, UK would be bankrupt within two years

 

As for anyone messing about in a country like Iran with western links, then you are likely to be detained on whatever trumped up charges, nothing to do what so ever with any comments from government ministers. As for Boris lying as posted above, at least he's an honest liar unlike the Corbinites of labour lol

UK goverment based upon human sacrifice ?

16 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Johnson is a buffoon, albeit a very well educated one, and is not fit for purpose as a foreign secretary.  But at the moment he is the least of May's problems.  She is clearly only surviving because nobody wants to take on the leadership of this chaos.   

I see it slighty different.

There are people with leadrership ambitions, but none of them wants to be the catalyst for a leaderhip battle.  Because in that scenerio they are judged as mischief makers and very rarely win. What they require is a willing /unwilling patsy

53 minutes ago, smedly said:

what on earth are you talking about lol

 

The EU are demanding this money on one hand but refuse to say how much and how they calculate it, does anyone else see the stupidity here, they are also demanding a solution to the Irish UK border when no such solution can be made until trade talks are completed - more stupidity

 

There is now only one option left for the UK and that is to walk away, too much time being wasted trying to get past this stupidity and nonsense 

The irish border cannot be addressed as part of the trade talks, it would result in other third countries asking for similiar treatment under the MFN clause. This scenario would apply equally to the EU and any other trade deals the UK make.

As for DD statement on the financial commitments , it is just a confirmation on what the UK and EU agreed at the start of the talks. It seems obvious to me that what is going to happen , the UK will confirm the details of  financial commitments they are willing to undertake , but will present no actual figure to the public as a victory

13 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

And, of course, the eventual trade agreement - which is why the EU insisting that 'money' is sorted before trade agreements can begin is ridiculous. 

 

Even so, I still want to see justifiable 'accounts' as to any money owed (assets/liabilities) by both sides.

The financial commitments are there for the UK team to see, after all the UK did committ to them.

Art 50 is not about trade deals, these follow after the Art 50 process. It concerns the withdrawal of the UK taking any future framework  into account.

Establishing the UK's commitments determines the next stage.

The toxicity of the referendum campaign and such speeches announcing the ending of sending monies to the EU meant that precious time was wasted arguing the toss of whether we need to pay a so called brexit bill instead of concentrating the real issues of solving the NI border issue

13 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

True, but if the leave date is enshrined by the UK parliament, businesses (and the EU) know that it is time to start planning for brexit at a set date.

Which direction do they plan for?

Continuing regulation conformity or divergence.Access to the SM or no access.Border and customs paperwork and checks or a frictionless regime. 

None of the above will be clarified by enshrining the exit date in law.

The only result of such action is to deny parliament a meaningful vote on the final deal.

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

To quote from the OP:-

 

"We’ve listened to members of the public and Parliament and have made this change to remove any confusion or concern about what 'exit day' means," Brexit minister David Davis said in a statement"

 

Everyone needs an end to the uncertainty.  It gives businesses time to plan for the future and will ensure both sides realise they have v little time to 'bugger around'/pursue an agenda - they would actually have to quickly negotiate a deal .

It does not provide an end to the uncertainty. Businesses still do not know what the arrangements post the end date will entail , and therefore cannot plan for the future. 

As for ensuring both sides have little time , then Art 50 did this itself , the enshrining of the exit date does not preclude a transition or implementation period where the status quo remains

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

But without any accountable numbers.

 

It shouldn't be this hard for both the EU and the UK to come up with their version of a justifiable figure - and yet for some reason it is - as neither side is prepared to do so.....

It will depend upon what the UK will want to continue with, such as the Horizon projects, 

52 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Unfortunately, how much money the UK will pay the EU to leave seems to be one of the main 'stumbling blocks'.

 

Has anyone seen any financial breakdown of money owed/off-setting share of assets from either side??

 

I haven't  - and neither side seems keen on justifying/quantifying the amount payable for some reason.  It's all just numbers plucked out of thin air .

Although no financial breakdown is public, the following article concerning savings acrruing from leaving, goes on to discuss the exit bill 

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86016

24 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Speaking out herself in the msm, an action which was taken up on by said msm in a big way. Now, how about we get back to how Putin allegedly changed the course of the referendum? So far, we are told that he did it, but 'how' is top secret and nobody outside his cabal knows .

You requested how it was possible. I provided an example of how one tweet shaped the news in a manner to cause discourse 

16 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

And it was a perception which was quickly corrected in the msm. Now, how about some specifics on this Russian influence in the referendum?

It was initiallay picked up by the msm to condemn the woman, and if my recollection is correct , on this forum itself.

The perception was only corrected by the woman speaking out herself

9 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

So tell me how he did it. Internet trolls on message boards that only a fraction of a percentage of the voting population reads ? How?

As an example how they influence the public perception of events.

Recall the terror attack on Westminster Bridge earlier in the year , and the picture of the muslim woman walking past looking into her phone , with the quote muslim woman walks past uninterested. That was posted from the Russia troll farm