Phulublub

All you so- clever Farang might pause to consider the lady likely had very limited education, and certainly limited geography, geology or fluid dynamics. Bangkok is both south and down from Chiang Rai, so a perfectly (if flawed) assumption for such a person to equate the opposites - north and up - as being equivalent. As Dazinoz ably demonstrated by lack of knowedge about what a tidal flow is, we may not be quite as clever as we thnk we are. PH

No it isn't. The Chao Praya (for example), when flood tides force water to flow "backwards" is tidal. Tonje Sap flows into the Mekong, or the Mekong flows into Tonje Sap...freshwater all and northing to do with tides, or the sea. PH

More deeply insightful and well thought out points gthat add to our knowledge. Keep it up. PH

Either "she said nothing about what she would do...£ OR ..."Her only solid plan was..." Well done in contradictig yourself. She also summarised a few other plans. At least she has some plans, rather than just "concepts of plans" PH

Whether the grey/black economy and small street vendors etc pay tax or not is not relevent to this change in the regulations. For them, nothing is changing. Similarly, foreigners (or Thais) with investment, rental, stock market etc income from within Thailand will already be paying tax or breaking existing law. This change is ONLY germaine to those remitting funds from outside Thailand who are tax resident here. PH

What evidence dso you have for that? All Thais who are in proper employment will be taxed at source by their employers! Many of those in rural Thailand will not earn enough in cash to have any liabilty And your evidence for this is? Many expats will be in receipt of non-assessable income through DTAs. Even many of those who are not will be able to offset tax paid in home country which, together with Thai exemptions and allowances will also reduce their liability to zero. PH

Which is the relevent item. Domicile is not (at all?) relevent to tax status or, here, ability to add to ISAs. PH

Fox are now leaning left... But now, it seems, so are Rasmussen. Last month Trump applauded them as being the only True, independent and accurate pollsters. But today....oh dear Donnie boy even Rasmussen has Harris ahead. Probably caused by fake electors, or bamboo paper, or windmills, or Chavez, or bacon, or ...or...or... PH

You do realise that legend is merely two words joined together...and from what flows out of the OP's keyboard, possible that the end of the leg we are talking about here.... PH

In the case of a credit card purchase, you have taken a loan in <home currency>. The money you have been loaned is then (in a completely distinct transaction) remitted to Thailand to make your purchase. Later (and, again quite separately) you repay the loan in <home currency>. PH

Oh deatr...Latest Fox News polls show Harris ahead in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada. What this means, of course, is no that she is REALLY ahead, more that Fox is now leaning left and distorting the truth. PH

First up, why the totally irrelevent Thai bashing? How good are the majority of UK at saving (hint: many live on their credit cards) . How many in the US literally live paycheck to paycheck? (as an aside, the new rules are aimed at those Thais who DO save, offshore, and have previously removed any tax liability by remitting in future years; that expats are in the same boat in a side effect - but for many of us, most of the time, there will actually be little or no actual tax to pay). Secondly, savings are savings. There are savings accounts here too. The issue is whether they are classed as Assessable when remited to Thailand under the new rules. You pay tax on returns from your savings in the UK (unless in an ISA), don't you? All that matters is whether they were held at 31 Dec 23, or the classification of the income from which they are saved. The only change the new rules have brought in is that deferring the remittance to a following tax year does not turn remited funds (in whatever form) from assessable to non-assessable. Whether you, I or anyone else calls them savings, or not, is not relevant to their status. PH

So it is OK for the candidates to engage in petty name calling, but not for writers here? Slightly odd thought, that! PH

Nope. The parties agreed to two debates. There has been one Trump wants to change the remaining one to three more Harris has not agreed to that Harris wants to change the format of the already agreed second debate Trump's team have not agreed to that, though Trump appears to be content with changes The second debate, on Sep 10, on ABC, should go ahead as previously agreed using the already agreed format. Unless one party pulls out. PH

Not a single thing there saying they want to pull out. You are just maing things up, which is probably par for the course for a Trump cult member. The debate arrangements were agreed; the Dems wish to alter that agreement - if the GOP do not want them to change then Harris should debate under the previously agreed terms. Nowhere have they said that they will not! PH

I know he did. But announcing YOU have decided to have three debates does not make it an agreement. In exactly the same way, I could say I think you are a complete idiot. That statement does not make you one. PH

Not what I said. If you are a tax resident and get audited, it is up to you to show how/where/what monies you have reported have come from. If you have reported a suspiciously low figure and cannot prove non-assessable income, you will be in trouble. PH

Not true. The agreement was for debates between the two presidential candidates. But keep scrabbling to defend your Leader. PH

When and where did anyone agree to three debates? That Trump says he wants three does not an agreement make. He agreed to two debates between the two presidential candidates. One has been had, one is scheduled for Sep 10. Any others are open for discussion. PH

555 PH

Trump sure is sounding more and more like a 5 year old. PH

1. You can legally bring cash into the country but you are still liable for tax on this money in exactly the same was as any and all other remitted funds. Not declaring it is tax evasion and is illegal. You may very well not be caught, but that does not remove the illegality, and , if you are... 2. Incorrect. If the savings were held on 31 Dec 23, then they are not assessable. If audited you would have to show this. I have statements dated 31 Dec 23 for this exact reason. No matter the route or method of bringing in money to Thailand, the status of assessable or not is exactly the same and the Thai tax system is one of self- declaration. The onus is on you to report accurately. If you choose not to and are audited you will have problems. Your choice on course of action... PH

Of course, if it doesn;t fit with your narrative it must be fake. Silly me. PH

Or maybe not: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president.html Harris ahead in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylania...... PH

If you say so. PH