PingRoundTheWorld

Hahahahaha. Idiots. Really have no words beyond that. The level of stupid has exceeded the quota allotted.

None of this is going to happen. It's insane to think people will accept carbon passports as they represent a huge infringement on personal liberty and most likely unconstitutional in most countries. And that is assuming a government is crazy enough to even try it - there's zero chance my home country will, and Thailand with it's reliance on tourism... are they going to accept it?

Depends what kind of pension you have, if it's a government one - they can do whatever they want and you can't do anything about it, but if it's a private pension then they can't retroactively amend the terms. I'm not sure why you're freaking out- the US is almost completely over the minor recession it experienced, and when it charges forward it will pull the entire world with it. The only thing that could possibly spoil that is a large-scale war - something that's very unlikely to happen in an election year.

And you came to add to the party? pointless post.

Depends on the person, some counties I've seen mentioned in travel plans were Japan, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia... Overall they seem to be travelling less post-Covid, but these are rich guys so money is not the reason. I think for most of them in the past they travelled to Thailand on a regular basis to party, but once that's stopped they haven't really replaced it with anything.

Malaysians, Lao, Burmese, and hey even Vietnamese. Just because they're "Asian" doesn't mean they actually stay in the country (for more than a day) nor does it mean they spend (much) money. Whereas if they're western you can be sure they'll be staying (and spending) longer.

It's not that simple. I pay nearly 50% tax on income in my home country, which has a DTA with Thailand. So even if it was deemed "income" we now enter the murky waters of DTA and how it will be applied: if tax credits - how do you calculate the tax credit for the small portion remitted to Thailand - is it based on my highest marginal rate? lowest rate? entire sum paid in taxes?? or will Thailand want me to pay full (Thai) tax on the remitted sums and go knocking on my home country's doors for a refund of those amounts? That's kind of the whole point- I don't think I'll legally owe more tax either way - it's just the complexity and filing I want to avoid. Again remains to be seen if and how this is enforced...

Depends on the bank. Some limit to 20k, Bangkok Bank ATMs 25k, Krungsri ATMs 30k. Probably some more with higher limits but I'm sure you can find one of those two anywhere.

Source? Whether ATM withdrawals and paying for goods and services with an overseas credit card will be considered remittance is hugely important (for those of us who use foreign cards for the majority of their expenses). Which also brings the question- how do you "decide" if a credit card purchase/ATM withdrawal is income or not? I could pay the credit card bill with income, or I could pay for it with savings. It would be difficult to keep records and prove it either way.

Which hospital?

Then how do you know it was Dengue? (seriously asking, I don't think I've ever had it)

I will never understand why some foreigners choose to live in Thai villages with zero security. Almost every time you hear about a neighbor going stabby or a foreigner getting robbed it's at some village out in nowhereville. I'm sure it did happen.. sometime.. but I can't recall hearing about someone getting randomly stabbed by their neighbor in a condo. Better security, actual security guards (when they're not asleep), and less easy access (if you don't open the door nothing will happen). For those of you who live in villages/houses - do you actually feel safe??

This. People come to Thailand because it's (somewhat) seedy and unpredictable and the image of "anything can happen", or what you call character. Their past efforts to make it a wholesome family friendly destination are completely the wrong direction - western families have plenty of closer, cheaper places to go on vacation - why would an American family choose to fly 24 hours to Phuket when they can fly 4 hours to Puerto Rico, and they don't even have to worry about visa or currency exchange. For people to prefer to Thailand over other destinations there needs to be a differentiating factor, and that differentiating factor is character - and I'm not even talking about prostitution and all that - just the feeling that you're coming to a place where anything goes is exactly what young people want. Families won't come anyway - it's young couples and single people (all ages) Thailand should be aiming at. A great example of them suffocating tourism is their insistence on regulating nightlife closing hours. Bangkok still hasn't nearly recovered fom pre-Covid levels and tourist nightlife have crowds which are a fraction of what they used to be as a result of the 2am curfew. No tourist wants to be told to go home at 2am - so next trip they just won't come - I know many people who used to come every month or two, now they don't come at all because Bangkok is too boring for them. They are (finally!!) taking a step in the right direction with allowing nightlife (in designated areas) to open until 4am, however that is too little too late, and it still doesn't address major tourist areas in Bangkok like Nana/Asoke and soi 11, and Thong Lor - which are NOT allowed to open later under the new rules. There is a very limited number of tourist venues which will be allowed in Ratchadapisek and Silom, but the grand majority of venues affected are actually local Thai (RCA, Ratchadapisek are predominently Thai). Whoever made the rules clearly does not understand the tourist nightlife market at all.

While Thailand may want them (*their money), less Chinese means better treatment and lower prices for those of us who aren't Chinese. Don't legalize gambling! Taiwanese are great- they're basically like Japanese who speak Chinese A lot of them are highly educated and well mannered. Bring 'em on!

Not everybody has a great pension plan that adjusts for inflation. With my pension plan it's almost guaranteed it will be eroded by inflation. Not to mention I could only start pulling reduced benefits at 60, or 67 if I want full benefits. I do have other investments that I expect will far outweigh my pension, but for those too I will have to actively manage them to make sure they outpace inflation - it's not automagic - I'd think on the contrary, most pension and like-pension plans (savings) people have aren't protected against inflation.

Yeah no kidding. Ludicrously overpriced. I have a friend who got admitted there for another condition (also was on the brink) - he survived but had to sell an apartment(!) to fund his hospital bills. Out of curiosity- if one were to be in critical condition, where would you recommend they go/get admitted to? can a government hospital be trusted? are there private hospitals that won't cost you an apartment or a kidney?

By not declaring I mean declaring it as sourced from savings, gift, or other source that isn't income. Assuming we'll actually be required to file tax returns if we don't have taxable income - that remains to be seen.

Bingo. This whole system is unrealistic and relies on people coming forward and declaring that the source of the money is income from the same year. Very few will actually do it, and anyone who can will avoid (not evade) it.

Yeah, it's quite a wonder how they want tourists to stay longer, yet they do everything they can to make sure visas are short. Simply changing from 30 day to 90 day visa waivers will by itself encourage longer stays, and if they allow 90 day extensions on top of that they'll get plenty more European winter crowd (they already get some, but the visa hassle is for sure keeping some away).

A Thai national living abroad is not a Thailand tax resident, therefore income tax does not apply. Gift tax won't apply either since it's not a large enough sum. Bottom line: a Thai overseas worker who lives there for more than half of the year won't have to pay Thai taxes on money they send their family. If you want to complicate this further: What if you gifted (transferred) money to a Thai person's overseas bank, then they transferred it to Thailand? It cannot possibly be income to them since it was a gift, and it's not bringing money into Thailand for you, since it's not you who transferred it to Thailand. Of course it all depends on how Thai RD and courts interpret such events, but likely they won't bother with small amounts. Some good news I read today was that on Nov 20 they clarified that any income made before 2024 will NOT be subject to the new rule. So any savings you accumulate before the end of the year will not be taxable next year regardless of when you transfer it (but you should probably be prepared to show/prove you had those savings on Dec 31...)

They thought thieves broke into their house as money and valuables kept going missing for several days, when they finally found the missing items they realized that mice had "stolen" it and moved it around, not thieves. Moral of the story: keep your money in the bank - not in the ceiling, and gold is not a savings account.

It wouldn't be statuory rape either way since she's 17 and 10 months, not 14, but she couldn't prove there was sex anyway, because there wasn't. She didn't claim sex - she claimed sexual assault. They got to the hotel around 3am and by 4:30am she already managed to take pictures of him sleeping, call her friends to pick her up, and file charges with police - that's not a whole lot of time which certainly makes his side of the story seem valid. He claims that he did not think she was underage when taking her to his room, they started messing around and he undressed her, but when she told him her ID was fake/doctored and she's actually 17 he came to his senses and told her they will not have sex but she can just sleep, and he went to sleep himself. She took pictures of him sleeping as "evidence", and called her friends to pick her up, after which they went to police. Ironically, if they did have sex and she didn't "regret" it - it wouldn't be a crime - the "crime" here is that she regretted whatever happened. The whole ordeal is ridiculous considering she's 17 and 10 months - not a child. Old enough to fake an ID and go drinking, clearly knew what she was doing and what was going to happen, and the age is so close to 18 that it's just a technicality.

Nitrous oxide is commonly used to make whipped cream. The hundreds of "tanks" they seized are just finger-sized whipped cream chargers that are placed in whipped cream dispensers and used one at a time to inflate balloons. Generally unless the person has other medical conditions inhaling a few of those won't cause any long-lasting harm, but habitual heavy use can cause all sorts of bad things including damaging the nerve system. IMHO they should spend more time/resources in educating the public about the dangers of habitual use than try to control/prevent use which is impossible. Busting a single shop won't do anything when every other bar is selling these.

And here's what that law actually says: “modern drug” means a drug intended for use in the practice of modern medicine or healing arts or the cure of an animal disease; Section 12. No person shall produce or sell a modern drug or import or order a modern drug in to the Kingdom, unless he or she has obtained a licence from the licensing authority. Section 101. Any person who violates section 12 shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of not exceeding five years and to a fine not exceeding ten thousand baht. It's referring to something like an unlicensed pharmacist selling you medicinal drugs. Nitrous oxide is not a medicinal drug and not regulated as such - it is commonly used to make whipped cream and openly sold as such with no restrictions. While police can certainly charge someone with selling it as a "medicinal drug", it will probably not hold in court. It's not a regulated drug therefore not covered by drug laws prohibiting recreational use, but also isn't a medicine therefore not covered by the medicine act above. What they have been doing according to some past news articles is giving the vendor arbitrary small fines and letting them go without charging them. If I'm wrong and there has been anyone who's actually been convicted of selling nitrous based on the medicine act I'm open to change my mind, but so far I haven't found any such examples.

Sure doesn't seem like sexual assault. Either she's looking for a payday, or she was offended that he rejected her and decided to take revenge.