Etaoin Shrdlu

7 hours ago, CharlieKo said:

What American Dream? probably the biggest fallacy ever. 

In my family's case, on one side the dream was to avoid conscription in the Prussian army. On the other, it was to avoid being murdered by the Nazis. Seems to have worked out well enough on both sides.

3 hours ago, rumak said:

AND ......... while we are on the subject .........would like to hear from anyone who has had a Hyaluronic Acid Injection ( given in a weekly series  2 to 5 shots depending on the brands/protocol).    

 

read about it ......... it is offered in Thailand ......... and different than the cortisone stuff.

 

i am thinking seriously of going this route.....  

Have twice had HA injections administered by Dr. Panya at Bumrungrad after x-rays and consultation.

Only one injection was administered each time. The first one lasted more than a year and fixed the issue of my kneecap "catching" and increased range of movement.

The second one lasted about a year, but the symptoms and inflammation I had prior to these injections never returned to the level they were before.

I am not sure whether the HA injections are responsible for the continuing reduction in symptoms and increase in movement of the knee, but I suspect they may be. It has been seven years since the second injection and my knee is much improved compared to where it was before the injections.

Losing weight also helps a lot.

Even basic travel insurance policies often provide third party liability coverage. Third party liability insurance usually also covers defense costs. There are limitations with respect to liability arising out of the use of motor vehicles, but you weren't operating a motor vehicle so it is worth contacting your insurance company and asking for assistance.

If you PM me with a copy of your travel policy, I can give you an idea as to whether the policy may respond.

13 minutes ago, swissie said:

Hmmm! Only kept my Bank Records for the last 7 years. Diden't think anything older would ever be of relevance to anyone. What now?

I think the statute of limitations on FBAR non-filing is six years after the due date.

When you say "coming of (sic) motorbike taxi with shopping", do you mean you fell off a moving motorbike, or did you dismount intentionally after the motorbike taxi came to a stop. If the former, what caused you to fall off a moving motorbike taxi? If the latter, where did the motorbike taxi stop to let you get off? In the middle of the road? Next to the sidewalk? Why would a dropped bag be in the path of an oncoming motorbike? 

Who called the ambulance and why?

Did the motorbike taxi stick around and did you get details of the bike and the driver?

Lots of details missing.

8 hours ago, Repton1 said:

Good evening. I left Thailand several months ago, receiving my endorsement / non quota immigration stamps before leaving. 

I’m currently in my home country and have just renewed my passport. Am I correct in saying upon returning next month, at immigration I should produce my PR booklet showing the endorsement, my old passport containing the exit stamp and my new passport?

 

If so, does the entry stamp get applied to the new passport? I see someone asked a similar question earlier in the thread but answers were a tad vague so just wanted to clarify. Much appreciated. 

I once obtained a new passport while outside Thailand. Upon returning, I submitted both my new passport and the old one with the valid non-quota immigrant visa and my residence book. I was stamped in without comment by the immigration officer. 

Shortly thereafter I obtained a new non-quota immigrant visa in the new passport along with a new endorsement in my residence book. I don't believe there is any need to transfer an existing non-quota immigrant visa into a new passport. Just carry both passports until you get a new non-quota immigrant visa in the new passport.

There's also form 8938 that needs to be filed with the 1040 tax form if one's non-US financial assets exceed certain limits. These limits are higher than the FBAR aggregate limit of USD10,000.

FBAR 

3 hours ago, CanadaSam said:

 

I was told the exact opposite by many brokers, with facts to back it up, that the local insurance companies are regulated by an "ombudsman" who is always on the side of the customer, but the international companies are not.

It is true that the OIC here is quite consumer-friendly and it is easy to schedule a meeting to discuss a grievance. The downside is that insurers here may offer less broad coverage and have a poorer claims-paying attitude.

Offshore insurers may or may not be well-regulated and the relevant regulator may or may not be easy to engage. Large, well-established insurers in the EU and other developed markets probably are. Those incorporated in tax havens in places like the Caribbean might not be. 

28 minutes ago, 2ndhomepattaya said:

The problem is, most 70+ years old have several pre-conditions known or unknown to them. When I approached a major insurer some years ago and even had a physical at the BH, my reading very pretty good, they decided that a reading of 97 was pre-diabetes and 120-130 high BP. My GP just shook his head. Needless to say, I decided all the exclusions.

Yeah, insurers are allowed to set their own underwriting guidelines and in many cases they use  thresholds for certain conditions that are lower than those used to indicate clinical disease.

Almost all 70+ have pre-existing conditions, even if they aren't always aware of them. It's how the body ages.

Commercial insurance is a poor risk transfer mechanism for the over-60 set. The cost of covering everything regardless of whether pre-existing or not would put the premium out of reach for most people. Even the US, that bastion of capitalism, throws the oldies onto the back of the taxpayer via Medicare when they reach the end of their working life and start to have all the age-related conditions that commercial insurers exclude. There just isn't a good solution in the commercial insurance market.

1 hour ago, 2ndhomepattaya said:

Can easily happen. If you happen to have a TIA for example you immediately enter the world of "you should have known as it takes years to build up you you most certainly will not have any prior symptoms. You, according to the insurer it is an existing condition.

Yes, depending upon the policy wording, an undetected condition that existed at the inception of the policy may be a pre-existing condition according to the definition of such in the policy and therefore excluded. It was still a condition that existed at inception even if no symptoms had yet manifested and the insured was unaware.

Some insurers have more liberal definitions, some have more restrictive, and some impose waiting periods for certain conditions. It pays to read the policy and know how it defines pre-existing conditions.

Again, if there really were no pre-existing condition then there would not be a basis to deny a claim.

Since gift taxes are levied on the recipient of the gift, not the giver, it would seem that any exemptions and special rates would apply to the recipient's tax liability, not the remitter.

Since the giver is the remitter of the gift, then the new interpretation of the rules regarding remittances and the standard PIT deductions and rates would apply to the remitter, not the recipient.  

Recipient of gift: Subject to gift tax rules.

Giver of gift: Subject to PIT and rules on remittances.

Both the giver and recipient may be liable for taxes depending upon the various factors involved.

My Samsung S10 phone is on its third battery, both replacements were performed at a kiosk in a shopping mall, not by an authorized Samsung repair facility. 

No problems so far, except that even the original Samsung battery that came with the phone when new only lasted about two years before it expanded to the point of forcing the case apart. The first replacement did the same. I'm still on the second replacement.

Words can take on different meanings when used in a different context or combined with other words in a sentence.

It is a semantics issue, not grammar.

I looked into this a couple of years ago and consulted an attorney in the US who specializes in international estate planning.  She happens to be a relative as well.

For assets in the US, it is really best to have a US will.

For assets located in Thailand, she stated that a Thai will is best, but it is possible to put instructions for Thai assets in the US will should there be no Thai will in existence.

Without confirmation on this matter directly from April, If your policy is silent on this then you should assume that your coverage will lapse on the expiry date. You would then have to start over making a fresh declaration on order to get a new policy.

If you have developed a medical condition during the period of the expiring policy or earlier iterations of it, then it will become a pre-existing condition and likely excluded from cover under the new policy.

L'Opera was excellent back in the day. 

I'll await reports of food and service quality before I give it a try again.

Hope this isn't a repeat of what happened to a favorite German restaurant. 

11 minutes ago, djlest said:

From what i have read none of our money has any protection whatsoever!

https://www.dpa.or.th/Protected-Depositors

 

Deposits in “Non-Resident Baht Accounts” are not protected by the Deposit Protection Agency as this is a special type of deposit account denominated in Thai baht that is used solely for specific transactions as prescribed in the Exchange Control Act B.E. 2485 (1942).

My understanding is that Thai banks request proof of an address in Thailand so that they may open a resident account for the applicant. No Thai address is required to open a non-resident account. If you provided a Thai address, then you most likely have a resident account and are protected.

1 hour ago, Lorry said:

Makes sense.

 

So if Mr U wants to gift 1m to Mr T tax-free, he has 2 choices:

1. Mr U is not a tax resident in Thailand,  then he can remit from Mr U's US account to Mr T's Thai account.

2. Mr U is a tax resident in Thailand, then he better transfers the 1m to Mr T's US account. Mr T then can remit the money to Thailand, and as a gift it would be tax-free (if customary,  and if a real gift, no sham).

 

Do you agree?

Until the RD issues clarification to the contrary, yes, at least with respect to a personal income tax liability on Mr. U. However if the purpose of the gift was to evade personal income tax on Mr. U's part, then possibly all bets are off.

Mr. T might be liable for gift tax if the amount were large enough.

9 minutes ago, Lorry said:

I don't get that.

 

If Mr U sends a birthday gift of 1m THB from his US account to his friend's (Mr T) Thai account, Mr T would have to pay Thai gift tax (if over 10m). Sure.

And don't let us talk about US taxes.

 

Imho, Mr T does not have to pay personal income tax for this 1m, because it is a gift.  No matter,  whether any income tax in any country has been paid for this 1m.

Nor does Mr U have to pay Thai personal income tax for this 1m. He never got this money in Thailand.  (Ok, @Etaoin Shrdluthinks he got that money for an imaginary microsecond - it was still Mr U's money on the way between crossing the border and landing in Mr T's account. So, what if Mr U transferred the money to Mr T's US bank account, supposed Mr T has a US bank account?).

Am I mistaken?

 

RD 161/2566 specifies which kind of income are taxable according to RD 161/2566 - gifts are not. That has been clarified by the RD in the video Klonko posted.

Neither are inheritances, BTW. Bringing inherited money to Thailand you shouldn't have to pay personal income tax, but inheritance tax if over 100m THB. Regardless of what taxes have ever been paid for the inherited money in any other country. 

Imho.

 

I may be completely wrong, I am financially almost illiterate, please elaborate. 

 

 

 

 

I think that the purpose of the remittance is irrelevant with respect to the remitter's potential Thai personal income tax liability. 

I think it means something when insurers advertise their reinsurers' financial strength rating and not their own.

Reinsurance won't help a policyholder if their insurer goes bust.

Some interesting reading here, especially page 21:  https://www.bma.bm/viewPDF/documents/2023-10-04-10-14-06-Best-Doctors-Insurance-Limited---2022-Financial-Statement.pdf

4 hours ago, Surasak said:

If extreme CO2 is the cause of the temperatures rising, why are the not more trees and plants which thrive on CO2? Also, if CO2 is the problem, why is the global population increasing, when high concentrations of CO2 would be deadly to all animal life?

You don't suppose that the climate, plants. and animals might have different thresholds of sensitivity to CO2 levels?

35 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Yeah, seems like a doable filtering, er laundering scheme.

I think that for laundering statutes to kick in, at least in Thailand, the source of the funds has to be an illegal activity.