Etaoin Shrdlu

7 hours ago, ChipButty said:

Even Tel Aviv is not 99% Jewish I couldn't imagine any neighbourhood in the world being 99% 

 Kiryas Joel in New York comes close.

Did you grow up in Radnor?

12 minutes ago, CartagenaWarlock said:

Can you please post step-by-step instructions on how to do it, including the URL as a starting point. Thanks. 

I was visiting the US when I went into a Chase branch and opened the account.

I know this isn't helpful if you aren't planning on going to the US, but it is better than not being able to open an account under any circumstances with only a Thai address.

Before I opened the Chase account I did look into trying to open an account in the US without traveling there. If I remember correctly, TD Bank would open an account without me having to be physically present. This could be initiated over the phone using one of their toll-free numbers.

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Not sure what you're talking about. I think Interactive Brokers does IRAs which you can open from abroad. What do you mean by ported? I'm talking about a U.S. based bank specializing in expat customers.

Yes I'm aware you can't buy mutual funds living abroad for IRA by you can by stocks, bonds, and ETFs.

By ported, I meant establishing an IRA account with, or rolling an IRA account over into, a financial institution outside the US.

10 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Also think about why most people become expats.  It's not because they have too much money to live in the USA. 

 

Obviously, there are exceptions.  But I suspect the ones with the dosh have figured out banking overseas.

 

Some types of accounts can't be ported outside the US, such as IRA and 401k accounts. Really wealthy people probably don't rely so much on these accounts, but for middle-class Americans they are anchors to the US financial system. Then there are the US tax laws, particularly regarding ownership of some foreign financial products. 

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Yeah but you found a custom solution. They could change their policy tomorrow. I'm talking about making things much easier for ALL expats and digital nomads.

That's true, but that would also be the case for a bank that specialized in catering to expats. Nobody is safe while the legislature is in session.

Besides the issues raised by the Patriot Act and KYC requirements, licensing and regulatory issues in the expats' countries of residence may still be a deterrent. And as unlikely as it may seem, banks are also afraid of being sued by an account holder in a foreign country under laws and regulations they are not aware of.

Yet some banks will still work with expats. I was able to open a checking account with Chase using only my Thai address and mobile phone number along with a copy of a bank statement with my Thai address on it. Their mobile app works just fine on my phone with a Thai SIM and I can perform internet banking on my computer.

1 hour ago, Dolf said:

Never had a female pilot. I would be worried as women can't read maps. Might end up in the wrong city.

Women pilots are fine. No need to parallel park aircraft.

27 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Im not sure that payment of debt is considered income in any country. I may be wrong but that is a gross overstretch to make a claim like that. 

In the US, the IRS considers debt forgiveness as being income to the debtor and is taxable. This is an issue when President Biden proposes relief for student loans.

I could see how the RD could consider repayment of a loan that was remitted into Thailand but repaid with funds outside Thailand in a similar vein, or at least examine the provenance of the funds used in the repayment.

11 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

I think that Thai RD, unlike IRS, has no means nor power to enforce anything out of Thailand borders. Could you bring any case of Thai law being enforced abroad?

 

My comment is about the RD's ability to obtain relevant financial information under existing international tax agreements. Enforcement, if any, would be undertaken within Thailand under Thai laws.  

I think that enforcement of a Thai court judgement would require the re-litigation of the issue in the second country's court. This would be impractical with the exception of very large judgements. But I am not a lawyer and have to defer on this to those with legal training and insight into this issue.

29 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

I think the taxable event occurs when the cardholder transacts against the card in Thailand and that nothing else matters.

That may very well be the case. 

5 hours ago, eisfeld said:

 

But then that could be avoided by traveling outside of Thailand at the time the debt is settled. It makes more sense to count the items value as assessable income because it was at that time for sure for the benefit of someone in Thailand.

The funds were remitted into Thailand so perhaps the only way to reverse the debt obligation without creating a potentially taxable event would be to send after-tax funds from Thailand to the person or institution that lent the money.

46 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

 

I think there can be a reasonable argument made that the funds used for the purchase were a loan if it's a credit card. The loan then is repaid outside Thailand. So if really going by the letter of the law then the credit card transaction is not counted towards assessable income. And there is no income transferred to Thailand.

 

What should be counted as assessable income is the value of the item. The user from Thailands point of view got the item from the credit card company. The amount of tax due will be the same.

 

 

In the end it might be just semantics but maybe there's some edgecases where this plays a role.

 

In fact, if interpreted this way then it doesn't even matter if the recent changes were made or not. It would apply the same already before.

Remitting money that is borrowed abroad may not count as income when remitted, but payments to repay the loan could be considered income even if the payments don't cross a border since they accrue to the benefit the debtor located in Thailand. 

Option 2 is likely to be considered the same as Option 1 by the RD.

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

How about billionaires should not be above the law and not run their office like his corporation. 

That, too.

Trump is finding out the hard way why billionaires with political enemies and legal vulnerabilities don't run for high political office themselves, but instead have cleaner-handed frontmen run.

14 minutes ago, Tropicalevo said:

Our pest control folk use both.

We've also had both applied.

My understanding is that the spray is for roaches and ants and the bait is for the termites.

I'm not sure how effective spraying would be when it comes to termites. Their nests are underground and they construct tunnels to reach houses.

I think best practice is to use treated baits.

My preference would be to use US-based advisors for anything to do with US taxes, investments, and estate planning.  I would not engage any individual or firm domiciled outside the US legal system for advice in these areas.

There are firms in the US that specialize in helping expats with these issues. Here's one: https://creativeplanning.com/international/