Filer

DCC is dynamic currency conversion and used increasingly worldwide in hotels, restaurants etc. According to VISA and Mastercard regulations they card holder always must have the choice of currency and the exchange rate must be printed and shown. In a normal case DCC is not a cheat to the cardholder as he will get exactly the amount billed which he signed for. The spread which formerly was shared between issuer and acquirer is now often shared between acquirer and merchant. That is the reason the merchant is interested in using the system as he can get a kick-back from his acquiring bank.

So just to confirm, if you are charged GBP on a British card, you pay exactly that amount and no other charges are made?

I read somewhere else that additional charges would be made. So obviously I heard wrong.

Therefore in Thailand paying the home country currency on your card is generally a bad idea (onshore/offshore rates) whilst in most other countries it would make little difference.

Correct?

"So just to confirm, if you are charged GBP on a British card, you pay exactly that amount and no other charges are made?"

--- Correct, in my personal experience in Thailand and other countries.

The Pound amount stated on your transaction receipt is what shows up on your account - nothing more. The card issuer handles it like a transaction back home.

"I read somewhere else that additional charges would be made. So obviously I heard wrong."

--- As far as I am aware, the only circumstance where an extra charge is levied on a Pounds transaction is when you draw Pounds cash from an ATM in UK and some issuers add a small percentage or flat fee on to this - to give them some profit, since they are not getting any commission percentage from a merchant in this case).

"Therefore in Thailand paying the home country currency on your card is generally a bad idea (onshore/offshore rates) whilst in most other countries it would make little difference."

--- Incorrect, on both points.

In Thailand the local onshore rate gives you more Baht for your Pound (or other currency). Doing the Baht-to-Pound exchange in Thailand results in a much lower Pounds total, not a higher one. The bottom-line saving can be up to 10% in my experience.

If we are considering UK-issued cards, then in most other countries where there is no dual exchange rate to worry about it may still be better to accept a local DCC conversion (at the slightly disadvantageous exchange rate which the merchant/retailer will use). This is because you will lose less this way than by letting the typical UK card-issuer do the conversion with its rip-off exchange rates plus the extra loadings for foreign-currency card transactions. Nationwide in UK doesn't screw its cardholders as badly as most other card issuers, but generally anything to do with foreign exchange conversions in the UK is to be avoided - it is a big cash-cow for the UK banking industry.

I think that Malaysia airlines still has a direct flight from KL through Jo'burg/Capetown all the way to BA. You have to do the connecting leg to KL, but it might be worth checking out with an agent that is well-connected with Malaysia Airlines what the best deal with them might be all the way from Bangkok. I guess that lack of competition on this direct route would work against low fares, but maybe still worth checking.

The practice of billing in a foreign currency is a big disadvantage if you have taken the trouble to get a credit card that does not impose a conversion charge or an unfavourable exchange rate. For UK residents the credit cards issued by Nationwide and the Post Office both offer this big advantage, but this is completely lost if, for instance, an hotel bills in GBP at its own exchange rate.

In theory you're right, but don't overlook the big current difference in Thailand between the on-shore and offshore exchange rates.

Currently it's still better to convert in Thailand at the on-shore rate, even at the hotel's lower-than-market rate, and have pounds billed direct to your UK card, than to have the conversion done in UK by your card company at the much worse off-shore rate.

I gave a specific example of my experience in post #6

My wife and I used to be regular users of Thai business class BKK-LON until about three years ago. Their service, food, equipment, seats etc were adequate, that's all. We flew them because of price: they were the cheapest business class to London out of BKK with a daily service (and the air miles were useful for local trips on Thai in SE Asia).

Then Thai dramatically raised their discounted prices. So a lot of people like me left them for one or other of the airlines flying through an intermediate hub, which we pleasantly discovered were offering far better service, food, seats etc at prices not much more than Thai had previously been charging.

Judging by what members are saying, Thai still seems to be offering an inferior product.

You may, like me, be amazed at the reporting in yesterday's London Times (its property supplement), which states that

"Thailand ...is trying to attract foreign investors and retirees to its shores."

"...Thailand is proposing a change in the law to attract retirees."

Here is a scan of the relevant text

See the image caption and the 3rd TopTips bullet.

Thgis is not a 'sponsored' supplement, but the Times's own editorial matter. No doubt the Times is simply, without checking it, reprinting PR material put out by one or other international property agency which has property interests in Thailand.

The thought of a pro-retiree change in the law!

I have emailed to the Editor of the Times to ask what he knows that nobody in Thailand knows.

This system appears to be creeping in all over the world. The retailers like it because it allows them to make a small margin on the exchange transaction - to offset their commission loss to the card company.

I agree it's deplorable, and sharp practice if the retailer doesn't offer you the choice.

However, in Thailand, with the onshore and offshore rates, it can in fact be to your advantage to go with the local conversion and have your foreign credit card billed directly with your home currency.

Let me give you an example:

On 23 Feb this year I had to pay a big hotel bill in Bangkok, baht 102,300. I was given the choice of billing in baht or via an on-the-spot conversion to my card currency (pounds) at 67.17 baht to 1 pound, slightly less than the then current banks' exchange rate of about 68.5. I accepted the conversion which resulted in £1,523 ( no additional charges). This amount was exactly what was billed to my pound based credit card account at home - no extra charges.

If I'd allowed the 102,300 baht to be charged in baht to my credit card, it would have been converted at home at the offshore rate, which I think was was then about 62 to £1 (making £1,650), plus a foreign currency surcharge, and I would have ended up with a debit approaching £1,700.

Unless I've got something wrong here, it's BETTER to accept the local conversion in Thailand, even if the rate is a little worse than the banks', because the alternative is to have the conversion at the very unfavourable offshore rate - so long as we continue with the dual exchange rates.

Of course, this works in the opposite way round if you are talking about transferring credit amounts out of the country.

Remember: cash or credits coming into TH, debits going out of TH - do conversion in Thailand

cash or credits going out of TH, debits coming into TH - do conversion offshore

That's good advice.

In addition, consider taking the risk to mention apologetically that you think you may be just a little overweight and you hope it will be OK and smile pleadingly.

Don't forget the old trick, if you've got several bags, of placing them firmly in contact with the fixed side walls of the weighing place (jam them in if possible). This often takes quite a few kilos off the load which is sensed by the weighing platform below. Most check-ins are configured so that you can do this.

A can of aerosol insecticide spray may be a useful additional weapon against snakes.

For a while I worked in the insecticide business (large international insecticides group with tropical involvement). We were very strong on natural-based insecticides (from the pyrethrum flower) and synthetic derivatives of them. These are still the predominant active ingredient in most contact sprays for flying insects today, because they are essentially harmless to humans and mammals (as opposed to other more toxic sprays, with a long residual effect - for crawling insects, which may contain all sorts of harmful chemicals).

While harmless to warm-blooded animals, these flying-insect sprays are quite harmful to cold-blooded things, reptiles and fish, because of the way that the active ingredient works on their nervous systems. (You should always cover up your fish tank if you use them in the house.)

These sprays have been used successfully to deter and kill snakes when nothing else was available - a piece of info not much known outside the insecticides industry.

Check your insecticde cans and look for ingredients which mention pyrethrum/pyrethrins or the synthetic bioallethrin, permethrin, tetramethrin etc (things which contain the letters '..ethrin..'). Most big cans of fly/mosquito spray which I have seen in Thailand are made this way. I always check them when I buy, to make sure that I'll not be spraying something toxic in my air (although I think that most manufacturers have in fact now stopped putting really toxic stuff stuff in fly/mosquito sprays).

So keep a can of fly/mosquito spray handy and spray it hard towards the snake if you've no other weapon. The snake will almost certainly go away.

I've often wondered whether frequent spraying of these insecticides on the ground and vegetation around the house (not with aerosol sprays but with bulk insecticide and industrial sprayers) would create a discomfort zone for snakes. The problem of course is that these insecticides are short lived (aimed at catching insects on the wing) and you would have to repeat it frequently. Mosquito coils usually contain a pure, basic form of pyrethrum and ought in theory to deter snakes. if you have them alight close to your house.

Good idea. I've often wondered about this myself. It'll be interesting to see the results - if enough people take part.

Welcome to the forum (I see it's your first post).

Most of the local Phuket rental agents have good Web sites from which you can see (with pictures) what's available at different price levels, and that may be the best place to start - before you came and look yourselves. ll send you a PM (personal message) with contact/Web details of some Phuket agencies which my wife and I have found useful. We're shortly moving permanently to Phuket ourselves and will be renting, so we know these agents and are using them. The price range is probably something like baht 10,000 to 40,000 (or more) per month for long-term (1 yr) rent, depending on all the usual variables of size, quality, location, view etc.

(For visas there's a lot of info on this site, including stuff pinned at the start of the Visa section - or look at the Web site of the sponsor Sunbelt for overview of the possibilities. )

Good luck.

Interesting and insightful thread ... and a depressing one as well.

So now the whole focus will be on hitting Johnny farang for income tax on monies remitted to Thailand - can see the exodus that will ensue if they pull this stunt.

I think you'll find that every country has a similar approach. The taxman always come-eths with his hand out.

From what I see, Thailand has very similar rules on this tax matter as the UK. Resident but non demociled foreigners in the UK aren't liable for tax on offshore earnings unless they are repatriated into the UK.

Its actually a perfered system to say Australia where I am from . If resident there, you are liable for income on your world wide earnings, whether bought into Australia or not AFAIK.

The position in the UK (for a resident but 'non-domiciled' foreigner) is as stated above, but if fact even more severe than that. The default position of the UK tax authorities is that if such a person transfers any money into the UK through the banking system it is automatically considered as income (and thus subject to UK income tax) UNLESS the transfer is made by the remitting bank specifically as a 'capital transfer' or 'savings transfer'. In other words you are guilty, in terms of tax liability, unless you can prove otherwise. I hate to think of this being applied in Thailand.

I'll give you a recent example of someone I know in London, a Frenchman running the UK subsidiary of his French-based employers, resident and working in London but not long-term 'domiciled' there.

This person decided that, rather than continuing to rent a house in London, he would buy one, since he felt inclined to stay in London for some time. He worked out the logistics of this with the international firm of accountants which his employers uses world-wide. He transferred some 2 million pounds sterling from his French savings into his UK bank account for the house purchase, and bought the house. (It seems a lot, but I assure you that in the 'posh' parts of west London, such as Kensington, prices for a family house essentially are 1 million sterling upwards.)

When it came to the time for his annual tax filing with the UK tax authorities, to determine his year-end UK tax situation, he had the same firm of international accountants prepare his papers for submission. He was shocked to see that they had included the transfer of 2 million pounds from France as income, with a tax liability on this of 40% (top rate of UK tax) or Pounds 800,000. They told him that since his UK bank account record showed money coming in from outside the country, they were obliged to report it as income, since there was no documentation from the transmitting bank that it was from a savings source or had borne tax in France.

Essentially the accountants had screwed up by not advising him of the correct procedure (transfer it specifically as a capital/savings transfer). Fortunately he had enough leverage as a top executive over his company's accountants (backed up by the threat of personally suing them for negligence) to force them at their expense to follow the paper trail back and retroactively get the proper documentation set up.

Imagine the complexities if Thailand moved in this direction. How would you demonstrate that incoming transfers were not current-year income?

The info about this on Hull's own Web site seems pretty clear to me - just as the other posters have indicated.

"I can see your point but do you really believe that having to show 800k in a bank account ... to get a 1 year extension of stay is difficult?"

Yes, comparatively, Thailand is easy to retire in. I believe that in order to qualify for a retirement visa in Malaysia, one needs to document a monthly income of $2500. U.S.

Again, keep in mind that for Retirement Vsa extension, it is the combination of bank deposit(s) plus yearly retirement income which must equal or exceed 800,000. Baht.

Completely incorrect about Malaysia. You can qualify on a one time deposit alone to get a visa for 5 or 10 years. Yes, it is a rather large deposit. No pension or income needed to show. A large chunk of this deposit can be withdrawn after one year to buy housing or for medical care.

....."rather large deposit" is only twice the size of the Thai one and 60% can be withdrawn (and not topped up) after 1 yr as stated above. Plus foreign income/transfers into the country are guaranteed free of Malaysian tax, you can legally buy freehold properties, you are specifically allowed duty free import of household effects (rather then relying on goodwill of Customs) etc.

Following on from from recent postings on this thread about the advantages of the income method, there's a question which I haven't seen answered elsewhere (and I'll raise it here rather than start a new thread).

Seeing that a foreign married couple, subject to marriage documentation and the other usual conditions, can generally get their 12 month retirement extensions on the basis of one sum of 800k in a joint-name account, can they also combine their individual pensions into one amount for the purpose of reaching or coming closer to the alternative annual 800k pension income qualification? This would seem logical, if they are allowed to count as a single household unit for the bank balance method? Has anybody tried this? Or is the income qualification applied strictly to each individual?

The rain radar at Phuket airport is fascinating. You can see what it means, and I know that it shows the intensity of rain, but I'm curious exactly what physically is being recorded and what the indicated units are. Anyone know?

What Tinkelbell didn't say, and what Ben@H3-Digital may not be aware of, is that an employee of Aramco, living in Saudi Arabia in Dhahran, enjoys the finest expatriate living conditions in the whole of Saudi Arabia. It is not living in the desert at all!! This is absolutely the top end of the market there and Tinkelbell's half-brother certainly wasn't living in any hardship. It's not at all surprising that he chose to stay there for almost 30 years (as my wife and I did for 18 years).

The Saudi Aramco compound (really a company city) at Dhahran contains the company headquarters departments plus housing for several thousand employees and dependents. It is about 4km across and is like a giant country club in terms of its facilties - to mention just a few: 18 hole grassed golf course, several 25m swimming pools, all manner of sports fields and pitches, libraries, schools, movie theatre, 500-bed US standard hospital, clinics, shops, restaurants, vibrant employee-generated social life, women are allowed to drive cars (still not allowed in Saudi Arabia outside the Aramco family compounds) etc. etc. All these things are free. It's not a hardship posting. Restrictive customs that apply generally in Saudi Arabia are much more liberally applied there and the company takes care of any brushes that an emploiyee may have with any of the Saudi authorities outside the compound.

No wonder that Tinkelbell's half-brother chose to stay for almost 30 years. He's earned good money, had a comfortable existence, with ample opportunity for periodic vacation travel world-wide, and probably stayed at the cutting edge of his technology and professional field in the world's largest oil-producing company

As I said, this is one end of the spectrum, and Guesthouse is not going to enjoy such luxury on his assignment there, but. depending on the location and the residential compound where he lives, he may well have quite a reasonable life for 15 months and collect good money and career experience in the process. The critical thing in Guesthouse's case, in my view, is that he is embarking on this for a limited time frame.

I've heard in one or two places that 5 year renewal licenses for expats are going to be phased out and that there will be only 1 year licenses in future. I can't see anything about this in this thread. Anybody have any news on this?

Best of luck, Guesthouse!

I think it's not a bad decision if it's for 15 months only. Life is now (since the Gulf War, Iraq invasion and all the so-called terrorism-related stuff) considerably harder and more complex for expats in Saudi Arabia than it has been in the past.

My wife (European) and I spent 18 years there up to 1996, including the period of the first Gulf War, when I worked in the oil industry. I have kept closely in touch with the country since I left. It was a great experience and we were able to save money to help with our long term plans - which mature this year with our retirement to Thailand.

For somebody going now, I believe there are three important factors: your attitude, the job's location and your living accommodation.

If you have an open and curious mind to other cultures, which it seems you have, it can be an interesting experience.

Eastern Province (such as Dhahran, Al Khobar and Dammam) where the bulk of the oil industry is and which has been home to countless expats over the last half-century, is more expat-friendly than other areas. Jiddah on the west coast still has a somewhat more 'open' feel than other cities, due to its long role as the traditional port of entry to Saudi and the holy cities. Riyadh, the administreative capital is relatively new and quite a tough environment for expats. Other cities are probably harder still.

Wherever you will be, the quality and scope of your living accommodation is critical. The larger, better equipped and better-run compounds will make a big difference to your and your wife's happiness in the country. Do not accept to live 'on the local economy' (as they say) just in a flat in an apartment building.

(Having your family with you, rather than a long way away, also really helps).

15 months sounds to me a reasonable period to experience the country.

PM me if you have any more specific questions and I'll help if I can.

Been through several times recently (last in March). The restaurant that IMA_FARANG mentions is still there, but I've not used it recently. It's always struck me as a typical unexciting Middle East airport restaurant, adequate but pricey. During layovers I get free food in the Gulf Air lounge as a frequent flyer, but if I didn't I guess that I would make do with the fast food and franchise outlets (of which there are quite a few), rather than spend in the restaurant.

One point of information then a question.

The FCCT in Maneeya Centre, Chidlom is a members' club and to join you do not have to be a foreigner or a journalist. Hence the audience attending one of their public talks given for example by a mouthpiece of the Israeli embassy is made up of a mix of members, non-members and perhaps a few jornalists.

As I live in Surin, I am a country member and my very small subscription gives me a pleasant private place to sit and have a drink or a meal. The only chromium poles are on the Skytrain that takes you to the door. The staff always know and welcome me and it is one of my special pleasures to go there when in Bangkok. I have heard some excellent talks there, not least of all by the current Prime Minister.

Finally, can anyone suggest any similar club in Bangkok?

Andrew Hicks

For those who are interested, they've a very informative Web site at www.fccthai.com

Finally buy pale coloured curtains and towels as mosquitos will congregate in dark coloured ones but don't like pastel and modern styles. No kidding!

Andrew Hicks

This is not as stupid as it may seem. There's a fair amount of anecdotal evidence that, at least in the evening, mosquitoes are more attracted to land on you if you are wearing dark clothing than if you are wearing light clothing (I worked in tropical insect control business for a while). This tracks with Andrew's comment about curtains. So, stick to white shirts, rather than dark blue!

The question is: Are you UK-tax-liable? If you were not, and your instruction was for the executor to pick up money from offshore and distribute it to a person living in UK, I do not believe that inheritance tax would enter into it.

I'm not domiciled in the UK or liable to tax there. I just want to open some accounts there and have them covered by a UK Will rather than a Thai Will or no Will at all. Apparently, UK inheritance tax only kicks in when the amount is over 300,000 pounds, so I guess that makes it irrelevant to me. I'm on a Thai salary.

If you're not 'domiciled' (for tax purposes) in the UK, then any assets you have there or anywhere should be in the clear for inheritance taqx purposes, and the £300,000 threshold for inheritance tax is irrelevant. However, do take professional advice on your case. You can be totally free of UK income tax liability due to overseas residence and overseas source of income, but this does not by itself make you 'non-domiciled' for the purposes of inheritance tax on your world-wide assets..

The tax legalities of 'domicile' are a real minefield. It has nothing to do with simply not living there. Merely retaining and operating a bank account in the UK could compromise your claim to be 'non-domiciled' for tax purposes. Opening new accounts in the UK could also compromise 'non-domiciled' tax status - and it's very difficult in any case nowadays to open a new bank account in UK if you've severed all practical ties with the country (which is essentially what non-domiciled means) and if you cannot show current residency in the country or some other substantial current connection with the country. This is all due to anti-money laundering precautions.

Again I say, talk to an expert in English tax law. You should be able to identify some initial sources through the Web.

Hello all,

We're planning to fly to Europe on either of these airlines, in business class. I flew QR in economy before and was very satisfied with them, so I am sure that business will be excellent. But RJ's fares are lower, so I was wondering whether their business class product meets QR's levels of service. Anyone flown with them before?

I've flown with RJ on and off, although only in Middle East /Europe. They seem quite competent, are well respected and have been around for about 40 years with a solid flying tradition. They have a surprisingly young fleet for an airline this old (avg 5yrs, I believe) - as young as the much newer Qatar Airways. Their long-haul business class seats are good (flat beds).

If you get a better deal on price, go with them, I'd say. No reason not to. However, Qatar Airways, which a number of my business associates have flown with and are enthuisiastic about, probably has the edge over RJ in terms of on-board service and on the ground facilities at their Doha hub (where they even have a special terminal there, not just special lounge, for first and business class!). Qatar Airways has a consistently very high performance in the major customer surveys. The Qatari government is pumping a lot of money into the airline to make it one of the best, and the intense competition with its close neighbours Gulf Air, Emirates and Etihad, is all helping to push up service levels.

We currently use Gulf Air between BKK and LON in business class, because its a better deal on price than others. However, the trade-off there is that they don't have flat beds in business class yet on the Bangkok leg, but we tolerate that.

Some sites that I use for reference are:

www.airlinequality.com (has all the Skytrax survey stuff)

www.flatseats.com (part of Skytrax - good survey comments on seating)

Wikepedia profiles of each airline: just do a google search for: Wikepedia and name of the airline.

Ahhh thanks. I looked Dengue Fever up on the internet...

This infectious disease is manifested by a sudden onset of fever, with severe headache, muscle and joint pains (myalgias and arthralgias - severe pain gives it the name break-bone fever or bonecrusher disease)

I recall being told - a couple of weeks ago - that a teenager in the locale had these sypmtoms and was being treated at hospital. That seems then the most likely explanation for the fumigation taking place. I did not know it was caused by mosquito bites. Obviously Malaria is more commonly associated with mosquito bite and Dengue Fever rarely talked about.

I'll have to remember to be more careful on a morning.

Quite coincidentally, I've just noticed that The Nation today

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/08/01...al_30043214.php

carries a report on Dengue Fever and the number of cases in SE Asia. Fatality rate not as bad as I thought, but if you don't diagnose and treat it quickly or if you get a bad dose, there's no solution. One of my expat friends in Phuket got it, but immediately recognised the symptons, being a long-termer in the region, and got off lightly with just two days in hospital.

If you hold substantial wealth in the UK/US then it makes sense to have a Will and an Executor looking after those UK/US assets.

Can a UK Will and Executor look after assets in offshore bank accounts in, say, Guernsey? Would those assets be subject to UK inheritance tax?

I think (but I may be wrong) is that if your executor attempts to repatriate the funds, the funds will be hit by inheritance tax. Perhaps the answer is to encourage enjoying life abroad

It is my understanding that a 'UK will' (by which presumably is meant a will set up in the English format and under English law), with a UK based executor, can govern assets held anywhere in the world. There may of course be additional local requirements which are advisable in order to facilitate the return or liquidation of assets held abroad - for example, having a local will in Thailand to cover any Thai assets and their distribution after death (without this a UK-based executor would have to do much more work to extract the Thai assets). I would imagine, however, that offshore banks in, say, Guernsey or other European jurisdictions would have no problem following instructions from a UK based-executor executing an English will.

On the issue of inheritance tax, I believe that the determining factor is the 'domicile' for tax purposes of the deceased person ('domicile' being a very complex issue in itself - too complex to discuss here - and quite different from mere 'residence' for tax opurposes). If you are considered UK-domiciled then all your assets, anywhere in the world, are potentially subject to UK inheritance tax, regardless of where they are based and regardless of whether they are actually repatriated or not. Of course, offshore/overseas assets which were not identified in an English will and which had been set up to be governed (in the event of death) by some other quite separate instructions, might escape the UK inheritance tax net.

I don't see that the actual repatriation of funds from offshore/overseas by a UK executor makes any difference. The question is: Are you UK-tax-liable? If you were not, and your instruction was for the executor to pick up money from offshore and distribute it to a person living in UK, I do not believe that inheritance tax would enter into it.

I am not a lawyer, just a well-informed person who has researched the same issue for myself, so please take proper legal advice for your own case before setting up arrangments. It's worth consulting a qualified lawyer in the countries in question. An English solicitor drawing up an English will for you should be easlily able to advise you on tax liabilities.