jerrymahoney

As to the reference in the OP, it does help when you keep your speed below 135 mph ... although that might not have been a factor in the actual incident.

OK. Per Trump motion: "The Court should reject this transparent gamesmanship and deny the motion entirely." Smith's team has until Saturday to respond. The judge will then likely set oral arguments on the issue. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-opposes-special-counsels-request-gag-order-jan/story?id=103489896

I posted this elsewhere but this, in part, is what is referenced above: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/thailand.pdf (click on jpg to enlarge)

This has been posted in various forms elsewhere, but this is from the official Treaty Doc (click on jpg to enlarge): https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/thailand.pdf

In my case it isn't if they come to believe, they make a SWIFT transfer to Bangkok Bank every month. But I had the account for 15 years before moving to Thailand and have IRA and other and other investments with the bank so at least so far, they have never made any such inquiry. Setting up any new accounts elsewhere, as I once tried to do, hit a Patriot Act buzz saw.

Maybe read this for now: https://mahanakornpartners.com/the-revenue-department-closes-loopholes-tightening-tax-collection-on-foreign-income/

Well, at least for me, my next retirement extension is early December so I will have almost a whole year to figure out the nitty-gritty especially US-Thai Tax Treaty implications.

I will assume any hard-core results from that meeting will become available elsewhere.

Webinar. 1000 baht for non AMCHAM members.

It is important to note that a POD is more powerful than a last will and testament. If a POD account has one individual named as the beneficiary, and the will of the account holder lists another individual as a beneficiary, the POD-designated beneficiary prevails. The named beneficiary on the POD account is not required to honor the account holder’s last will and testament, which makes it imperative that the individual ensures to change or cancel the POD beneficiary if they have someone else listed on their will. A POD account is very similar to a transfer-on-death (TOD) arrangement but deals with a person’s bank assets instead of their stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or other investment assets. Both POD and TOD agreements offer quick means of dispersing assets, as both avoid the probate process, which can take several months. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/payableondeath.asp

With a properly filed P-O-D, It is not the bank's concern. Maybe you should have sued the deceased when he/she was alive.

Trump fights Jack Smith request for narrow gag order in Jan. 6 case Prosecutors asked a judge to bar the former president’s ‘inflammatory’ attacks on case participants, citing a threat of violence and intimidation of jurors and others September 25, 2023 at 11:39 p.m. EDT After the government request was made public Sept. 15, Trump called special counsel Jack Smith “a deranged person” who “wants to take away my rights under the First Amendment.” His attorneys struck a more restrained tone in a 25-page court filing in Washington, D.C., writing that the court “should reject this transparent gamesmanship and deny the motion entirely.” “Given the significant First Amendment issues presented by the Motion, President Trump respectfully requests the Court schedule a hearing at the first opportunity,” the filing states. The response joins a battle that promises to be a recurring feature of Trump’s multiple state and federal criminal cases and that highlights challenges facing prosecutors and judges in the historic attempts to prosecute a former American president and active candidate. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/09/25/trump-gag-order-response/ https://archive.ph/zaOGG

Yes. I have one whether asked or not 3x total.

It is up to the individual IMM officer whether they request a source-of-funds letter. For me it has been some do; some don't.

Upon proof of death, the bank or investment bank would give the money to whomever was listed as the beneficiary(ies).

I do not know about UK. In USofA it is a common practice at banks and investment P-O-D and no probate required.

If a UK bank offers payment-upon death options (no probate) then it might be easier for the Thai partner to gain access than from a Thai bank that does not.

Only to say that, at some future point, there may be an advantage to having a long continuous extensions of stay versus NOT so having.

Sure. But any NEW change would likely be modeled on the same type verbiage.

Correct. What I write and what's in my head sometimes do not correlate. BTW the 'grandfather' provision is at Item 6.

The last time there was an overhaul to the Police Order on retirement extensions of stay, there was a grandfather provision based upon "consecutively permitted to stay in the Kingdom" extensions". I would want to lose my 15 previous continuous extension track record.

Just to note that about the only payable-on-death no probate option here in Thailand is a paid up life-insurance policy.

No. American. And I use no-hassle SWIFT for monthly transfers.

Thanks. I myself use the 65K per month option but I just tried to keep things simple.

Just to note: I have one totally non-politics entry on Wikipedia. It was a mini-war from those who opposed the entry and those that supported. One experienced editor came to my rescue else it never would have been included. Multiple footnotes as mentioned above. Buddhism-related.