NoDisplayName

Sure, but was the all-important provision that the tax only applies to "physical cash", like cash money orders cashiers checks, being sent? Are banks and "financial institutions" still exempt?

The downside to self-insuring, when 300K baht expenses (~US$10K) depletes the fund.

I don't expect a rebranded $150 made-in-China T-Mobile smartphone purchased for $500 with a rebranded overpriced service contract will be worth all that much after 47 gets 25'd.

Not really enough to fulfill the dream of opening a bar. Have you considered buying a tuk-tuk?

Wise uses electronic transfers not physical cash or cashiers checks, and would be considered a financial institution, so appears to fit the definition to be exempt.

A new draft of the "One Big Beautiful Bill", released on June 27, shows big changes from the earlier version passed by the House of Representatives. The tax was originally proposed at 5 per cent in the House bill under the Trump administration before being reduced to 3.5 per cent and now further lowered to 1 per cent in the Senate draft. But crucially, this tax will only apply to cash or similar physical payments handed over to money transfer providers. Transfers done through bank accounts or debit and credit cards issued in the US won’t be taxed. The bill says the tax is “limited to cash and similar instruments… only to any remittance transfer for which the sender provides cash, a money order, a cashier’s check, or any other similar physical instrument.” https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/us-senate-lowers-proposed-remittance-tax-to-1-spares-bank-transfers-125062800890_1.html Appears under this revision the tax would only apply to poor migrant workers who use Western Union to send their salaries back to Mexico to feed their kids.

"Not an inch to the East." Trust us.

My wife has Aetna insurance (formerly BUPA) in addition to her standard Thai social insurance. This is in-patient only coverage for 1400 baht per month. On the another hand, I have a western policy with repatriation and higher coverage which is in-patient only with a large deductible. I figure health services are cheap enough to pay for most things out of pocket.

According to which flat-earf' chiropractor?

Operation Paperclip v2.0 We always need folks with experience in genocide.

Was it published in an accredited peer-reviewed journal, or RFK Jr.'s new governmental in-house medicinal tabloid?

Typical propaganda from the Daily Mail tabloid. Now the "report" it gets liked and shared and cited throughout the echo chamber, and suddenly it's truth social. Next will be a "report" from anonymous senior officials familiar with studies showing Putin may be responsible for the possible theft of right-handed socks throughout Dublin.

Google DIY will. Download and edit to your situation, translate to Thai. Print off, get two witnesses to sign. Technically that should be enough. Your amphur might record it for you. Ours (Korat) will not record a will with a foreigner.

Could be thought he was MS-13.

Dunno. Have only used it half a dozen times, and no calls dropped.

I downloaded VIBER when SKYPE went away. No problem calling toll-free 800 numbers in the US.

Your title "Norwegian tourist, 21, is barred from entering the US after ICE guards find JD Vance Meme" left out the words "allegedly" and "claimed the tourist" on his Instagram and Facebook accounts. The other side of the story: CBP said in a post on X that “Mads Mikkelsen was not denied entry for any memes or political reasons, it was for his admitted drug use.” https://time.com/7297472/jd-vance-meme-mads-mikkelsen-tourist-denied-entry-cbp-ice/ It's technically true he was denied entry after border agents found the meme, but it's equally true that the agents denied entry after they ate breakfast prior to their daily shift.

Not a treaty, and not an international legal obligation, according to..................the US government. See above. Can't have it both ways. A political "deal" isn't binding on the Iranians if it's not binding on the other parties to the "deal." I'll let you google it if'n ya like, but I recall one of the provisions of the "deal" was that restrictions on Iran would be nullified if one of the other parties exited the "deal" or if the promised sanctions relief was not accomplished.

On November 19, 2015, the State Department sent a letter to then-Representative Mike Pompeo that severely undercuts the notion that the Iran deal represents any form of binding American commitment. It turns out that the Obama administration not only acknowledged that the deal wasn’t a treaty (obvious enough), but it also admitted that it wasn’t “an executive agreement” or even a “signed document.” https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/iran-nuclear-deal-not-signed-document-not-binding/ In a letter recently released by Representative Mike Pompeo (R-KS), the State Department emphasized that the Iran deal – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – is not binding under international law. The letter was in response to Pompeo’s inquiry about why the JCPOA transmitted to Congress lacked signatures. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/state-department-affirms-iran-deal-only-political-commitment Sorry.

Nowhere in there does it limit enrichment.

The IEAE is not a treaty, it is a UN organization that monitors individual nations' nuclear programs based on provisions of the NPT. The NPT does not set limits on enrichment. Sorry.

Trump exited the treaty, Europe never fulfilled. JCPOA no longer applies. NPT does not set limits on enrichment.

60% is permitted under the NPT. Iran voluntarily committed to a 3.5% ceiling under the JCPOA. Trump unilaterally exited, applied sanctions. Europe did not fulfill their part of the deal. JCPOA is dead, NPT applies.............for now. I was not correct in 6 months notice to exit the treaty. The requirement is 3 months.

Not prohibited under NPT.

20% needed to fuel the Tehran reactor for medical isotopes. 60% enrichment is not prohibited under the NPT. Exit the NPT and they, too, can make nukes for defense. Winning!©