NoDisplayName

Incorrect. The limit of gifting spouses is 20 million baht per year. She can save up all her 20M gifts for a decade, and bring in 200M in one swell foop as non-taxable gifts. The 20M limit is on gifts received per year, NOT on gifts already gifted remitted into Thailand. Yes, they may be in a passbook savings account, but they are still qualified gifts. Remitting more than 20M probably is reportable, but not taxable. The gifts are remitted over a decade, not received in one year. Same as when reporting carrying more than a designated amount of currency when flying. Reportable, not taxable. Perhaps look at them at an angle where they are not being laundered. I am gifting, solely for her benefit. I have no rights to the money gifted. It will likely stay in her account as long as I breath. I'm pretty sure that's both technically and ethically below-board. A quick review of the gifting rules should tell you that. You missed the part where my wifi asked whether gifting oversees was allowed. TRD did not "recommend" it over gifting in-country. They simply confirmed that the rules for gifting IN Thailand apply for gifts given outside, as well.

No, not yet. Tax policy is fluid now, no telling what changes are coming, or what might flag interest. If I follow a procedure that is unquestionably legal, no worries. I've got plenty of non-assessable funds and in-country savings to spend down that will cover all foreseeable expenses. Been there, done that. We both have Schwab accounts. I can pull cash by ACH from my other brokerage into my Schwab cash account. Then I have a standing order allowing my to send cash only, one way, to the wifi's account. Everything set up, all links tested. Good to go. Everything can be done online now without having to contact a representative.

They no say that. Wife asked if gift rules apply to funds received in an offshore account. TRD says yes, gift rules are not limited to Thai bank accounts only. There was talk on previous threads that gifts received offshore don't get gift tax exemption. That is untrue. I don't want to send direct to her Thai account, because I would be the remitter, in which case million baht deposits might draw attention. Sure, I could (try to) prove non-assessable funds, but I don't want to. They did not. We want to gift offshore so that remittances are her gift, NOT my funds deposited in her account and then declared as a gift.

No, it doesn't "morph" into savings. She still has a gift of $xxx,xxx regardless of what she may have done with the funds before remitting. The money can move through multiple accounts, buying and selling stocks, whatever, but she still may remit the amount of the gift as a gift under the gifting rules. Interest or capital gains or dividends she has earned from the gift is taxable/assessable, and she would even qualify for a foreign tax credit on the 15% withholding on interest and dividends. As long as she follows the gifting rules. "Filter?" Like at a, you know, laundry? Naughty, if she's bringing in the gift money to pay general expenses from which you benefit. That is no longer a gift. If you get caught, there will be TRD to pay. My plan is to gift the wife ~1 million baht as a birthday or xmas gift each year, deposited into her Schwab brokerage account. The money will be invested to "take care" her after I've departed. Perfectly legal, in accordance with gifting law.

Never mind. You're the guy what doesn't understand "revenue." "End of discussion."

Other than interest payments of $1.2 trillion, the debt does NOT factor into the budget calculations. You owe $50K on your Chinese EV. You make $100K per year after taxes, you spend $90K per year on living expenses plus $10K per year on car payments. Your budget is balanced. Now you can cut frivolous expenses, like your transgender mouse experiments you perform in your basement, and begin to pay off your car loan and perhaps even your $100K student loan for your masters in lesbian street performing arts you hoped Biden would cancel.

Article author mis-spelled "street racing."

I'm shirley everyone will settle down once Vance is elected. They can enjoy peace in Europe, a balanced US budget, and no taxes on their sociable security benefits.

"They're eating the rich!"

Harrison Salisbury, who had recently been in Hanoi, detailed for the committee how bicycles enabled the Viet Cong (VC) and regular North Vietnamese Army (NVA) to continually resupply their forces even under the most adverse conditions. Salisbury concluded his testimony with a strong assertion: “I literally believe that without bikes they’d have to get out of the war.” The astonished Fulbright, almost springing up from his seat, replied to Salisbury: “Why don’t we concentrate on bombing their bicycles instead of the bridges? Does the Pentagon know about this?”

Not exactly. If the gifting laws are abused to evade taxes, then you may have problems if caught. If the gifting laws are followed, you'll be fine. Wife called the TRD helpline to confirm, gifting law applies to funds given to a spouse into an offshore account, and she can bring in the funds as she pleases. NOT for OUR daily expenses, of course, or for the donor's benefit. I mean, like, dude, really........this particular law was written by those with wealth for their patrons with wealth to reduce their tax burden. Otherwise why set the limit at 20 million baht per year in a land of subsistence farmers.

Who got a "certificate of clearance"? I must have missed that. Do you mean a receipt for filing tax? I've got a bunch of those. How 'bout you?

Ooh! Ooh! I know this one! Because it's a republic!

Vance 2028!

He's just following tradition. I said, “Nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars.” They said, “You have no authority. You’re not the president.” The president said—I said, “Call him.” I said, “I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars.” I said, “You’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours.” I looked at them and said, “I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.” Well, son of a bitch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

Revenue is simply income before expenses and deductions. Is possible to have $millions in "revenue", yet make no money. This is something expats in Thailand will have to watch out for if Thailand moves to global taxation. In the US, capital losses may offset capital gains. This is not the case in Thailand. US expat can sell a stock for $1million, making $100K, then sell another stock for $500K, losing $100K. gain = loss, no tax due to the IRS. Under global taxation, the $100K gain is taxed as ordinary income, whereas the loss is not entered into the PIT calculations.

Income or profit? There is a difference. And do we apply the concept to farmers, as well? No deductions for fertilizer or diesel fuel. No write-offs for crop losses? Good luck buying food. Or,............anything.

But it's only fair. And you don't need to make up just-so situations of some guy gaming the system to validate your socialist tendencies. Just take a guy that has made a fortune over the past decades running a plumbing supply chain or investing. Everything legal and according to the rules. If we're gonna strip him of his annual income "for equity", then it's only fair to compensate him for his annual losses "for equity." Work hard, save some bucks, invest and retire. You, too, can make $60K/year and pay zero tax. Until the commies come along.

The point is the billionaire didn't make a billion dollars this year. That is wealth, assets, savings, prior earnings. If he paid $750 in taxes he likely only made $15,000 income after deducting business/investment losses.

You're absolutely right. That billionaire that only paid $750 did so by writing off $millions in business or investment losses against income. Wouldn't you like to reimburse his losses?

You are more than welcome to do your part by donating all your wealth to be split equally at a local homeless shelter. Or are you suggesting we should be liberal/progressive by being extraordinarily generous with OTHER people's money?

Inequality of wealth is only bad if you're a socialist, and specifically one not at the top of the food chain.

Ooooooooh! Anonymous sources said it!

Probably shower time stories.

That's what I thought. You have a talking point. "Proposed" and "possible" is not definite. Why wouldn't the State Department mention even one of those real offers?