MangoKorat

Skim readers as usual.

In light of the news yesterday, that Singapore Airlines will be paying compensation, I wonder if the member who berated me for saying that Singapore would payout rather then risk their excellent reputation would care to comment?

As I'm pretty sure there is no difference. If you know otherwise, I'd gladly stand corrected.

Well if I couldn't make a business work, I wouldn't have much choice would I. I would keep myself busy though. I don't. Doing your homework before you start a business is just good practice. There is no tax. I also contacted a friend who works as a taxation specialist with Deloitte in Bangkok. She advised me that no changes will be made to the tax system retrospectively - its never been done. So once my money is in, tax free - it remains tax free. They may screw over the general population but I very much doubt they'd dare to screw over the 'high rollers' in Thailand (and probably themselves) who'd be seriously affected by any retrospective changes. In looking for comparisons, the Thai government have often 'grandfathered' new rules for existing residents - such as the income requirements for extensions of stay. With the greatest of respect, there is a general presumption worldwide against introducing any new rules on anything retrospectively unless there is compelling justification. Any attempt to do so regarding tax rules would almost certainly be challenged in the courts. I don't think I need to 'wake up' - I'm very aware of how Thailand works. I've used the courts in Thailand and contrary to popular belief, I found I was treated very fairly. There's often a 'back story' to those who claim otherwise.

Yes, I find it incredible that he continues his line after I posted several links, some to specific cases and convictions. I don't invent knowledge of tax evasion, it comes from years of seeing TV news reports and like many of us, its common knowledge. I do though, know of one person personally and referred to that as an addition to a post. That person never got caught for what he did so there is no documented evidence but one only has to search google to find many examples of people that have been prosecuted, jailed or remain under investigation. There are perhaps 5 or 6 other posters on here who seem to look for people posting something and then pouncing on it and demanding evidence. When you provide evidence, they argue with it. In future I will refuse to do so, I have more to do than waste me time on pedants. One guy recently asked me to provide evidence that airlines have to pay compensation in the event of accidents. In that case we were discussing the Singapore Airlines emergency landing at Bangkok. Given today's news the Singapore Airlines have indeed announced a compensation package, he's ended up with egg on his face.

No I can't but they can't change rules retrospectively or the Thai population would be up in arms. Changes normally take place from the beginning of a tax year. Hence I will bring my cash in whilst it can be done tax free. I'm not going to risk things changing and possibly having to pay tax on money I bring in. Having been involved with the country for a long time, I know several people who run businesses in Thailand so I'm aware of what's involved. There are hoops to jump through but only one of the people I know has problems and when you get to the bottom of them, they are all his own doing because he spends all his time trying to get around the rules. He complains about having to pay social security for his Thai staff - all Thai companies have to do that. He tries to get out of paying income tax by underdeclaring his income then wonders why it isn't sufficient to support his visa etc. etc. If I couldn't make a business work, then I would retire and find some other way of keeping myself busy. Fortunately the main expenses for the business I have planned are in in assets that I can readily sell on. Losses will be minimal. I'm not, I'm simply answering your suggestions.

1500 of them apparently. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/criminal-investigation/criminal-investigation

How many bloody links do you want for christ's sake? Do you think that HMRC employ specialist fraud/tax investigators for a laugh?

You asked for evidence, I've given you it. If you can't be bothered to read it, that's your problem. End of this ridiculous chat.

That is precisely why I often refuse to provide links. Even with all the links I've posted, you still say my statement is wrong. You probably haven't read any of them. So typical of some AN members. You believe what you want and follow the yellow brick road. There are no tax dodgers, no one's under suspicion and nobody's ever been prosecuted for tax evasion. The Russian oligarchs own their super yachts through shell companies because they love doing paperwork and gold hangs from trees in the dingly dell. I'm happy that I've made no false claims.

From what I can tell, the total costs of running a company in Thailand will be less - the tax certainly is. But yes, their will be forms to fill. Precisely - no intention of retiring. Not really a hurry - this has, as I said earlier, been planned since 2009. None of us lives forever. I don't see how. Under the current rules, I can bring cash in tax free as long as I don't become tax resident. Hence, I bring it in later this year, have a short break and become tax resident next year.

That is something that I worried about many years ago - the fact that I would always be a guest. At that time, some rules around visa/extensions had just changed, can't rember exactly what it was but it created some consternation amongst the expat community. Some high ranking Immigration Official was on record as saying that if expats didn't like it, they were free to go home and take their Thai wives with them. As a 'newbie' I thought it was the 'grim reality' of living in Thailand but the old hands assured me that nothing much would change and to just ride it out. Now, possibly 15 to 20 years or so later, they were correct.

I have no intention of working on a retirement visa, what gave you that impression? I can't start a business without bringing funds in so I'll be sticking to my plans and remitting this year before I'm tax resident. That's covered by current the regulations so I'm fine. Waiting unti 2025 could leave me open to any further changes there may be.

Same old story - enforcement. If there was proper enforcement there would be no 13 year old kids riding motorbikes and car/pick up drivers would drive to a better standard. In most countries, a few tragedys would spur some form of action. In Thailand all that happens is some talk about new laws, road safety campaigns bla bla bla......... but that's all that happens, talk. Two weeks later, all is forgotten until the next time. Never mind, fill out this accident report sir. Meanwhile the police sit in their offices eating Som Tam.

I think he means before the event.

I just checked the UK rules on this and you can turn without the right hand light being green as long as the main lights are at green - obviously as long as the right turn light isn't red and there's no oncoming traffic. Whether the Thai rules are any different, I know not but I doubt it. Never seen anything like a Thai Highway Code - does one exist?

I bought my house 9 years ago. No intention of retiring.

Are you talking about where this incident took place or in general? If in general, you are wrong. As long as the right turn red light has gone, you are free to turn right as long as there is no oncoming traffic. You do not have priority until the right turn light goes green - that's all. Otherwise the right turn light would stay red. Call it what you want, right turn, filter whatever.

In all honesty, although I hate these 'extras', if the proposed 300 baht tax had actually been used to cover the hospital bills of the uninsured, that would actually have been a good thing. It wouldn't be a bad thing if all countries operated such a scheme - its like insurance for all but the numbers involved mean that the cost would be a fraction of individual insurance.

No and neither do I. You sure you haven't been talking to yourself in the mirror?

Love it!

I fail to understand what Russian investment in the Thai property market has to do with traffic matters or human behaviour. Baffled!

But did she really have to wait? In no way am I supporting the Russian guy's actions - let's be clear on that. I also don't know how the subject lights function. However I have often come across possibly the same situation at a traffic lights in Pak Chong. I doubt that Thailand's rules are any different on this but at this particular set of lights, I don't think many Thai drivers know how to handle them. There is a right hand turning lane and a 'filter' light controlling it. When the main lights turn to green ALL the red lights go out, including the one on the right filter lane. The green light for that lane though, doesn't come on until the main lights turn red again. Therefore, even though there is no green filter light, the red light has gone out and providing there is no oncoming traffic, its fine to turn right. If it wasn't, the filter light would remain red. Many drivers sit there waiting until the green filter light comes on - despite the fact that there is no oncoming traffic and the filter light is out.

In addition to my previous reply - and before you ask, you can either check this out yourself of regard me as a liar - I don't really care which. I work, I have more to do with my time than pamper to your wishes: I watched a BBC news report recently where both US and UK law enforcment authorities were trying to prove the ownership of several 'Superyachts' - suspected of being owned by Russian Oligarchs with links to Putin as they were trying to confiscate them. The web of 'shell companies' and 'nominee directors' used to 'own' those craft was unbelievable. Many were set up long before Putin attacked anyone so perhaps you can tell me.............why would they do that? Why not simply own them? In addition, I know someone personally who avoided paying any tax at all on the sale of a company around 25 years ago. The gentleman in question is the brother of a close friend who since leaving school, had built up a small 'White Lining' company into a a major UK road marking and traffic management company in a relatively short time. How he did that is another story but it involved government contracts and brown envelopes (I know that factually but I'm not about to reveal how). He sold the company for £14 million and the transaction took place the day after he left the country and became domiciled in a tax haven, I think it was the Cayman Islands but I can't remember. He could do that legally at that time (I believe that loophole is now closed) but he was not allowed to become domiciled in the UK again for 7 years - or he would become liable for tax. I believe he was allowed to visit the UK for a set number of days each year though. He even found a way around that and was back living in the UK within a few years - entering and leaving through 'the back door' - fly into Ireland, train to Northern Ireland (no passport needed), ferry from Northern Ireland to the UK (no passport needed). All these things cost money - much more money than most of us have and so cannot conduct our tax affairs 'efficiently' - I think they call it. The cost for those who can though, is far less than the tax they would pay otherwise. Can I take it from your pedantic demands that you don't think the rich avoid tax?

Why should I back up my claim - simply because you want me to? Several governments around the world are still investigating people as a result of The Panama Papers - Google it. If you want specific examples of tax evaders being jailed/prosecuted for tax evasion - then again, Google is probably your best source but, just to be going along with: https://www.vanderpumpandsykes.co.uk/site/library/legalnews/tax_evasion_leads_to_prison_and_500000_repayment_order.html https://www.fawcetts.co.uk/self-employed-plumber-jailed-for-tax-evasion-494/ https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/texas-man-sentenced-41-months-prison-tax-evasion https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22429181 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/georgia-bar-and-restaurant-owner-sentenced-prison-tax-evasion Need I go on? If I made some wild claim, I could perhaps understand your request but when something is common knowledge, well you're just being an a s s. https://views-voices.oxfam.org.uk/2023/01/how-super-rich-pay-lower-taxes-than-you/ https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/economics/sophisticated-tax-evasion-by-the-super-rich https://www.propublica.org/article/billionaires-tax-avoidance-techniques-irs-files They are even open about it: https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3417950/City-bigwig-famously-admitted-paid-tax-cleaner-appointed-chairman-estate-agent-Savills.html Why do you think 'Tax Havens' exist and why are several countries trying to close them down? The existence of tax havens and their use is well known: https://www.taxwatchuk.org/ccff_companies/ I used to work for a large multinational chemical company and whilst I paid my taxes normally through the PAYE system, the company itself located its headquarters in a tax haven. Head office (which was actually just an accountants in Abu Dhabi) sent 'management charges' forward at the end of every tax year that reduced the profits of the company's subsidiaries. The actual profits were then taxed in Abu Dhabi at a much lower rate - all fully legal but its tax avoidance whatever. The chairman of the company and several board members all listed their personal addresses in tax havens. You might also want to look into the tax activities of Google and Amazon - do you need the links? Can you do that? Can any average person? So, the next time you try to pick holes in something I've posted, when its common knowledge, I won't even bother replying to you - just giving you advance notice. My time is too valuable to waste it on pedants!