Jingthing

Yeah, this is not a new issue. Older Thais will tell you that over the years Thai food in general has become much more sweet. Yes I've cooked Thai food myself using palm sugar as an authentic ingredient. Yes I know sugar is served on tables for those who want to add it themselves. It's my impression that when modern Thai food is overly sweet it's coming from white sugar. In any case, I had a sad too sweet experience today. I ordered food from a very local part of town so I know they didn't cook for f-rang palates but rather for Thai. I had pad krapow and Northern Khao Soy coconut curry chicken soup. Both were cooked with skill EXCEPT both were very sugary. That's new to me in a pad krapow and it was the sweetest Khao Soy I've ever had. Aside from health concerns (I'm assuming most Thais are not focused that) for me the dishes were ruined. I won't be ordering from them again. I suppose the pad krapow could be adjusted but I'm assuming the curry broth is pre-made.

This might seem rather arcane to some people, but if you're in a certain category of expats, it is very relevant. Say you're a retired expat (in Thailand or anywhere) from a much more expensive country and while you obviously don't want to ever run out of money, you don't care about leaving a legacy for heirs. Traditional mainstream retirement planning advice does not apply to such people! That goal is to not only take no risk to run out of money, but also to not decimate your principle, and with the assumption that you care about leaving significant assets to heirs. The result of that is that many people who didn't need to be frugal in retirement end the game of life with a similar or even MUCH MORE money than when you started. That's just stupid. Even if you care about legacy if your net work is much higher than when your retirement started, you're probably doing things wrong. So what if you don't want to leave a legacy AND you're an expat? That's where planning gets complicated or maybe impossible. The tired old four percent withdrawal rate plus later inflation adjustment for a "safe" 30 year retirement is total garbage for such people. What if your window is less than 30 years (depending on where you're starting from, etc.)? Again the fossilized advice is for planning expecting to leave a large legacy. So as a basic starter the 4 percent rule can be SIGNIFICANTLY much higher than that. What number exactly that would be safe enough depends on a lot of individual factors, but let's say at least 6 percent and in some cases up to 10 percent. But wait. Here's the EXPAT PARADOX. You're planning your spending based on cost of living in the cheaper country (Thailand or elsewhere) NOT you home country. Not at all rarely expats for different reasons (visas, bad chains of life events, especially health crises) are forced or pressured to leave their expat home. What then? Well if they are able to move to ANOTHER relatively low cost country, then their retirement planning withdrawal rate shouldn't really need to change. But in many cases expats are forced to move back to their home country. That happens often enough for it to be real risk. The question here is about factoring in that risk to retirement withdrawal rate plan for an expat that doesn't care about leaving a legacy.

True Grit. Australian Style.

OK, American expats are hopefully aware of FBAR filing requirements and the potential ruinous penalties for failure to file. This topic is not another one about the rules for who needs to file and who doesn't. That's widely available information. But this horror story video caught my attention: OMG, right? Well reacting to this, a potential problem in my past (about twenty years ago) came to mind. When I bought my condo here my real estate agent helped me open a That bank account and for some insane reason I trusted him enough to wire the purchase price of the condo while back in the U.S. It was nerve wracking at the time and I realized that it wouldn't shock anyone if the money just disappeared. Well it worked out and I returned to Thailand with the keys and title to my condo. Anyway, I forget the details but I'm not sure if the sum of the purchase money ever actually hit my Thai bank account. at least I don't recall that it did. Probably means I sent the money to the agent. Well IF it had hit my account even for 5 seconds I would have been required to file FBAR due to that. Maybe it did hit it, maybe it didn't. But it's been a concern that I didn't start to have until many years later. So why the long story? Well, after watching the video I looked up the statute of limitations on FBAR non filing penalties. It's SIX years! So presumably I would be in the clear for something that might have happened twenty years ago.

Here's my suggestion Those who have retired in Thailand for 10 consecutive years with no criminal.record shall be granted permanent status with no further need for address reports unless new address or annual extensions.

It would likely be pretty high on the list depending on the details of the visa. For example, Malaysia is desirable but their visa program asks too much. I will be very surprised if Vietnam ever does start a retirement visa at all or if so it would likely be at Australia type levels. That's not the path they have chosen and the path they have chosen has been very successful. For them to do so now would be a bit desperate and needy and they're beyond that.

The list isn't about best countries to move to if you marry a citizen there Duh.

No visa. Shouldn't be any such list. Duh.

You missed the point. It's irrelevant to.the illegality of structuring whether you have something to hide or not. It's only about a numerical PATTERN.

For fans of high quality indie films with depressing subject matter. URCHIN Urchin movie review & film summary (2025) | Roger Ebert www.rogerebert.com/reviews/urchin-harris-dickinson-film-review-2025 A conversation early in Harris Dickinson’s excellent directorial debut “Urchin” (winner of the FIPRESCI Prize at Cannes this year) between protagonist Mike (Frank Dillane) and a guy he meets on the street named Simon (Okezie Morro) speaks of “a gap of empathy” in modern society. Dickinson’s nuanced character study closes that gap, but it does so in a way that’s never sentimental or manipulative. Inspired by tales of people on the fringe by Mike Leigh, Sean Baker, and the Safdie Brothers, “Urchin” stays committed to presenting Mike’s story without frills, recognizing that it’s just a tragically common one of a man spiraling down the drain of society.

Keith Kellogg comments concerning the state of the war.

I don't mean to be contrarian for sport (I just want to learn the truth), but it's my impression that when it says U.S. banks are exempt, what is meant by that is BANK TO BANK transactions. The link that I provided before definitely implied that.

This is where it gets weirdly onerous. I started this topic with the assumption that structuring was merely a red flag for money laundering. But under the law, the structuring itself is very illegal and it is still illegal even if you can prove that the money is legit and not being laundered! Crazy bad but they're in charge. It reminds me a Thai laws against bad reviews even if you can document what you said in the bad review are facts. There was a live rat swimming in my tom yum! Here is the video and several signed witnesses. You're the one in trouble, not the restaurant.

Why shouldn't I be spooked as I know by now that the pattern of my transactions over time could even remotely look like structuring? Certainly grounds to start doing over 10K transfers going forward.

Well this seems resolved. Banks ARE required to report wires over 10K to the IRS. Not only cash. Are Wire Transfers Over $10,000 Reported to the IRS? A Guide to Understanding the Law - Veem www.veem.com/library/are-wire-transfers-over-10000-reported-to-the-irs/ What is the law regarding wire transfers and the IRS?Under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) of 1970, financial institutions are required to report certain transactions to the IRS. This includes wire transfers over $10,000, which are subject to reporting under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act (31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.). Financial institutions must file a Currency Transaction Report (CTR) for any transaction over $10,000. The CTR includes information about the person initiating the transaction, the recipient, and the nature of the transaction. The purpose of this requirement is to prevent money laundering and other criminal activity.

We've been over this before and I've found that there is actually CONFLICTING info out there about whether wires are truly exempt. We do know for a definite fact the intention of the law was about cash transactions. Based on my research so far, I'm currently of the opinion that wires can be flagged as structuring patterns as well. Oh, sorry, I see you're talking about bank IRS reporting, not structuring patterns. I'll check that out again. I was pretty sure wires over 10K require that as well. But good news I suppose if they don't. Cheers.

As mentioned before it is known that what they are looking for as evidence of structuring is in the PATTERNS. Some kind of combination of evidence of a pattern of -- Breaking up a large chunk of money into several (how many?) under 10K transfers. Time. A pattern of above in a short time period would be damning. The same done with breaks of for example four months could still be structuring by a very patient person but it seems to me not as damning. What's in the account? If for example it's 200K and someone does 9999 every month, that shows guilt. But if the account is modest, it's not breaking up a large sum. Banks are supposed to (obligated) grass out people that they think are structuring. So I have a question that only a banking insider could possibly know. Details of what is the trigger. Probably a silly question as this is a perfect issue for AI. One transaction of 9999.99 is not a PATTERN. Those who transfer their monthly social security check are not going near to 10K and it's obvious that their pattern isn't structuring.

Well further googling has led me to a conclusion that while the intention of laws against structuring are mainly targeted at cash transactions, they can apply to Wires as well. Obviously patterns matter. For example I just did 9950. Let say I did ten additional 9960 wires in the next ten days. That would be a very clear case of structuring. Breaking up a large amount always under the 10K threshold assumed to be to avoid IRS reporting. But let's say the next 9950 wire is four months later? Would that be seen as a pattern proving structuring? In any case, I'm spooked enough by this new info to me that I will be breaking doing anything that could possibly be seen as a structuring pattern.

Well I'm well up on FBAR filing rules as I use the 800k baht in Thai bank method for retirement extensions so I've always needed to file them. This topic however even though the 10K number is coincidentally important to both, is not about FBAR. I thought the legal link I posted was quite crystal clear -- that the law against structuring is about cash and is not about wire transfers. But it can be risky relying on internet sources, even apparently credible one. I just did a transfer of 9950 which is about as blatant as you can get as far as avoiding the 10K short of 9999.99. (Ha ha.) The last one I did was about 6K which was about Thai tax reasons to clear old old pre Thai tax rule changes savings. I think I will probably do an over 10K one next time. Either a lot higher or for a little bit of sport -- 10,100. It will be interesting to see that even though the bank will need to file an IRS form whether they will actually up the verification game for such a trivial overage. Cheers.

Wow. I'm glad that I opened this topic. I had no idea that the structuring itself was illegal EVEN if the funds are legit! I thought it was only a red flag for the possible crime of money laundering. But wait. Check this out. This seems to indicate that the anti structuring laws do NOT apply to wire transfers! Your opinion please. www.uslawexplained.com/structuring Structuring: The Ultimate Guide to the $10,000 Cash Reporting Rule [US Law Explained]

Money laundering is breaking the law. Appearing to be structuring which could look like money laundering -- how is that breaking the law? I'm really asking. Looking like breaking the law isn't breaking the law is it? Again, if the source of funds is 100 percent legit and very easy for the bank and IRS to see that, what happens if it looks like structuring? So they take two minutes to look at the source of funds and the suspicion is resolved. Or do they literally make a "federal case" about a crime that never happened?

Yeah I get that. Appearing to be structuring is definitely more of a red flag than going over 10K. As I said I just want to avoid any extra steps with my bank. I also agree the amounts I'm talking about are low over 10K a pop or not. Anyway, say structuring is suspected and the legal source of the funds is without question, so what if they do suspect? What will happen? Someone will look at the source funds (in my case I have no worries) or what exactly?

Ugly old straight guys often have a bizarre tendency to way overinflate their appeal to gay men. Having a D functioning or not is not enough. Sure there are gay men who have no standards just like anyone else, but the vast majority are quite particular about what does it for them or not. Overly and oppressively so actually which can be brutal for gay men over 30 and/or not meeting with unreasonable body image expectations likely fueled by media and porn. www.michaelpezzullo.com/post/gay-men-body-image-a-therapist-s-perspective-on-insecurity-worth-and-healing The Reality: Gay Men & Body ImageLet’s be honest: gay men & body image are closely intertwined, largely because the culture of attraction among men is highly visual. Men—regardless of sexuality—are often more visually driven when it comes to attraction. When you place men in a dating culture with other men, physical appearance naturally becomes a central metric of desirability.

Nah. It was a reflection on the human condition and the state of one man's digestive system.

You've never had a surprise cheeky shart in your tighty whities?