oldcpu

$50 for 3 months ONLY from Vietnam ??? That's crap !! The LTR is good for 10 years and one is not restricted to 3 months. Further, a GREAT thing about Thailand is there are many different Visas. Why pay $50 for 3 months in Vietnam, when one can enter Thailand visa exempt for 60-days, and then apply for a 30-day extension and get 90-days (ie 3 months) and not have to pay $50. Clearly Thailand' options there are FAR superior. Not to mention other aspects of Thailand are superior (for example, the superior quality of Thailand's hospital system comes to mind). Frankly? You can have Vietnam. I MUCH prefer Thailand and not just because of Thailand's superior Visa options.

That is wrong. A complete fabrication. a TOTAL fabrication. There is no such annual re-qualification. I qualified back in May last year. I have had ZERO interaction with BoI and ZERO interaction with the local Phuket immigration since. NONE. The ONLY interaction I have had the past 18-months is with airport Immigration when I enter and leave Thailand, and they look at and stamp my passport. Typically I travel out/in Thailand twice a year and if I maintain that, I will NEVER have to do a report ( compare this to the 90-day reports I had to do on a Type-O/OA ). I will thou in about 3.5 years (at the 5-year point from first getting my LTR visa), need to show proof of my finances again. I look forward to that, as I now know the technique to use (and have BoI accept) my European Cigna Health insurance, and I then won't need to keep $100K US equivalent in a bank account for self health insurance. The insurance requirements for the LTR are, IMHO, massively superior to what is in place today on an Type-OA visa extension (for reason of retirement)

Yes I agree. Lets keep fingers crossed with the LTR. In regards to change in policies with visas, one need look no further than the Type-OA. When I obtained my Type-OA, there was no requirement for proving Health Insurance. But by the time my close to 2 years (on that one year visa) was up, health insurance requirements (with insurance from the Thai branch of a health insurance company) were put in place. A number of us then left Thailand (either sooner or later) without a re-entry permit to invalidate our Type-OA visas and re-entered Visa Exempt, and then applied for and obtained Type-O visas which did not have a Health Insurance requirement. Many nay sayers claimed (and still claim) that there will come a day when Type-O visa holders will have to get health insurance (similar to Type-OA) but that has not happened yet - but it could happen. And it might not. Still, I like the LTR visa approach to Health Insurance, where one can either self insure (by proving $100k US$ equivalent in any savings account around the world), or show commercial health insurance up to a Thai specified coverage, where BoI do NOT require this (for LTR visa) to be from the Thai branch of a health insurance company. Instead if one can show (to BoI satisfaction) that the foreign health insurance meets their specified health insurance requirements, then that will suffice (where I have read some users have done that by a letter which specifically states the BoI health insurance required coverage). My speculation is as the years roll by, the health insurance requirements, and the requirement in how such coverage is shown, could continue to evolve - possibly for both the Type-OA and the LTR Visa, and maybe other visas as well. As you note, governments and policies change.

Deleted post (mostly duplicate of previous post) - see above

From us as expats on 'the outside' it can look that way - although we do only pay the 50,000 THB once at the start - no additional money need to be paid at the 5 year permission to stay renewal point. Its possible thou, the approval process on the inside at BoI may be different (possibly quicker - less paperwork for them ?? but same paperwork for us as expats ??? ). I guess we won't know until the first individuals who obtained the LTR visa, start going for their second 5-year permission to stay period. How difficult will be the financial proof then? The same ? Worse? Easier? As for the 'permission to stay' terminology being different from visa dates - that has been around for a while with other visas (albeit applied differently). A classic case is the Type-OA visa multiple re-entry , where one could get that as a 1-year Visa from outside of Thailand, and then say one obtained the Type-OA on 1-July-2018 and it was valid with a Visa date from 1-July-2018 (start) to 1-July-2019 (expiry date). My recollection is one could FIRST show up in Thailand border on on 1-July-2018 and obtain a permission to stay in Thailand until 30-June-2019. But say one then left Thailand on 25-June-2019 (say a week or so before last date on the visa) and re-enterred Thailand on 29-June-2019 (re-enter 2 days before Type-OA visa expiry date). In one's passport, using that as the underlying Visa, one would then obtain an additional permission to stay until 28-June-2020. ie one almost gets 2 years permission to stay on the one-year visa (despite last date on visa being 1-July-2019). ... further say on 1-June-2020, one then goes to immigration inside of Thailand and applies for a 1-year extension (say based on retirement). If approved, one could then get an permission to stay until about 27-June-2021 (where note the last date on the original Type-OA visa was almost 2 years earlier being 1-July-2019), again on the underlying Type-OA visa. So already, on a 1-year visa, one has obtained almost a 3-year permission to stay. Each year one can keep going back for a 1 year extension (assuming one continues to meet the requirements) despite the last date on the visa being many years in the past. And technically, the Visa is NOT being renewed - but rather the 'permission to stay' is constantly being extended (or renewed) on the basis of the underlying visa. ... and apologies if my terminology is not exact and if that reads confusing. Best I can understand, the validity dates of a visa (in Thailand) are different from the 'permission to stay dates' in a Visa although clearly there is a relationship between the two. I do understand the confusion here. It puzzled me for a while as well. And as for the LTR - yes I agree having to go back after 5 years to reprove finances for a 10 year Visa does make one wonder why its called 10-years ... but we don't know yet exactly how smooth things will be at the 5-year point (for permission to stay extension for remaining 5 years), nor for that matter at the 10 year point. We have been told there will be no more money asked for at the 5-year point.

I note Tim K you posted about experience in Phuket. My post is a bit off topic, but when I was on a non-immigrant Type-O visa a couple of years back, I opened a few different accounts with Krungsri (branch in Central festival in Phuket) with no problem. It was not difficult at all - although I note the Bank Manager at that time was a friend of my wife (where that manager has now moved to a different branch in Phuket). I also have a yellow book/pink-ID but I don't recall being asked for that to open the Krungsri account (maybe I was - maybe I wasn't - I just can't recall). I also deposited a moderate (more than basic) amount of money which I think helps the Bank Manager who can show they attracted new customers who deposit a bit more than the average amount. I like the Krungsri account for if one keeps a total of 5-million THB in the bank (in different 'forms') with the Krungsri Exclusive, one obtains a LOT of perks (use of their VIP lounge, 2 passes to Thai Airways lounges every year + 2 Dragon Pass lounge access passes every year), plus 8 passes every month to two different health clubs in Phuket (Club Asia (in Royal Phuket City Hotel) and Alpha Club). The main reason thou for me opening a Krungsri account at the time was I could get yearly printouts (needed for the Type-O visa year extensions) much quicker than I could from Bangkok Bank. The 'total' amount in the bank can be in different currencies, mutual fund via the bank, etc ... (it need not all be in cash). Obviously that perk is NOT something of interest for most, as many on a Type-O prefer NOT to even hold 800k THB in a Thai Bank. With a substantial amount of money in Thailand now, it also means I don't have to worry about bringing money into Thailand for a number of years, until this entire 'tax residency' speculation aspects are more clear. Back on topic : While I don't know anyone personally on a DTV visa, I am reading this thread with interest, and I hope more people with a DTV visa post on it and share their experience. I have many friends who don't live in Thailand often pepper me with questions and its nice to have a bit of information on other visas. A DTV might be suitable for some of them.

Renting can be a good approach as long as rents don't sky rocket. In the (foreign freehold) condo where I live (and purchased in 2016) typically monthly rents were 75,000 to 80,000 THB per month for a one year lease (year 2016). During COVID years this dropped to ~55,000 to 75,000 THB per month. The asking price today (year 2024), for a one year lease, for the same properties, is 120,000 THB/month. That is a BIG increase. Many renters simply moved out due to the price increase (and new renters with more money moved in). I purchased a foreign freehold condo in the complex where I live in year 2016 and I am glad I did. Asking prices then for a foreign freehold condo in my complex were about 18-million to 19-million THB. The CJPM/Committee have done a good job in maintaining the complex, and asking prices now are 23-million THB per unit. This is always the risk with real estate, and that is especially true in Thailand. I know of condos in Thailand whose prices have fallen by 50% since their original offerings (by the developer) as the complex was never maintained well by the CJPM/committee management. Those owners of condos are disappointed at the price drop. And I also know of condos (mine being one) where price has increased. Its VERY difficult to foresee the future here. Also, if buying a condo in your Thai wife's name, that means it will be a Thai freehold. My experience is that the liquidity of Thai freehold (especially for luxury condos) is much less than the liquidity for foreign freehold. If it was in your name, the condo would be a foreign freehold. So if you and your wife want to sell a "Thai freehold" condo, it might be on the market for a long time before it sells. In contrast a foreign freehold on average sells much faster. And I assume you have taken into account the risks that (1) if disaster should occur and your wife pass away, you have one year to sell the Thai condo (as a Thai freehold condo can not be owned by yourself as a foreigner), and after the 1 year if not sold the government will auction it off at a dirt cheap price, and (2) if another disaster, such as your wife and yourself having irreconcilable differences, then she could evict you from the condo. So there are major risks with a foreigner having their Thai wife purchase a Thai condo in the Thai wife's name - and these are aspects that need to be considered as well.

I suspect there is a growing concern among many, that those who Thai immigration are able to determine spent >180 days in Thailand in a given calendar year, could be flagged as possible tax residents and that information could be passed to the Thai RD. Clearly that is speculation, but it is not unheard of for immigration to have communication with the Thai RD. If there is such a communication, then the "Tax residents the RD are aware of" could be more than just those who hold a Thai TIN. I believe this is an aspect many of us will be observing to see how it all plays out in the coming few years.

Hopefully, for those on an LTR visa, that the BoI statement in their marketing of the LTR visa, which on the BOI web site states: "Tax exemption for overseas income" is hopefully proven correct. There is a lot of debate about this in the LTR visa thread, and some on that thread are even saying (speculating is likely a better word) the opposite of the Expat Thailand statement based on their interpretation of Royal Decree 743 (which authorizes the LTR visa), ... where those with a different view claim that money (from the income of an LTR visa holder) is not taxable if it is brought into Thailand in the year it is earned, but money from previous years (after 1-Jan-2024) will be taxable. I am NOT one with that opinion. An unofficial translation of the Royal Decree for the LTR visa for Wealthy Pensioner and Wealthy Global citizen category reads: " Section 5 income tax under Part 2 of Chapter 3 in Title 2 of the Revenue Code shall be exempted for a foreigner categorized as a Wealthy Global Citizen, Wealthy Pensioner, or Work-from-Thailand-Professional who is granted a LTR Visa under immigration law for assessable income under section 40 of the Revenue Code derived in the previous tax year from an employment, or from a business carried on abroad, or from a property situated and brought into Thailand." Note that translation states the tax of assessable income from the previous year is (tax) exempt. It does not state the income is not assessable. So if income is assessable, it may be necessary to file a tax return, dependent on how one reads such. Further, a tax return is typically filed for income of the previous year, and NOT filed for income of the current year (CLEARLY NO ONE one files a tax return for income of the current year as the current year is not yet over), so I believe that adds further lack of clarity. To say there is some uncertainty here would be IMHO a very accurate description. I find the "Expat Thailand" claim quoted interesting but I do not believe it dispels the confusion (rather it just adds to the confusion), as it provides no basis for their video statement other than that statement that is the interpretation of the "Expat Thailand" representative talking in the video.

I usually 1st try to pay by Thai credit card (gives points), unless they have a 3% charge. My Thai wife always asks before I pay, asking if they have an extra small charge for credit card payment. If they have a 3% charge for credit card use, then I will typically pay by bank transfer from a Thai bank account of mine. And if my small bank (currency) notes is getting low (ie I have none or very few 20-baht or 50 baht notes) I will pay by cash with a 1,000 baht note, so to get smaller notes as change in return. I like to use the smaller notes for tips, as I prefer to give tips in cash (as opposed to adding to bank transfer or credit card).

In my case, back in 2016, I opened up a bank account at the Phuket town main branch of Bangkok bank when o a 30 day visa exempt. But I noticed for the past couple of years, a big sign indoors at that branch that they will no longer open new accounts for foreigners who are in the country visa exempt. I believe that is why if one doesn't already have a Thai bank account it is typically superior to 1st get one's Type-O visa from outside of Thailand and then as soon as one is in Phuket immediately open the bank account when on that account. I have read ( for some other provinces) it may be possible to open a Bank account when in Thailand on a visa exempt status by paying an agent to handle the application, but I do not myself know of any agents in Phuket.

I have lived in Thailand with a permission to stay on a Type-OA initially for reason of retirement, and later on the underlying Type-OA on an extension for reason of marriage to a Thai, and then more recently on a Type-O for reason of retirement. Last year I switched to the LTR. I have no regrets. I prefer it over the Type-O/OA. I believe the LTR makes sense if you plan to reside in Thailand for another 10 years AND if you have the money/income. Clearly due to the financial demands it's not a visa for everyone, and the initial paperwork demands are greater than that of a Type-O/OA. But if one meets the requirements, I believe the duration and perks make it worthwhile.

Thanks all for the clarification that the reduction back to 400k THB (in patient)/40k THB (out patient) is coming (soon ?? ) , but not there yet. ... I confess, my being on an LTR visa now, I don't track this as much as I used to. Its a bit puzzling to me why they are waiting what seems to be a long time to make it official, given that it was announced around the same time as the new DTV visa and at the same time as the time duration changes to Visa Exempt.

My recollection (for type-OA) the following. Originally, in year 2019 (?) the policy introduced where: For In-patient: health insurance policy must have coverage at least 400,000 Thai Baht per policy year. For Out-patient: health insurance policy must have coverage at least 40,000 Thai Baht per policy year. Then, around year 2021 or 2022 this was changed to: In case of Thai insurance policy: the applicant must have a photocopy of medical insurance policy, which expressly covers medical treatments of general sickness and COVID-19, with minimum coverage of 100,000 USD or 3,000,000 THB. That was a MASSIVE increase. and then either last year or this year (possibly the reduction you are thinking of), it was decreased back to For In-patient: health insurance policy must have coverage at least 400,000 Thai Baht per policy year. For Out-patient: health insurance policy must have coverage at least 40,000 Thai Baht per policy year. I don't recall reading of any other reductions. Perhaps others will chime in if they heard of such. Many of us, dissatisfied with the above insurance being required to be from the Thai branch of a Health Insurance company (where we already had superior health insurance from outside of Thailand), deliberately left Thailand without a re-entry permit on our Type-OA visas to invalidate such, and then we re-entered Visa Exempt and immediately applied for a Type-O that has no such Health Insurance requirements. My hope is that the BoI LTR visa Health Insurance requirements (where foreign health insurance companies are accepted if one can provide documents to BoI's satisfaction) or self health insurance ($100k US equiv in a bank account anywhere in the world) are acceptable will be eventually applied to the Type-OA visa ... but that is just a hope. The more flexible BoI approach with LTR visa, is very helpful especially for those of us who are into our 70s or older.

I would not restrict it there. I have read many state 'no taxation without representation' ... where I think those who state that tend to come from one country. But my understanding is those who type that want the right to vote in Thailand if they are taxed. Also, I think many if they are taxed in Thailand, they would like the right to own land in Thailand. So I would expand the benefits if one' wishes to include the benefits most people want. In my case I am happy with my Foreign freehold condo, my foreign pensions mostly from countries with DTAs with Thailand, and my foreign subsidized health insurance (as part of my pensions), ... but not everyone is in the same situation as myself.

and if you read on, note that I also typed " ...I will continue to watch this carefully to stay compliant with Thai laws. "

Thus far that is the sense I am starting to get as well. They don't want more paperwork than necessary (likely IMHO as they are already overloaded with paperwork). My wife attempted to apply for a Thailand tax ID for myself, and the response she obtained from the local office of the Thai Revenue Department (TRD) was I did not need to file a tax return and hence not need a tax ID. Of course things can change, and I will continue to watch this carefully to stay compliant with Thai laws. (As an aside note - this is contrary to some countries, such as Canada, where Canada want a tax return even if there will be a 'null return'. In the case of Canada, the CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) want to make up their own mind if one has a 'null return'). However Thailand is NOT the same as Canada.

My pension situation is complex. I worked in Canada for 27 years paying tax to Canada then (qualifying me for a partial Canadian pension and Old Age Security), worked for a company in Germany for a bit less than 5 years paying tax to Germany then (but paid extra to Germany to get 5 year credit to qualify for a very small German pension which I now receive) and worked for a European Government organisation for 13.5 years (my tax money went to Ireland then before I retired - although I never worked in Ireland - this is a complex European organisation thing) and I now receive a pension from that European organisation. I won't go into all its tax aspects here. On the 'private' side, next year I will start receiving money from a Canadian Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF) (sort of like a US 401k) which will be taxed in Canada (per DTA), ... and also some money from a private German Health insurance/pension scheme that my wife had my buy many years back (which I forgot about - and I assume taxed in Germany). The Canadian pension and Canadian RRIF money will be taxed in Canada (per my understanding of the Thailand/Canada DTA). The German pension will be taxed (or not taxed) in accordance with the Thailand/German DTA (and in accordance with the Thailand LTR exemption on assesable income). The private German Health Insurance pension scheme pension I assume will be taxed in Germany < not sure > Its small and I even forgot about it, until I received a letter a week ago from them reminding me ... The European government organisation pension will be taxed or not taxed in accordance with my Thailand LTR visa. I have always planned to have it taxed, so not being taxed by my having a Thailand LTR visa would be a nice financial perk/extra. So regardless as to how this plays out, it won't affect my future plans for Thailand. My wife is 13 years younger than myself, so my main long range financial future plan is to ensure she is looked after when I pass away (hopefully I don't pass away too soon).

I am curious about this, as a (very small) part of my different pensions comes from Germany. I struggle sometimes with the wording of "a Contracting State" and "other Contracting State" in the DTA (for example in the DTA between Germany and Thailand). Further to that example, if I read Article-18 in the German/Thai DTA, para-2, and when at first I tried to fill in 'Germany' (or 'Thailand' ) in place of 'a contracting state' or in place of 'other contracting state', at first I incorrectly read: (2) Notwithstanding the provision of (1) pensions and other payments for past employment created by Germany (ie a contracting state) shall be exempt from tax in Thailand (ie 'other contracting state'). Clearly that is inconsistent with what you have determined - and I then checked again. I note in para(1) of Article-18 of the Thai/German DTA "a contracting state" is referred to the one in which one is a resident. ... so it could be at first I confused "a contracting state" with "other contracting state" ... ie is it instead maybe it is saying (1) Pensions and other payments for past employment .... derived by a resident of Thailand (ie a contracting state) may be taxed in Germany (the other contracting state) only if such payments are deducted as expenses in determining the profits of an enterprise of Germany (the other contracting state) ... (2) Notwithstanding the provision of (1) pensions and other payments for past employment created by Thailand (ie a contracting state where one is resident) shall be exempt from tax in Germany (ie 'other contracting state'). And if that second example is the case, then the DTA talks about Thailand pensions (for German pension recipients who reside in Thailand) and says nothing (ie and saying nothing it provides no DTA protections) about Thailand taxing German pensions , but rather only infers Germany won't tax the German pensions of those abroad from Germany who derive German pensions. So with no protections, Thailand could tax such if they wished. I almost wonder if it would be useful for a separate thread for expats who derive income from different countries ... where such could be hashed out.

History in Thailand has shown that if one has multiple VE entries into Thailand, then at the Thai border the IO can be concerned one is illegally working in Thailand while not being on a proper work Visa. They are known to have denied entry in such cases. This too is fact. FACT. It is very prudent to keep this fact in mind if attempting to conduct multiple entries into Thailand on VE. There will be suspicion by the IO. If one is prepared for a denied entry, then fine. But if one has multiple belongings and finances based in Thailand, prudence suggests caution. Being denied entry, because one ignored historical fact, could cause massive inconvenience and unexpected expenses. Those who decide to push the VE approach to the maximum can do so, but beware of the risk. If the IO at the border suspects you may be working in Thailand ( even if you are not ) they can deny you entry regardless of this change to the VE entry durations.

IMHO thats an important note from DrJack54. Some years back, I found out this the hardway (when on a Type-OA). Shortly after entering Thailand on my Type-OA (originally granted for reason of retirement), the new health insurance requirements were implemented. So I decided for my 1st extension on my permission to stay in Thailand to do so based on a reason of my being married to a Thai. That was WRONG planning on my part. Phuket immigration refused, telling me I could not do this for my first extension (as my original Type-OA was for reason of retirement). I ended up (for that 1st extension) going with an extension for reason of retirement (buying double health insurance for that first extension, as my superior European health insurance was not from a Thai branch of a Health Insurance company). A year later for my 2nd 1-year extension (on my type-OA) I was able to switch to an extension based on marriage to a Thai person (with no requirements for health insurance proof from the Thai branch of an insurance company). But in Phuket, the paperwork (and very long time to get approval for an extension based on marriage (long as it is sent out of province)) was a bit unsettling for me, ... so I decided NOT to get a re-entry permit on that extension of my permission to stay, and the next time I exited Thailand I deliberately let my Type-OA be invalidated (and I subsequent re-entered Thailand visa exempt and successfully applied for a Type-O). Some times, if one has not this planned in advance, it can seem a bit convoluted, to legally weave through the different immigration regulations.

Even thou the 60 day VE entries are purportedly unlimited , it still comes down to the individual Thai Immigration Officers (IOs) whom one must meet at Thai immigration counter when one enters Thailand. If the IO observes (in one's passport or on their computer system) a massive number of back to back border hop re-entries under the new 60-day VE, I will wager that they will be concerned the foreigner is illegally working in Thailand, and they may deny entry - despite the public statements that may state VE is 'unlimited'. It boils down to the IOs at the border, and they have full power to implement the immigration laws as they see appropriate. I believe that this (denial of entry on VE) will feel as being unjust to some, but as has been stated many times on this forum, This is Thailand. I believe we will need to wait and see over the coming months, at which point in times IOs at different border crossings start denying entry to those trying to do multiple VE entries.

Is the Thai Banking app 'linked to the model phone' or to the 'sim' (with its associated phone #) in the phone? I have not tested this for different banks (except being forced to do so for Bangkok bank), but I suspect it is 'sim' (with its specific assigned phone#) dependent and not 'phone model' dependent. My Xiaomi phone died some years back, and I replaced it with a Samsung (transferring the Thai sim from my Xiaomi to my new Samsung) , and I don't recall any issues using the Bangkok Bank app on the Samsung (with the old Thai sim). I note thou - I was in Thailand at the time. I do not recall having to go to Bangkok Bank to make it work. That is why a (more expensive) VOIP approach (with a Thai phone #) could work.

In regards to this old thread, I think kuzie57 was thinking of VOIP and not VPN. I have not researched this, but I suspect one can obtain a Thailand VOIP number that includes SMS functionality (albiet one needs to pay extra for such service). This will give one a Thai phone number (which can be SMS capable for even more cost) that one can use anywhere in the world. One not even need a sim in their phone to use the VOIP. Then when outside of Thailand one can then run a VOIP app on any mobile phone (with a sim from a completely different country, and even without a sim in one's mobile phone, if one has WiFi) and as long as one has the correct username and password, one can then access one's VOIP phone number, and then use one's mobile phone with the Thai phone number provided by the VOIP service. I suspect (but do not know if the case) that Thailand banks would not even be aware one is using a VOIP #, and even if they were aware, since it is a Thai phone # they may not care. However the VOIP # would have had to be used when first setting up one's mobile banking. Having typed that, I do not adopt that approach. Its extra money and extra inconvenience. Typically a VOIP app running on one's mobile phone drains the power on one's phone 2x the normal speed and not so pleasant. Typically each use of a VOIP # (for voice or SMS) costs one money (in addition to any monthly charge). And I find in launching the VOIP app there is typically a lag when using such. But it is a possible approach for one who does not mind those limitations.

Indeed. It does thou have me pondering - if the LTR visa ends up having its 'no taxation on foreign income' benefit rescinded (which I do not believe will happen), but to SPECULATE, if rescinded, what is the approach of the different countries around the world, if one spends less than 180 day in each country? ie say 175 days in Thailand, 170 days in country-A (which taxes residents who are > 182 days in country) and 20-days in country-B (which taxes residents who are > 182 days in country) . In such a hypothetical scenario, none of the 3 countries is one present long enough to be considered a taxation resident. For those who structured their finances/income sources, such that that they have minimized their taxation, is that a viable approach? I suspect in such a hypothetical scenario, one needs to specify still, the location of one's country of residence for various forms when applying for various items (maybe obtaining Visas and such), and one could still (in any such forms) state Thailand is one's residence (for living in more than other countries) but for taxation, Thailand may not be one's tax residency. This does not apply to me, as I am pretty much covered by Double Taxation Agreements (DTAs) for my foreign sourced income (and I still have faith in the LTR), but it may be approach for some who don't obtain a benefit from DTAs (who are concerned the LTR could be impacted).