sirineou

as far as I know only a couple of threads about God and Hundreds about trump IMO God is underrepresented.

That's not what you said. You said boring. By the way, is there any one among you that if you met up with her would act differently than the way I described?

It is but 20-30 yeats first is a long time This guy would probably be dead in the next 20 years The girl would still be 37 perhaps younger

Long way from this happening ! If ever Specific nice level , and zoning regulations have to be established first, Then the will and resources to enforce such zoning and noise regulations, At 66 years of age , certainly not something the would happen in my lifetime.

he can claim that since he now has practical experience he should head the department.

There lays the rub. Dont think I have not thought of that. I guess the only way would be to do a forensic accounting and determine that the amount transferred was less than the amount deposited and a balance remained , therefore since this saving transfer is equal to or less than that balance , it is attributed to pensions and should not be taxed. Yea Yea, I know Good luck.

I agree. but not so sure about the moral part. My wife is almost 20 years younger than ,me. though often she makes up that age difference by being 20 years more mature than me But the chronological difference still exists. I love my wife, and we are very close, She is my best friend and I her's.,and it distress me to o end that I will dies and leave her all by herself for a long time. This man is 58 years old, never mind that he might not be able to perform while she is still at her prime. This is not a long term relationship for her, with long term consequences , especially if they have any children.

You are right

I never said that it is wrong to have then. Only that the opinions are wrong. and I make what i thought they were wrong in a succinct manner why the opinion was wrong. You can do the same .

Obviously , just as you think my opinion is incorrect because you disagree with it. I am sorry that's all you got in what I consider to be a thoughtful post

I agree, but it does not hurt exploring it. Perhaps the IO would be reasonable or maybe even have a better solution. I am fortunate to live in an area (KKC) where we have a very professional and helpful immigration office , but I understand that this is not the case everywhere.

I understand that, but what if such savings are a result of unspend pensions? I have been fortunate enough to have pension income above ny need..My pensions are deposited in my US bank account and consequently result in savings , ( I spend less than I receive) In the past , occasionally I would transfer to Thailand some of these savings for vehicles and other property purchases. Would these pension savings now become taxable under the remitable savings provision of this old new law? And if so would it be a violation of the bilateral tax agreement?

Sorry i failed to entertain you? I will try harder next time. Perapse a song and a bit of dancing might be more agreeable with you?

First let me thank you for posting this, and second that IMO any change to an existing law , makes it a new law. All new laws are for the most part a variation of an existing law. but that's a different story. If I understand this correctly due to the bilateral tax agreement between the US and Thailand, income from SSI, private pension and annuities is taxed only at the source country, and as an American I should not have to pay tax on my pensions. But what id my savings are a result of my unsend pensions? If I save part of my pension and at some point decide to transfer such saving for a purchase in Thailand , would I have to pay tax on those funds? and if such occured would it not be a violation of the tax agreement between the US and Thailand?

A bit of BS IMO But if she is willing to meet with e for a drink and ... whatever, I promise to listen politely and be very, very sympathetic.

They keep the casual thief out. If you don't have a lock it is a simple thing to open a zipper, and if anyone one saw it he can claim that it came open on it's own, but if he actively cut the lock (They are hard to cut, I once lost the key and had a hell of a time cutting it" ) then he is acting in a burglary and might have to think about it twice ,or go to the next soft target with no lock. Anything That reduces your exposure at a reasonable cost , is worth doing.

It happened to me with my extension based on marriage How many day is he short of the two months? I was short a week. I had a conversation with the Supervisor and she suggested that I overstay a week and come back next week when the funds are seasoned appropriately and apply then. I said Y don't want to get in any trouble, she said "don't worry I am the one who reports the overstays, There will be no trouble". So I came back a few days later, paid a small overstay fine, and had no issues.

Yeyyy!!

This is something that can happen anywhere. As far as I know if you want valuables in your luggage insured, you must declare then to the airline and pay a fee. At least with Emirates you do. So did she declare these valuables and have a ticket for them? If not how does the airline even know if she is telling the truth? And yes , if you can carry it on your hand bag or carry on in the plane always do so, also carry on a change of clothes and allowable toiletries in case they lose your luggage, or it is delayed. I t has happened to me several times where my luggage arrived a day or two later, And always lock your luggage with a TSA approved lock.

First let's establish one thing. I am honest in asking 'cause I don't know. Was there a law in Thailand that we had to do the things they now say we have to do , but they did not enforce it? If there was my bad. But if there was a law that was not requiring to do the things they now ask us to do , And I say that because it is not entirely clear what specifically they require of my as it pertains to this issue. And now they interpret it differently , it is a change in the law. before it was not required, now it is. Two different things. New law, new interpolation of and old law , divine inspiration etc. Are all semantics , Orwellian doublethink, the consequence is one. Before it was not, and now it is. I

A little education is a dangerous thing! Do you know what that really means? I am not being disrespectful , or snarky , it is a real issue , one that trump supporters suffer from. You know enough to form and opinion . but not enough to form the correct one. It is an issue that players in the know, exploit . There is a big difference between engaging in endeavors which as a consequence cause others to lose trust in then and the institutions they lead. This is human nature and it has happen all thorough history, it is unavoidable if we are to have other humans lead us. And since humans are the only option we try to choose the best possible under the circumstances and hope for the best. It is the only option. trump actively actively engaged in slander against institutions .The courts that indict him are corrupts, The FBI that investigate them are corrupt, the country is run by the deep state, the CDC is conspiring against you. and on and on . These are his words. All these institutions are bad but I will be your champion, I will be your institution, I will lead you to the promised land. Straight from the totalitarian playbook. Totalitarianism 101!! Do you now see the difference? One is as a consequence of. The other is actively perused.

Brilliant !! Why didn't I think of that.

My response was to the proposition of using an ATM to transfer money thus avoiding taxes. Then the question is how do you do an extension based on income if you do not show any income?

The problem is that that is how do you do extension to stay.

In the absence of clear guidelines how is one to follow such guidelines?