wordchild

I would second this. Pro corner recently carried out a slightly difficult repair on my old Dell; did a great job at a fair price.

Maybe they will come up with something like the NVDR scheme as used by the Thai stock market. It has worked pretty well since it was introduced a number of years ago, and it has been suggested before, that the condo market could operate in a similar way; Eg if F (foreign) allocation is available you can buy F, if not available you can buy in NVDR form, which means your ownership is via a centrally controlled entity which will hold the voting rights, however all other ownership rights remain with you. In practice this means you can get your dividends and sell your shares same as any other owner, the only thing you cannot do is vote at the AGM. Before the introduction of NVDR there used to be some ridiculous anomalies in the Thai stock market. When Thailand was popular with foreign investors there could , on occasions, be a 20pct+ difference between the F tradable shares and the local version. something similar to the Phuket condo market at times in the past. Since the introduction of the NVDR scheme this has all disappeared, foreigners can now buy local shares and convert them to NVDR form immediately and when they want to sell they can simply sell them as local shares. There is almost never any premium for F registered shares anymore, in practice there is a level playing field.

yes you are correct, at least the last time i checked with CBRE. I believe there are only a handful of Bangkok condos where the ownership is anywhere near the 49 pct. This is really more of an issue for Phuket and Pattaya

its much much easier to transfer shares rather than cash. However to do this you need a brokerage account outside Thailand that is capable of trading Thai stocks. This might work; 1) open a share trading account in Thailand. 2) use your cash to purchase Thai stocks 3) After a respectable gap , Instruct your Thai broker to transfer your shares to the (Thai ) custodian of your overseas broker, btw both parties need to be informed of your intentions. 4) share transfer takes place on a date agreed by both parties (thai and overseas broker) , but everything can normally be done over a couple of days. 5) After the transfer is complete, your shares are still held in Thailand but by a different custodian who will act on the instruction (given by you) to your overseas broker. 6) once everything has settled you can either retain the shares or sell them via your non Thai broker, who can then convert to the currency of your choice and the credit will be in your brokerage account outside Thailand. 7) Bingo! your money is outside the country. I have done this a number of times, over the years, without any problem, on one occasion involving a very significant portfolio in terms of value. However i should add that i am an established customer of the Thai broker concerned and, over time, my fund/stock transfers have gone both into and out of country via this method. A new customer doing this with cash from an unknown source might arouse more interest from the authorities.

ok they just opened 504.5 bid 506 offer

I guess that was because the market had closed when you checked the price. Phoenix closed yesterday at around 508p, it is a pretty liquid stock with an average daily volume of c 3million shares and it generally trades with a fairly tight spread ie 1 or 2p. When the market is open again (around 2pm Thai Time) you should see a more normal spread.

i would agree Alibaba looks pretty cheap now but i am concerned about political risk and also they have been somewhat tardy in terms of returning their massive capital surplus to shareholders. There are many shares in HK/China that look cheap , and i own a number. The 3 i picked (you asked for 3) have a couple of common characteristics 1) They have very strong balance sheets 2) They pay decent level of dividends (around 7% 2024 consensus forecasts) which they have the capability of growing so they are pretty defensive. There are other shares that will do better if the market bounces strongly but i believe these 3 will do pretty well whatever the market does. On Your points As you mention CU has bounced strongly from its lows with a move up from just under 4 to 5-96 HKD. However if you look further back the shares were trading over 12 HKD in 2014. All of the major China Telcos look very cheap and have announced a strong commitment to grow their shareholder returns. China Mobile is the biggest and arguably the safest of the three, but CU has a better growth outlook (in my opinion). I would argue that Power is not particularly cyclical, If anything, it has been rather dull, in recent years. It is part of the CK group of companies and its largest shareholder is CK Infrastructure ,which attempted to buy them out a few years ago. Power is a holding company with significant positions in a number of network and power businesses around the world. Because of the nature of its underlying businesses , mainly regulated utilities, it is a pretty defensive company, it also has an extremely strong balance sheet.

1) Ping An (2318 HK) 2)China Unicom (762 HK) 3) Power Asset (6 HK) HK and China will be the best markets to be in for 2024 and 2025, My Opinion FWIW I would probably also have a side bet on BT in the UK. Full disclosure; I own shares in all of the above.

" The overseas use of offshore bonds has unfortunately come to be associated with high charging, opaque structures from commision-based salespeople who have sold risky investments to unsuspecting expats" Quoting AES from the above.

To Quote from the intro to the above; "

https://www.aesinternational.com/wealth/reviews/offshore-investment-bonds/what-are-offshore-investment-bonds This gives a reasonable, factual and balanced summary of the uses of offshore investment bonds. In particular the section on "Problems with offshore investment bonds" is worth reading as it refers to the potential for excessive charging, which is what, i believe, you are referencing. That section highlights the issue that many expats have experienced ie depending on the provider, the IFA/Wealth Manager can have a significant degree of flexibility with regards to the charging structure eg with the potential to impose a charging structure that could involve significant penalty (upto 9.5 percent) for an early withdrawal from the scheme. That is , of course, on top of the other charges they impose on your assets. The key takeaways for me are 1) these products offer pretty much zero benefit for a long term expat who does not intend to return to the UK 2) They offer the potential for loading exit charges which effectively tie in the customer. 3) i am sure there exist honest IFAs who do not abuse these products but, for sure, some do

The London Times article, which i linked in the OP, was referring to expats who had been the victims of offshore IFA,s sharp practice in the recent past, not from many years ago. I know, for a fact, that the deVere Group (referenced in the article) still promote "offshore portfolio bond" structures to customers of their Dubai operation. One needs to exercise extreme caution in dealing with any offshore financial advisors, especially those based in places like Thailand. As the original Times article illustrates you are running significant risks with your finances

Not True, Many offshore IFA,s still use a product called a "portfolio bond", as a kind of wrapper, this is a structure which effectively locks the customer in for a number of years, carries high annual costs and is expensive to get out of. The IFA,s love them because they tie in the customer but they are of zero benefit to the majority of long-term expats. These , portfolio bonds, can be very detrimental to your financial well being and if any advisor proposes such a structure you basically know that they are not going to act in your interests so walk away.

did you read the comments and links posted above ie re how the domicile rules in the UK are set to change post 4/25? Your position could be fundamentally different post that date.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-the-taxation-of-non-uk-domiciled-individuals/technical-note-changes-to-the-taxation-of-non-uk-domiciled-individuals#:~:text=From 6 April 2025%2C the current remittance basis of taxation,years of non-UK residence. Link posted from gov.uk which explains the changes , some of which will be implemented from 6/4/2025 and others will be subject to a period of consultation. As is stated in this document the definition of domicile will change fundamentally to one that is based on the length of residence in the UK. It also looks like 10 years non residency will change your status to one of being not domiciled. As can be seen in these (UK Govt) guidance notes, if someone, who was previously domiciled in the UK, and is then not a UK resident for a 10 year period , and then returns to live in the UK , they will benefit from the 4 year grace period; ie they will be treated the same as a newly arrived non dom.

Actually that is the whole point. Both parties are agreed on the principal that the definition of domicile needs to change. The exact nature of the change is subject to a period of consultation that is going on right now. but , for sure, the way in which UK domicile is determined will change.

Whatever the final shape of the legislation, it is hard to see how either government could move to a length of residency test as the primary determinant of domicile for those who live in the UK, and then apply another kind of domicile test for those who have lived outside the UK for many years.

https://blog.macfarlanes.com/post/102j5b7/the-labour-party-announces-further-reforms-to-the-non-dom-regime Labour has indicated that it is supportive of the current governments proposals re domicile, however they would prefer to see the legislation toughened up in certain areas. It seem like there is broad acceptance that the domicile rules need to change and it seems likely that some form of residency test will be at the heart of the reform. However there is an ongoing consultancy process and we have yet to get any of the detail from this.

great point, this whole situation is, very much, in flux. the UK domicile rules are currently undergoing consultation pre new legislation, which may or may not be enacted by the current government. In any event , i think it is likely that there will be a change in the definition of domicile to one which is based on time either resident or NOT resident in the UK. I think the advice to wait , rather than implement a new series of arrangements is a good one. I suspect, that whichever government finalizes the legislation , UK citizens who have been non resident UK for a significant number of years , will find that they are deemed to be non domiciled in the UK.

Dont know anything about them, however the website raises a couple of red flags for me. 1) offices in Bangkok , Seychelles and Chichester (UK) - an odd mix of locations 2)Lots of the usual general guff on the website but very little in the way of specifics eg no names/details for the key staff. This makes it impossible to do any initial background checks on the people you would be dealing with- a major red flag , at least for me.

and background to the case mentioned in todays ST https://www.aol.com/sec-fines-york-firm-devere-8-million-over-192142813--sector.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pension-fraud-stolen-uk-expat-brite-advisory-mark-donnelly-jjh5cr7mk Interesting article and a reminder to us all about the risks of using offshore investment advisors

I used to live down the end of soi 11 and I dont know if they are still there, but there used to be 2 or 3 single houses tucked away on the opposite side of the soi , before you get to Kallista at the end.

still some single houses , but deep into the soi down toward the khlong, also down 11/1 , again heading toward the khlong.