jayboy

Not quite.Being a woman means being a person who has XX chromosomes and reproductive organs that make bearing children possible.However not every woman is able to bear children.

Oh dear

I used to worry about being debanked too but mainly in the context of international cooperation on tax transparency. But I don't understand the concern about international transfers (assuming one is not cheating the UK government on the state pension.) There are many very reputable banks, mainly Channel Islands based, which exist to service expatriates and have no problems in regular transfers overseas.

Or the Thai way as well.

Depends where you live.In posh suburbs and fashionable parts of the big cities very likely.In many other areas far from acceptable.

And never was - like the rest of the independent sector. Stupidity is one thing.Ignorance is another Envious spite is yet another.But the Labour government and its gullible acolytes have managed to combine the three, to devastating effect. This is a minor issue in the overall scheme of things but it is also very revealing.

If you mean this school is for profit, you are misinformed.It's not.

Not one of the top 100 independent schools in the UK is for-profit.They have no shareholders and any surplus is reinvested.Actually there is usually never more than a modes surplus if any.Schools like Eton and Winchester are well endowed from centuries back but the others have to rely on appeals.

It's never been taxed anywhere in the world - pure spite on the part of the Labour government who hate the middle class.

Agreed, you included. Incorrect.There are circumstances when not necessary, especially if the individual has no assessable income. They are equally likely to be misleading.

It was a slight annoyance but the key point is the mechanism actually still exists and requires no additional legislative or statutory authority. I don't know why they suspended the requirement.I doubt whether the Embassies had much to do with it - perhaps the Japanese and the Americans who had the major influence in those days. Tax clearance requirements for foreigners do exist in a few countries but as in Malaysia are directed at foreigners who have been employed, not retirees and other non working people. Who knows what they will do?

This is pure and ill informed speculation on your behalf and bears no resemblance to reality.If Thailand wanted to monitor foreigners tax compliance a mechanism already exists in the Tax Clearance certificate which is now in suspense but could easily be revived.Again there has never been any suggestion up to now that it will be revived, other than in the fevered minds of some foreigners.Personally I think it unlikely.

Yes all ranks, provided certain criteria (common to all ranks) are met such as families living together.

It's just been demonstrated that privilege is not acquired in this way.You could make the case against but you just repeat the dogma. It's a spiteful bit of class warfare to appease the left.Some people with closed minds will like this.

Boarding school syndrome is real though the the system has changed out of recognition in the last 20 years. In any case most independent school children are at day schools. No other country on earth charges VAT on education.

It's not clear at all.Let me make it simple for you.If private schools were abolished, the children of well educated middle class parents would still tend to end up at the top of the heap. I have a lot of respect for the Sutton Trust.If there's a wish to press for equality of opportunity (and i think most people will support this) , then the work needs to be done in the state education sector - not by penalizing aspiration and the pursuit of excellence.

Actually I would deny it.It's true that say the top thirty independent schools have pupils of mainly wealthy /upper middle class (though many many exceptions) and that their excellent education and, more importantly, supportive home life gives them a leg up. But for the vast majority of the independent sector there is no particular advantage in gaining access to universities/employment.Furthermore none of the independent schools are "for profit. Eton for example has over 100 boys with fees fully remitted and 20% boys receive financial assistance.However Eton is a special case and it is ludicrous to suggest there are many other schools like it. At Oxford and Cambridge there has been a rapid decline in independently educated students.Critics of the independent schools tend to forget that these days universities and employers want the ablest candidates available and don't care about where they were educated. The assault on independent schools is therefore little more than spiteful class warfare.There is no proof that the very large sums claimed in VAT will in fact be forthcoming, not to mention the need to find government funding for the mass of pupils forced to transfer to the state system. I don't in fact have much sympathy for the independent sector because of the ridiculous escalation of fees in recent years.But what most critics don't appreciate is that even if independent schools were abolished altogether, the wealthy and well educated middle class will ALWAYS find a way to give their children an advantage in life.

All from savings pre 31.12.23 therefore non assessable

I am no more a Trump fan than you are.But perhaps better reflect on why Americans gave Trump such a convincing mandate. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/09/we-can-rage-about-donald-trump-or-we-can-be-curious-about-why-he-appealed-to-so-many?CMP=share_btn_url

I need to transfer about Baht 2 million from my UK bank account to my Thailand account to cover a car purchase, school fees and some home improvement work. I have obviously made many transfers over the years but not as large as this.I expect to be asked by my Thai bank the purpose of the funds which I think is a BOT requirement. I was wondering whether there is any point in making a number of smaller remittances, say Bt 700,000 pm over 3 months. Any thoughts or suggestions?

It's true that rates hit a peak in 2006 though as I recall 5% was not easily available (more like 3.5%) and in any case rates fell steadily from then on to the paltry position of the last few years.Assuming we are talking about Baht deposits the return calculation must also take account of what FX was brought in and when. You mention CIMB: as it happens, I remember there was some concern about rates offered by CIMB about that time - not on the conventional rates for depositors which tend to be pretty standard across the sector but on some weird hybrid products with very high returns. Whether thousands of farang were "flocking" to TRD who can tell? What one can say is that people would need to be very smart to take advantage of the very few spikes in rates and avoiding the long years of rates lower than inflation.I doubt for most people it made sense to enter the tax system given the poor returns available over any reasonable stretch of time, to say nothing of the opportunity cost.

They were and I think most sentient retirees were aware of this.However given that inward transfers were fungible and (a) earnings from previous years were not taxable and (b) no checks were ever made which years transfers related to and (c) no system for making checks existed and (d) the TRD wasn't interested - the vast majority of non working retirees without Thai income did not file tax returns.Many including myself tried to keep in mind it would be best not remit current income.But it wasn't a big deal if one did and certainly the idea of submitting a tax return never entered the mind.All changed now of course. So I don't think many people in the category I described were submitting tax returns in the past.Can I prove it ? No other than anecdotally and the application of common sense.I put this matter to a senior foreign tax/accountancy guy (well known firm) and he agreed my assessment - though making the point that the situation has now changed. I'm aware that a few people submitted returns to claim back interest on savings.One struggles to understand why they would want to enter the tax system for miserable financial returns given the interest rates payable - but perhaps they had astronomical holdings. There is a certain sort of person that loves to have every remote possibility covered.They derive pleasure from completing and submitting tax returns even when there was no real need.Even more they enjoy the virtuous feeling and the potential ability to rebuke others for their shortcomings/incomprehension.It takes all sorts. Anyway the matter is excellently covered in the recent PWC tax publication for which there is a link elsewhere.Pay attention to that and not to people like me and certainly not the Eeyores out there.

This is a trenchantly expressed view. too extreme probably, but at the heart there is a real truth.I did some quick research on this Thai tax expert and to put it mildly it was not encouraging.Please don't pay too much attention to grifters.

Yes, but if I understand the position correctly the savings do not necessarily have to be retained in Thailand.Thus if one remits funds that were accumulated before 31.12.2023 (and can prove it) then this is not assessable income and not subject to tax.Isn't that correct?

I think that sums it up accurately and concisely. My one question would be to ask what is meant by "to potentially file a tax return." Given the criteria you outline surely these foreigners must file a tax return? And just as a comment on the Integrity Legal video, I'm not a great fan of these videos.The American lawyer seems to know his stuff but he is too impetuous for my taste.I like my legal (and tax) advice to be cool, measured and thoughtful.