jayboy

Your opinion is noted though I do not agree with it.It's largely irrelevant because no sane person would declare that expense on his Thai tax return.

Really? If I hypothetically purchased an Emirates return ticket to London originating in Bangkok with my credit card issued by a Channel Islands bank, no money would be brought into Thailand and it would not be considered as a remittance. If I paid with my credit card issued by my Thai bank that might be different.

Do you think school fees would fall into this category and would it be prudent to remit directly to the school?

It's true that the Thais have become fatter over the last forty years, primarily for the reasons already touched on in this thread.Digging a bit deeper, the Thais, more perhaps than some other countries, attach great importance to a beautiful appearance including slim bodies.Inevitably there is a class element involved with the urban and better off sectors generally slimmer and keen to stay that way.In the past rural Thais were thin because of hard labour and restricted diet - not any more, there are lots of village fatties now.But even in the villages now there is pressure for fat children to slim down. The social aspect is interesting.In London for example from which I have just returned there is a very noticeable difference in obesity between the better off boroughs and the poorer ones.It's a delicate matter but in one specific ethnic group I didn't see one woman who wasn't overweight.I should perhaps add fashionable boroughs because some like Shoreditch are now popular with the trendy young. There is also the matter of physical attraction - nobody really wants to sleep with an overweight person unless there are some powerful compensations (you know what I'm talking about Pattaya sugar daddies.) And even in Pattaya, mother lode for fat expats, there's pressure to trim down. My hunch is that in Thailand and elsewhere obesity will decline over the next ten years - a combination of better awareness, souped up Ozempic type drugs and better diet.

Lazada

Half a teaspoon every day with coffee.Try the Lions Mane organic variety about Baht 150 a packet.Does it taste good? Yes with milk added to the coffee.Does it provide mental clarity? No idea, but if Clarkson's long legged Irish girlfriend says it might, I'm willing to give it a whirl.

Yes that is a sensible approach and possibly in this scenario not necessary to file Thai tax returns since no assessable income.However with a few fortunate exceptions that pre-2024 pot of gold will run down after a number of years - since it cannot be added to. Then one will be very firmly in the sights of the RD, since, subject to any DTA relief, one would be subject to tax on remittances funded out of current income.

Thanks.That's what I expected.

I'm a little abashed to ask this question because I feel I should know the answer.Anyway here goes. I understand that foreign earnings if they are assessable after 31.12.2023 are taxable in the year remitted.What would be the case if I earned money in 2024 but kept it offshore for say three years, and then remitted it.Would it still be taxable in Thailand?

Good luck with passing the very stringent medical that's required.

Has not the precedent already been set with the appointment of a jailed heroin smuggling criminal in the Coalition Government.As far as I am aware the military appointed Senate was perfectly happy about that.From the Sydney Morning Herald: "Thammanat Prompao, a key ally of top generals and an enforcer in the coalition cabinet, was a young soldier known as Manat Bophlom when he pleaded guilty in the NSW District Court to conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of heroin with a street value of up to $4.1 million."

There's not much diplomats can do.However the German Ambassador expressed outrage in a way that recognized the tragedy of the Netiporn case. The British Ambassador's response was anemic, disappointing as I rate him quite highly.

It's fairly obvious he means visa for retirement purposes.More generally this kind of abrasive language really doesn't help.There must be many retired expatriates in Thailand on relatively low incomes who are quite apprehensive about the enforcement of tax on pensions/current income.They will often be quite unsophisticated types unfamiliar with tax, finance and law and who wouldn't know a DTA from an MBA.This forum and Mike Lister in particular has done a good job in taking them by the hand.I don't think ordinary pensioners are going to be affected much.But in the meantime give them a break and ease up on the lecturing.

This is true and any experienced businessman - or indeed anyone familiar with Thai culture and government - in Thailand knows it to be true across a variety of sectors.However because there is nothing written down (indeed there may even be a law contradicting actual practice). It's down to custom and usage but there will always be those who refuse to accept.It's usually a waste of time debating or arguing with them.

In reality I suspect a large number of expatriates - maybe even a majority - in Thailand have obtained TIN numbers because of pressure from their banks overseas (which themselves are coming under pressure). The reasons are well known and relate to international tax compliance.But I would add another, namely the fear on the part of expatriates that they might be debanked - not very likely I agree but even at low odds that would be an intolerable position for most people.

FWIW my experience has been for over 20 years that premium increases have been well over the rate of inflation.I'm pretty sure that this is the norm in the West given medical inflation. To be honest I would be concerned if the increase was only 3% on the basis it doesn't stack up commercially - thus raising questions about credibility on claims. There never has been a NC bonus on my policy which is annoying since I have never needed to make a claim..Furthermore the company says that the premium is not affected by the claims record, subject of course to the maximum annual total under the policy (in my case US$ 1,000,000) The company is circumspect about detail but do concede that premiums are affected by age.There is no provision to kick policyholders off when they have reached a certain age. In my case the policy disregards medical history incurred before start of policy.I realize this is not usual and it only became possible because I had the option to carry on with the same insurance company (at my expense) after I left corporate employment The company is well known in Thailand (prefer not to give details) but my worldwide - except the US - policy is administered from the UK. I have a £ 2000 excess to keep premium costs down and to focus on significant medical events. My annual premium this year in Baht terms is Bt 230,000

I would seriously doubt that the Thai Government cares or will care about this.It is so marginal/irrelevant to what is planned for tax in initiatives in Thailand, and furthermore impossible to police/monitor given the millions of non residents who use ATM's here.

When snooty people say, as they do sometimes, that Asean Now is primarily composed of middle aged lower class sexpats, I shall direct them to this thread to dispel that slanderous suggestion since the quality and class of the participants are clearly on display.

Not really accurate at all but easy to research for those who are genuinely interested.

I don't think it would be a good idea to self prescribe especially with drugs from India. I would suggest any prospective consumer should be under the strict guidance of an experienced physician at a major hospital.That would not include a particular clinic favored by some expatriates where on my last two visits the doctor in charge has put on an eccentric display (to put it politely) including screaming at the support staff.

Thank you for sharing your experience.You might be interested to know a recent study reported in the British press indicated the weight could be kept off when not taking the drug by very slowly tapering off usage.Obviously this drug treatment is at a very early stage.It's hard to believe that in ten years time many of the teething problems won't have been ironed out.Cost down too probably.

Nonsense.There was extensive discussion of adverse effects particularly with AZ.Those with some appreciation of statistics and proportionality understood the position very well - see previous post giving seat belts in cars as an example.Others (those of the deniers who had not died or become seriously ill) succumbed to paranoia and conspiracy theories and some even perpetuated their strange perception to this very day.

I was withdrawn because it made no sense commercially now and there are other newer vaccines designed to tackle later variants.IT is estimated to have saved over 6 million lives thus served its purpose well. Yes there were many anti vaccination fanatics (are you one, I don 't know) ranting about conspiracies and globalist plots.They did immense damage particularly where the gullible and ignorant were concerned.I suppose its inevitable a few of these geniuses are wittering even now about their discredited theories.

Weight-loss jab ‘cuts heart disease deaths by 20%’ https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-weight-loss-jabs-prescription-drugs-ozempic-7dbsvkblg

As I recall the very rare issue of Astra Zeneca blood clots was recognized very early on, especially with young people.However the overwhelming evidence was that AZ did its job for the vast majority of people.There needs to be some understanding of statistics.Car safety belts in a small number of accidents can cause death or injury - but in the vast majority of cases they save lives.Same with AZ. Subsequently better vaccines were produced but AZ in its time saved lives and saved many others from serious illness.