connda

First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Probe all they wish, but when they begin passing laws to directly or indirectly "abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press" and "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (protest) they'll be shot down in short order in federal courts. Right now the Uni-Party, i.e., Congress, with the exception of a handful of legislators not bought and paid for by billionaires mega-donors and lobbies who are anti-Palestinian and anti-Muslim and pro-war, are in the process of doing just that. Attempting to make excuses to eviscerate the Constitution. And they are saying it: "We can't allow this speech or that speech, or speech against this group whom we support or that group whom we support. Of course - they are paid to protect those whom their donors expect to be protected and shut down the speech by those their donors do not like. That's not how the Constitution was framed. They are going after "protected speech" and it will get shot down in Federal courts (as it should), and barring that the SCOTUS. I know there are people, including US legislators and US citizens who wish to live under totalitarian control - and call it "democracy" - but as long as the SCOTUS functions that isn't going to happen. Keep an eye on this thread as you'll see those people who wish to destroy the Constitution say so right here. They'll start out with: "Freedom of speech is not absolute!!!" Yes - it is. Except in a very, extremely limited set of circumstances, and most of those have already been established in Constitutional Law via precedent. And the recent arrests on US university campuses are going to create a plethora of new cases, as well as laws moving through Congress to "abridge the freedom of speech" which are supported by both Democrats and Republicans. I never thought I'd see the day - but here it is. You say you don't like US Constitutional "protected speech?" Then move to the UK or the EU and ask for asylum based on being terminally offended by "hate speech" or "political speech" which IS "protected speech" under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The watchers of MSM cable news whether on the Left or Right will be holding hands as they board the first planes back to the England to swear fidelity to King Charles if he promises to protect them from the scourge of the First Amendment and unrestrained "Free Speech."

Does Urai have a black belt in Brazilian Ju Jitsu?

Eat the bugs. That will fix it all.

Are the Gore's, Obama's, and Biden's ocean-front properties flooded yet by the "melting glaciers?" No. Didn't think so. "But but but - Asia!!! Asia is under water!!!" What? Now we're suppose to believe that the world is tilted and the melting glaciers are flooding Asia but not the East Coast of America? Ok - whatever. To paraphrase PT Barnum, "There is a sucker in every crowd."

Ditto. I love this. The "vaccine" that doesn't stop transmission is affecting global public health. "But it will keep you from getting hospitalized." Bunk - I never got the shots and Covid was a 4 day mild flu. If the "vaccine" was actually a "sterilizing vaccine" that stopped transmission there wouldn't be vaccine hesitancy. Instead, people take the shots and get Covid once, then maybe get it again, and then are told - "See, it kept you out of the hospital." What utterly flawed logic. They started off in 2020 and 2021 by having world leaders tell the population that "If you get the shots you won't get Covid." So people took the shot and -- got Covid. So now there are a lot of people who feel they have been lied to. And rightly so. To the Op. When they develop a sterilizing Covid vaccination (or sterilizing flu vaccination) that has long-term safety testing and is proven to stop transmission - I'll be first in line to take it.

But you already do. You pay 7% VAT on all sales and if you have a saving account the Thai government automatically extracts 15% of your earned interest. So - you already are paying taxes in Thailand. You may not pay "income taxes" but you do pay taxes.

Unfortunately if you read the US-Thai Dual-Tax Treaty it's based on how residency is interpreted. Well, except for Social Security which is only taxable by the US <period>. I wrote about it and included the DTA earlier in this thread. There are cases when Thailand gets first shot at taxing your US earned pension, as suckola as that may be. The easier method to bypass this madness is, imho, not to transfer any more than you can claim exemptions for. Bottom line - don't be a target.

Eat bugs, stay home and never drive again, and give GammaGlobulin half your income in carbon offsets (so he can buy and fly a private jet and buy some beachfront property next to Al Gore) and the Earth will be saved.

My favorite - stringing utility cable across roads at "neck high" for the average motorcyclist. I've seen it. It boggles the mind. Kills people every year too.

That's sucks. RIP.

Probably because Singapore is one of the most expensive places on Earth to live.

It's called "pollarding" and it is a common practice here in Thailand, especially with fruit trees like Lamyai.

This isn't Buddhism. It's really time for another purge of Thai Buddhism as there was during the reign of Rama IV.

Now there's a change of pace, 'eh?

Thai scientists discover snow fossil fuel pollution in Antarctica's soil There! Fixed it!

Yes - they are. Welcome to Thailand.

If you are using Linux Mint. Once this is set up it's Cntrl + Mouse Wheel.

For myself? My transferred funds will be well below the taxable threshold. So what I'll do is give my wife my bank books and tell her that all the taxes taken out of my bank accounts for tax on interest income is hers and then put her to work to retrieve it. She'll be like a pit-bull. Again - I have let all of that tax on interest income slide. I just declare the interest income on my US returns and let the Thai government keep what they withhold. However - now that they force me to file? Their loss. They'll end up giving my wife the money that I allow them to keep because I don't consider it worth the hassle to file the income tax paperwork. Make me file it? Ok - wife will get every satang that the Thai government takes out of my accounts. So for everyone here who has a bank account that accrues interest income? If you're forced to file tax returns for the ludicrous dog-and-pony show, then go claw back all your interest income. Especially if you are over 65 and retired. But remember to declare it on your home-country tax returns.

The Thai government is shooting themselves in the foot. How many foreigners are now going to defer or simply not make purchases they had planned to make? Thailand can chose to make it's money from foreigners in one of two ways: Sales taxes or income on remitted foreign funds. Start taxing remitted funds and foreigners stop buying and they keep their funds transfers under the tax threshold - so all the Thai government is doing is screwing itself out of foreign funds transfers as well as losing sales tax revenues. It's a lose-lose proposition. These are not the brightest bulbs in the box of light-bulbs. I absolutely understand 100% - Tax your own citizens. But start categorizing foreigners who have no rights to permanent live in Thailand or become citizens as "tax resident" and watch what happens in the long-term. They will lose tax revenues in the long-term.

I agree with you. So in that case, start looking at the US-Thai DTA for guidance. Actually I just looked at it. There is next to nothing regarding capital gains. Realistically, when you cash out a Roth, your brokerage isn't going to show an assessment for capital gains because they don't exist for a Roth IRA. So what are you showing on a brokerage balance sheet? A debit from a non-taxable account that doesn't show capital gains. The Thai Revenue department can only work with what you give them. Anyway - probably a good question for an accountant. I only have a traditional IRA. It will probably go to my wife when I die so I'll let her figure it out.

Yes sir I have. But that doesn't mean that I understand what it means and how to apply it correctly. Which is why I asked the question. "No such thing as a dumb question," right? As an ex-instructor (English, computer systems engineering), I always thought that way and urged my otherwise reticent students to speak up when they are confused or didn't understand something I presented. So thank you for the clarification. It's truly appreciated as is your efforts to take the lead to provide members of AN with this information. Kudos!

Just being Captain Obvious here, but if Thailand really wanted to collect tax revenue they would start with their own citizens. Honestly, outside of Thais who work for incorporated businesses and businesses who actually file income taxes (as many small Thai business do not - think massage shops) I personally don't know any Thais who file income taxes other than my son who has a corporate job and I'm sure they withhold taxes. Filing taxes is not exactly the first thing on the minds of people (poor villagers) who are making 300 to 500 THB per day (cash) doing day labor - like a lot of those in villages and even in cities. What they are thinking about is surviving day to day and making ends meet. So in a discussion on tax evasion, which here in Thailand is being so poor that driving to file your taxes is going to cost you a days wage which you can't really afford, the first place to start is with average Thais. Of course that would expand their tax base but at what social and political costs? It's much easier to just ramp up the VAT taxes, like the new VAT on foreign goods. So instead? Go for the deep pockets - foreigners whom you will never allow to be permanent residents or citizens, but still class as "tax residents" because - "Foreigners are rich!" Slightly off topic and yet, tax evasion is probably much more widespread than the Thai government is willing to let on. Just saying...

@Mike Lister So let me do a "back of a napkin" calculation to determine the top threshold of what I can theoretically remit to Thailand this year just using exemptions: Here are the exemptions listed from the article: a) Personal Allowance for self (PA1) - 60,000 b) Personal Allowance for wife (PA2) - 60,000 c) Over age 65 years exemption (OAE) - 190,000 d) 50% of pension income received, up to 100k (PD) - 100,000 e) In addition, the first 150,000 of assessable income is zero rated and free of tax (ZR) Am I missing anything here? The way I read it is that I can bring in upwards of 560,000 that is exempted income - in my case US pension income. Any flaws in my calculations? I'm I missing anything? Making assumptions that are incorrect?

Deleted

Anyone who places movie stars on a pedestal and worships their views need to have their head's examined.