Thai gov. to tax (remitted) income from abroad for tax residents starting 2024 - Part I

[JimGant]

21 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Unless the Thai RD declares that the type of money you are remitting into Thailand is not taxable income, then it would be wise to lodge a tax return and state that you owe zero income taxes and why.

 

The DTA already says the type of money I'm remitting is not taxable. And, where on a Thai tax return would I put my Air Force and Social Security income, and designate it as "exempt per treaty?" No, declaring to Thai RD my "non assessable income" just opens up more areas for confusion. A poster here has been declaring his non assessable income on his return for years, and has gotten nods, "yes, no taxable income -- thank you very much white man (snickers in the background)."

[Mike Teavee]

18 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Not need to get rabid. They don't need to mention expats, they said that all residents for the purpose of taxation (strictly more than 179 days in country) will have to file a tax return. Why would you think that this wouldn't include the so called expats? 

Do you have a link to where that was said? 

 

Fact is the only thing that has changed is that income earned from 1/1/24 will now be tax assessable any time in the future (assuming you're Tax Resident) instead of the current "Rules" which says it would only be tax assessable if remitted in 2024.

 

If you do not remit anything that would be Tax assessable this year then there is no need to file a Tax Return in 2024 & if you do not remit anything that is Tax assessable income in 2024, there will be no need to file a tax return in 2025... and so on... 

 

Am sure you could file a Nil Return if you wanted to but there is absolutely no need to unless your investigated by the Revenue & if you've not remitted anything that is Tax assessable then you've nothing to worry about. 

 

[Ben Zioner]

13 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

Do you have a link to where that was said? 

Here, was clear right from  the beginning.

 

[Mike Teavee]

11 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Here, was clear right from  the beginning.

 

 

That doesn't say that everybody will have to file a Tax Return, it just highlights what I said about income earned from 1/1/24 being Tax Assessable if remitted in later years. 

 

[Steve2UK]

2 hours ago, James105 said:

 

I think its just a case of prepare for the worst and hope for the best, although as someone else pointed out it is pretty clear that any monies transferred into Thailand after 1 Jan will be assessed for tax. 

 

 

With the (beneficial for many) caveat/concession that RD's "Paw162" order (updating/clarifying "Paw161") treats separately funds demonstrably acquired outside Thailand before 1 January 2024 as not assessable for (Thai) tax when remitted to Thailand after 1 January 2024.

See extract from Mazars' advisory below.

BTW I've used the term "funds acquired" because I suspect that words like "earned" and "income" are potentially too tight/misleading for some cases - e.g. that inheritance from Aunt Mary's will and accumulated savings etc. Maybe "assets" is a safe(r) catch-all term? Maybe over-cautious on my part but..... better safe than sorry?

It perhaps goes without saying that some credible form of evidence might be required to show that the remitted-to-Thailand funds were acquired pre-1 January 2024 - even if it's just a personal bank statement showing as much. And, before I get jumped on, I fully accept that some/many have complex/multi-faceted financial dealings that are/will be difficult to compartmentalise.

 

"Funds acquired" after 1 January 2024? Yes - that (for now) remains a tangled potential nightmare.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Steve2UK

[gamb00ler]

41 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

There is a severe downside to that strategy - unless the Thai RD declares that the type of money you are remitting into Thailand is not taxable income.

My proof that remitted money is not accessable income would be my US tax return, my 1099-SSA, my 1099-Int and my 1099-R showing the same combined total as given on my 1040.  It can't get any easier than that.  If Thai RD is still not satisfied, my brokerage statement clearly shows the source of all incoming transfers from pensions and interest.

 

The only concern I have is that the Thai RD may consider interest earned in a retirement account (401K/IRA etc) as accessable income.  As a defense against an attempt by the Thai RD to tax those funds, I can show that no funds from those accounts were remitted to Thailand.

[JimGant]

8 hours ago, CartagenaWarlock said:

He parks the money in a US bank and brings it back the following year to avoid Thai taxes. It's closed now, of course. As usual, Thailand did not take into account the thousands of people living in Thailand because they had to travel 10,000 miles for a decent living in a foreign land. What about them? It is not sorted out yet.  

 

Not sure I understand your logic.... Yes, many Thais work abroad to get a decent wage. That their country of employment doesn't tax them, and that Thailand doesn't tax them (because of the next year remitted rule), has been a nice bonus. Now, apparently, they'll have to pay Thai income taxes on that nice wage earned abroad. But what's unfair about that? The tax is at the same rate as their Thai neighbors with jobs in Thailand. Why should they get the added bonus by working abroad of no income tax? I guess this is why we're seeing the new ruling proposal -- the Thai working abroad, who has a fatter paycheck than his hometown neighbor, should also be subject to Thai taxes.

[jerrymahoney]

55 minutes ago, JimGant said:

The DTA already says the type of money I'm remitting is not taxable. And, where on a Thai tax return would I put my Air Force and Social Security income, and designate it as "exempt per treaty?"

According to the Revenue Department, it will seek opinions from the stakeholders affected by the new rule and issue guidelines to provide more clarity. The plan includes an amendment of the personal income tax return form to facilitate the foreign tax credit claim.

 

https://www.mazars.co.th/Home/Insights/Doing-Business-in-Thailand/Tax/Thailand-Tax-Foreign-Income-Taxable-from-2024

[Steve2UK]

4 minutes ago, JimGant said:

 

Not sure I understand your logic.... Yes, many Thais work abroad to get a decent wage. That their country of employment doesn't tax them, and that Thailand doesn't tax them (because of the next year remitted rule), has been a nice bonus. Now, apparently, they'll have to pay Thai income taxes on that nice wage earned abroad. But what's unfair about that? The tax is at the same rate as their Thai neighbors with jobs in Thailand. Why should they get the added bonus by working abroad of no income tax? I guess this is why we're seeing the new ruling proposal -- the Thai working abroad, who has a fatter paycheck than his hometown neighbor, should also be subject to Thai taxes.

Hard to argue with what you've said. That said, I remain persuaded that the Thai RD is really after the multi-millionaire/billionaire class of Thai citizens who have long played the 'high-roller' overseas game with stock-market/investment dealings and have repatriated their overseas profits (rather than mere salary) all according to volatile exchange rates generally and - more particularly - the hitherto very 'useful' (aka lucrative) 'previous year' tax loophole. On past form, I'm less persuaded that that class won't find/create ways to stay way ahead of any loophole-closing measures that Thai RD can come up with - and enforce.

 

[JimGant]

23 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

The only concern I have is that the Thai RD may consider interest earned in a retirement account (401K/IRA etc) as accessable income.

 

Interest earned in an IRA has the same complexion as the tax deferred principal that funded the IRA, namely, it's not taxable until withdrawn. So, if you're currently not drawing down your IRA, you have no tax liability with either the US, or the Thais -- the interest is blended with the principal.

 

In my case, I have a Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) which is taxable, but which is an amalgamation of principal and compounded interest, but which there is no distinction needed -- it's just a glob of taxable income.

 

Now, if the Thais go to taxing "income" (and not income remitted), then I'll have a very reportable income amount from my RMD (here's where FATCA and CRS reporting comes in -- with income, not remittances). And per the DTA, Thailand has first dibs on taxing that. So be it -- the credit for this against my US taxes will make this neutral.

 

But if they stick to the "remitted" fiasco, I can just play games with the fungibility of the savings account from which all Wise transfers are made -- and claim FIFO and Aunt Martha's original funding as the source of remittances. That could prove interesting, but I doubt they're sophisticated enough, or adequately funded, to go down this road. We'll see....

[JimGant]

12 minutes ago, Steve2UK said:

On past form, I'm less persuaded that that class won't find/create ways to stay way ahead of any loophole-closing measures that Thai RD can come up with - and enforce.

 

Amen. Or just stomp on those trying to close the loophole. We may wake up tomorrow and have nothing more to discuss on this thread, as it will have all disappeared.

[JimGant]

17 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

The plan includes an amendment of the personal income tax return form to facilitate the foreign tax credit claim.

 

I would not need to declare the US taxes paid on my Air Force pension and Social Security as a credit -- since my Air Force pension and Social Security would not be assessable income, under the DTA, for Thai tax purposes. Thus, posting a credit against nothing would be wasting ink. So, I don't think any amended Thai tax forms will have line items for non assessable income.

[jerrymahoney]

17 minutes ago, JimGant said:

 

I would not need to declare the US taxes paid on my Air Force pension and Social Security as a credit -- since my Air Force pension and Social Security would not be assessable income, under the DTA, for Thai tax purposes. Thus, posting a credit against nothing would be wasting ink. So, I don't think any amended Thai tax forms will have line items for non assessable income.

You certainly are way ahead of those plodding revenue folks. 

 

Personally, I make a 65K+ FTT deposit every month for extension of stay so I think at some point I would have to address the source of those deposits whether they are tax exempt or not.

Edited December 22, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[The Cyclist]

15 minutes ago, JimGant said:

I would not need to declare the US taxes paid on my Air Force pension and Social Security as a credit -- since my Air Force pension and Social Security would not be assessable income, under the DTA, for Thai tax purposes.

 

You are on the same page as me on the above.

 

I'm not convinced ( though I could be wrong ) that income covered by a DTA will be classed as " assessable income "  My thinking being, that if it is non taxable in Thailand due to a DTA then why would i5  be " Assessable "

 

If you do not have any " assessable income " is there any need / reason to file a rax return.

 

Perhaps the new form will also have a section for income covered by a DTA.

 

Time will tell.

[TravelerEastWest]

1 hour ago, JimGant said:

 

I would not need to declare the US taxes paid on my Air Force pension and Social Security as a credit -- since my Air Force pension and Social Security would not be assessable income, under the DTA, for Thai tax purposes. Thus, posting a credit against nothing would be wasting ink. So, I don't think any amended Thai tax forms will have line items for non assessable income.

Logically you are correct but Thailand can create laws as they wish - Tax treaties are not always clear and can be changed or interpreted in different ways...

 

My point is that Thailand may require you to report tax-exempt income and then not tax you. (Or so we hope - smiling)

 

As an example on the US Form 1040 sometimes you need to report tax-free interest but you don't pay tax on it... Wasting ink does happen in the US as an example earlier I mentioned you can have income that was reported to the IRS in error as taxable or in the wrong amount - you don't ignore that situation you report the income and then subtract it out and explain with a note.

 

I would not report what seems to be tax-exempt and let them audit me if they want to.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

2 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

My proof that remitted money is not accessable income would be my US tax return, my 1099-SSA, my 1099-Int and my 1099-R showing the same combined total as given on my 1040.  It can't get any easier than that.  If Thai RD is still not satisfied, my brokerage statement clearly shows the source of all incoming transfers from pensions and interest.

 

The only concern I have is that the Thai RD may consider interest earned in a retirement account (401K/IRA etc) as accessable income.  As a defense against an attempt by the Thai RD to tax those funds, I can show that no funds from those accounts were remitted to Thailand.

We are in 'violent agreement' - all those things you have to be able to 'prove' not taxable in Thailand, require you to lodge a tax return for the Thai RD to assess that claim.  May I suggest, as thiungs remain as they are now, that you lodge a tax return in 2025 stating all that and see how the Thai RD goes with it. If they agree then it is clear you need not lodge a tax return again - unless the type and source of your money remains.  But if you decide not to lodge a tax return, then in a few years you may find yourself in deep poo for not having lodged a return.  Because as it stands now, any money you remit into Thailand is potentially taxable income, unless and until you can prove it is not.  That is my biggest problem with all this - having to lodge a tax return and 'proving' the money I remitted into Thailand last year is not taxable. Who is ever going to remit say 5 million baht into Thailand (car and property) this year, when they have no idea if they will have to pay 1 million baht income taxes next year. Until the Thai RD states clearly what is taxable income as far as they are concerned, then we are all in the dark. 

 

IMO to close the existing loophole, all they needed to do was to close the loophole for investment profits made from money taken from Thailand and invested overseas.  This would exclude all investments earned overseas made with money earned overseas.  Now they are going to have to detail all the exemptions and allowances and 'specials' - that is why they are going to take a while.  Malaysia did the same thing a few years ago, and when they realised the can of worms they had opened, they immediately delayed the implementation of the new rule until 2026 for personal tax resdients. They then spent a few years clarifying what is and is not taxable income - inclluding stating that Expat Retiree's money that they have earned and banked overseas, was not taxable when brought into Malaysia. 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

3 hours ago, JimGant said:

 

The DTA already says the type of money I'm remitting is not taxable. And, where on a Thai tax return would I put my Air Force and Social Security income, and designate it as "exempt per treaty?" No, declaring to Thai RD my "non assessable income" just opens up more areas for confusion. A poster here has been declaring his non assessable income on his return for years, and has gotten nods, "yes, no taxable income -- thank you very much white man (snickers in the background)."

The application or not of a DTA is not the decision of a taxpayer - it is the decision of the Thai RD - and to get that decision you have to lodge a tax return - unless the type and source of your money has already been declared as non taxable.  We are all waiting for those clarifications and declarations - but if they dont arrive before end 2024 - then lodging a tax return will be required to find out yes or no.   

[JimGant]

54 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

all those things you have to be able to 'prove' not taxable in Thailand, require you to lodge a tax return for the Thai RD to assess that claim. 

 

Pure conjecture. Why Thai RD would want to be inundated by a forest of paper, to prove a negative, is beyond me. Where are getting your information?

[stat]

10 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Yet others persuade us that CRS is one one thing, which they they know because they are a consultant who works with such data every day and are expert. But when others post confirmation that CRS is something else entirely and they are invited to debate the matter and fight their corner, they hide under rocks and in dark corners. It is not so much a question of who is right and who is wrong, it is more a question of what is correct. Will my transactions be recorded and be capable of being viewed at the detailed level asks poster A. Oh no, how can it be, CRS is consolidated data. Hmm, not so says another, here's the record layout from CRS. Personally, even though I'm not an "expert" tax consultant, I'm going with the latter because there is evidence and the poster is credible but I'll leave it for those involved to argue the toss. We have no horse in this race but it would be good to understand the truth, especially when it comes from the mouths of "experts", allegedly.

What is your question Mike? I was under the impression that you were in the camp of the people that claim that this whole new tax rule is completly irrelevant to them and the majority of expats.

 

CRS shows each and every transaction that you have done on a stock exchange or when you received money from such a transaction (gross transaction value not profit!) it also shows aggregate account balances. It does not show that you transfered money to Thailand for example. CRS should in my opinion not be a concern to 99.9999% of the people here, as Thailand wants to "only" tax money that is remitted to Thailand. So you can make a million USD per year on the stock exchange and TH would not tax it (current understanding of the situation by thai tax lawyers; some outlier claims they will also tax worldwide income that is not remitted but I am convinced for now that this will not happen at least not in 2024).

 

Maybe they will look at your crs report and see you have made 2 Million USD in gross proceedings and wonder why you have not submitted a tax return at all, but I doubt it as you need the IT tools and the people, but no one knows for sure. It took Germany several years to use the crs report and to have the "tools" ready.

[Ben Zioner]

54 minutes ago, JimGant said:

 

Pure conjecture. Why Thai RD would want to be inundated by a forest of paper, to prove a negative, is beyond me. Where are getting your information?

They  are in the process of modifying forms to enable the claim of overseas tax credits, any idea why they do it?  

 

All this came up in the various threads that have been started since September, and I don't want to go through sift though thousands of posts, but I think the form modification came up after some "AMCHAM" meeting, US being a good case in point.

 

AFAIC many things came up and made total sense. Now even the large tax advice consultancies raise doubts about RD's capabilities, but I wouldn't play their current weaknesses too much. Everything will be retroactive to Jan 1, 2024 if they catch you in 2030. I could hurt really bad couldn't?

Edited December 22, 2023 by Ben Zioner

[UKresonant]

Just now, TravelerEastWest said:

My point is that Thailand may require you to report tax-exempt income and then not tax you. (Or so we hope - smiling)

 

That's the way I would anticipate it to be for 2024 income, reportable 1st  Jan - 31st March 2025. (Not very functional until they provide  a facility to at the same time, list the claimed credit relief, (rather than Just writing a letter to them).  Though I am just watching from the side lines . E.g. 100% of each selected taxed pension remitted to Thailand, with it's corresponding credit relief value, gross pension, paid net of tax to bank, should all add up fine.

No extra tax on DTA only in home country entries, perhaps a little on other entries. Can see that seems do- able.

 

 

Though I cannot see how in any practicality, if bringing in home savings (post 2023) to Thailand, in say 2028 if tax resident, that when they say that they need proof that it had been taxed previously, that it could be presented in the same way or detail.  Only in general that the savings pots were created from taxed income, but multi years, multi pre-taxed sources.  So cannot see do-able, only if non-tax resident. Overseas home country financials are not likely to be designed (say 9 years before)  record wise, in anticipation  of Thai RD expectation perhaps.

 

[UKresonant]

Just now, TroubleandGrumpy said:

They then spent a few years clarifying what is and is not taxable income - including stating that Expat Retiree's money that they have earned and banked overseas, was not taxable when brought into Malaysia. 

 

That would be a good clarification for Thai RD to put out even if they said below 2 million THB pension or similar. It would perhaps save them a lot of non-yielding, can't see the wood for the trees effort.  Then not inflicting much stress and anxiety on many. Also void potential cutbacks of inward remittance from sources they imply are not their intended targets anyway.

 

Would be better than the DTA don't worry generalisation possibly 

Edited December 22, 2023 by UKresonant

[Mike Teavee]

Watching today's Fabulous 103FM News report & there's a story in there that people have been reporting Immigration (am guessing Chonburi/Jomtien) asking for proof that Income has been taxed at source when doing retirement extensions (presumably using the 65K Income Method)... 2 minutes in...  

 

 

It does go on to say that it's unlikely any income taxed at source will be taxed again BUT makes no mention of what happens if the income hasn't been taxed (Obviously if it is Income & hasn't been taxed then the person remitting the money should have filed a Tax Return & paid tax on it in Thailand). 

Edited December 22, 2023 by Mike Teavee

[The Cyclist]

1 hour ago, stat said:

CRS should in my opinion not be a concern to 99.9999% of the people here,

 

Would CRS not be a concern to 99.9999% of people who fly under the radar in order to avoid paying tax ?
 

Quote

The CRS seeks to establish the tax residency of customers. Under the CRS, financial institutions are required to identify customers who appear to be tax resident outside of the country/jurisdiction where they hold their accounts and products, and report certain information to our local tax authority.

 

Your second misconception is this

 

Quote

as Thailand wants to "only" tax money that is remitted to Thailand

 

Doesn't really matter ' what Thailand wants ' By joining CRS, Thailand will follow the rules and regulations set out by the OECD.

 

[The Cyclist]

16 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

It does go on to say that it's unlikely any income taxed at source will be taxed again 

 

Something I have said repeatedly.

 

The objective is not to raise a few quid double taxing people, it is to close various loopholes that have been used to avoid paying tax

[stat]

50 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Would CRS not be a concern to 99.9999% of people who fly under the radar in order to avoid paying tax ?
 

 

Your second misconception is this

 

 

Doesn't really matter ' what Thailand wants ' By joining CRS, Thailand will follow the rules and regulations set out by the OECD.

 

CRS does NOT show how much you transfered to TH and only that amount is taxable. This is the reason CRS should be of no concern for the majority. However CRS shows that you are rich (if you are ;-)) and maybe a target worth going after and check in more detail how much you transfered into TH. For you bank account there is no way to get around CRS report other then banking in very shady countries where I personally would not recommend to bank.

Edited December 22, 2023 by stat

[Yumthai]

37 minutes ago, stat said:

CRS does NOT show how much you transfered to TH and only that amount is taxable. This is the reason CRS should be of no concern for the majority. However CRS shows that you are rich (if you are ;-)) and maybe a target worth going after and check in more detail how much you transfered into TH. For you bank account there is no way to get around CRS report other then banking in very shady countries where I personally would not recommend to bank.

CRS is a potential issue for those who hold non-resident bank accounts.

If all your bank accounts are resident accounts (meaning reported address is in the same country where the account is opened) no CRS information will be sent anywhere.

 

 

[Lorry]

5 hours ago, Yumthai said:

If all your bank accounts are resident accounts (meaning reported address is in the same country where the account is opened) no CRS information will be sent anywhere.

Yes, this is how CRS is supposed to work. 

But there have been reports of Thai banks planning to report all resident accounts of foreigners. Presumably,  they would report to the country of the nationality of the account holder.

 

The CRS rules maybe clear and simple. What reporting banks actually do, is much less clear and simple.  I have personally seen some very messy "reporting", not only by Thai banks. 

[UKresonant]

Just now, Mike Teavee said:

Watching today's Fabulous 103FM News report & there's a story in there that people have been reporting Immigration (am guessing Chonburi/Jomtien) asking for proof that Income has been taxed at source when doing retirement extensions (presumably using the 65K Income Method)... 2 minutes in...  

 

 

It does go on to say that it's unlikely any income taxed at source will be taxed again BUT makes no mention of what happens if the income hasn't been taxed (Obviously if it is Income & hasn't been taxed then the person remitting the money should have filed a Tax Return & paid tax on it in Thailand). 

 

So the answer may be ; Yes it has been taxed at 20% and the retirement Extension costs >81250 THB/ month gross of income + transfer fees, for their selected countries, that cannot get an Embassy income letter since 2018ish!

 

So if it has not been taxed 65000 remitted - tax over 65 ~8000 = 57000 net to live on? 

 

What kinda proof?

[Mike Lister]

10 hours ago, stat said:

What is your question Mike? I was under the impression that you were in the camp of the people that claim that this whole new tax rule is completly irrelevant to them and the majority of expats.

 

CRS shows each and every transaction that you have done on a stock exchange or when you received money from such a transaction (gross transaction value not profit!) it also shows aggregate account balances. It does not show that you transfered money to Thailand for example. CRS should in my opinion not be a concern to 99.9999% of the people here, as Thailand wants to "only" tax money that is remitted to Thailand. So you can make a million USD per year on the stock exchange and TH would not tax it (current understanding of the situation by thai tax lawyers; some outlier claims they will also tax worldwide income that is not remitted but I am convinced for now that this will not happen at least not in 2024).

 

Maybe they will look at your crs report and see you have made 2 Million USD in gross proceedings and wonder why you have not submitted a tax return at all, but I doubt it as you need the IT tools and the people, but no one knows for sure. It took Germany several years to use the crs report and to have the "tools" ready.

The question in my mind is the same one that others will likely have, there is still no clear explanation of what level of detailed information CRS provides in total. That said, your latest post (above) does go some way towards providing that, for the very first time. I don’t know with certainty if you know all the answers on this or not, you try to persuade us that you know but thus far you have been unable, for whatever reason, to provide a complete explanation in a manner that everyone can understand. You have the arrogance and bad taste to tell us that others don’t know what they are talking about on the subject of taxation and should be ignored, because you are a tax consultant to banks, yet we still don’t have a complete concise easily understandable explanation about what CRS does and doesn’t provide, hmmm!

 

On the one hand you write that CRS does not include transactional data but elsewhere say that it is aggregated data. What you don’t say but imply is that the level of detail depends on the subject being reported and these can be divided into different groups or types. Stock market trades for example are reported at a detail level, or so you say, but transfers are not and other types of transactions are not. Does that mean if a bank sells your stock market holdings in a nominee account and transfers the funds to you, they are not reported under CRS.The average poster here can be forgiven for being confused when even the above average ones are still confused.

 

You took me to task because you understood me to say that CRS data was at the detailed level, I didn’t believe it was for the same reasons other think it is not, because the volume of data would be horrendously massive. Yet soon afterwards, poster @ben zioner also took me to task for suggesting that CRS data is not at the detailed level and he responded by posting the field layouts, to which I invited you to debate the issues with him but you stayed away, hmmm again!

 

The problem may be that you are unable to summarise the necessary information, succinctly and in a manner that everyone can understand, or, it may be that whilst you tell us you know, you don’t really. Social network forums are notorious for such antics hence no poster is above suspicion, until they have proven themselves beyond doubt!

 

My personal needs in this area are almost non-existent, my tax and financial affairs are very clear and simple enough. Others, however, will want to understand their exposure that results from CRS but thus far, this thread hasn’t provided the necessary clarity.

 

Lastly, whether or not the thread should have been closed a long time ago is a matter of personal preference. I personally fail to see the sense of talking around a subject when precious little more fact is known today from the RD than was known  months ago. There is only so much hypothesis, supposition and conjecture that can be debated without rehashing the same things repeatedly and recovering the same ground, but that’s just me.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Mike Lister