.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png.8488ab72b8bb2e508209bfe3211b6e08.png)
Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between Thailand and Australia
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Latest posts...
-
67
Russian tourist attacked in Pattaya over livestream mix-up
Quite a chunky stocky little bull that lady -
3
THAILAND LIVE Thailand Live Friday 24 January 2025
Three Orangutans Seized in Thailand's Wildlife Smuggling Bust File photo for reference only In a dramatic wildlife trafficking bust, three endangered orangutans were intercepted in Chumphon’s Mueang district, Thailand, on their covert journey to Bangkok. The animals, housed in large baskets, were discovered in a pickup truck during a police checkpoint inspection, with assistance from the US Fish & Wildlife Service. Full story: https://aseannow.com/topic/1349703-three-orangutans-seized-in-thailands-wildlife-smuggling-bust/ -
85
Hamas Is Effectively Back in Control in Gaza With no alternative following a cease-fire with
Hamas are now having shoot outs with other Gazian militias for control of Gaza . There are numerous different Palestinian factions in Gaza that oppose Hamas . Palestinian militia are fighting it out among themselves for supremacy in Gaza . "Rafah: battles for control between Hamas terrorists and local militias, for control of the supply trucks and the terrain. Hamas wants absolute control over the trucks, it loots and sells the goods, and with the profit rebuilds its government. All the "aid" of the UN and the like refinances terror. ' -
0
Canada Seeks a Diplomatic Solution to Avert Trump Tariffs
With a potential tariff war looming between Canada and the United States, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has adopted a different approach in hopes of resolving the crisis. After initially warning of economic hardships and preparing for retaliation, Trudeau is now offering a more conciliatory message, emphasizing Canada's value as a trusted partner to the U.S. In an effort to appeal to President Donald Trump’s vision for America’s prosperity, Trudeau spoke optimistically about a shared future. “Canada is a safe, secure and reliable partner in an uncertain world,” he said this week. He added that failing to nurture the partnership could drive the U.S. toward “more resources from Russia, China or Venezuela.” This shift in rhetoric reflects Canada’s urgent attempt to avert a 25% blanket tariff on imports, a measure being weighed by its largest trading partner. The threat of these tariffs, compounded by Trump’s unpredictable objectives and timelines, has left Canada scrambling for a clear strategy. Canadian officials are now torn between retaliation and appeasement, with no consensus on the best course of action. While Canada has prepared potential countermeasures, such as targeted tariffs on U.S. goods like Florida orange juice or a broader "dollar-for-dollar" retaliation, these tactics are fraught with uncertainty. Similar approaches were used successfully during Trump’s first term, when tariffs were imposed on Canadian steel and aluminum. But this time, the stakes and dynamics appear different. Further complicating the matter is a divide among Canadian leaders. Trudeau has hinted that even drastic measures, including taxing or embargoing energy exports to the U.S., are on the table. However, this suggestion has faced opposition, particularly from Premier Danielle Smith of Alberta, an oil-rich province. Smith has voiced her disapproval of using energy as leverage, signaling internal divisions over how to proceed. Both Trudeau and Smith have taken their concerns directly to Florida, meeting with Trump in person to make their case. Despite Trudeau’s efforts, his frustration is evident. “We’ve been here before,” he told reporters on Tuesday, referencing the challenges of Trump’s first presidency. “The first Trump presidency represented moments of uncertainty and threats of instability that we were able to work through constructively.” Canada’s ambassador to Washington, Kirsten Hillman, has also weighed in, suggesting progress in understanding the Trump administration’s priorities. She noted that discussions had shifted from abstract debates to more concrete negotiations, pointing to the “America First” trade review commissioned by Trump. This review outlines U.S. trade priorities centered on national security, with key roles assigned to Trump’s nominees for treasury secretary, commerce, and trade representative, all awaiting Senate confirmation. The stakes for Canada are significant. Around 75% of its exports are destined for the U.S., while only 17% of U.S. exports head north. This imbalance leaves Canada in a vulnerable position, with limited bargaining power. “The U.S. can afford to have a long trade war with Canada, and Canada less so,” said Theo Argitis, managing director of the Compass Rose Group. He added that while Canada has long considered diversifying its trade partnerships to reduce reliance on the U.S., such efforts have repeatedly fallen short due to the geographical and cultural proximity of the two nations. As Canada grapples with its response, Argitis emphasized that avoiding a trade war remains the country’s top priority. “There’s been no evidence that Canada is able to diversify at all, and so we’re kind of stuck with option number one,” he said. Ultimately, the advantage appears to rest with Trump, leaving Canada to navigate a difficult path. Whether through retaliation, diplomacy, or a combination of both, Trudeau’s government faces a critical test as it seeks to shield its economy from potentially devastating U.S. tariffs. Based on a report by BBC 2025-01-24 -
0
Trump Restores Terrorist Designation for Yemen’s Houthis
In a significant move to address militant activities in the Middle East, President Donald Trump on Wednesday directed his administration to redesignate Yemen’s Houthi rebels, officially known as Ansar Allah, as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). The decision, aimed at cracking down on the Iranian-backed group, reinstates a designation Trump first imposed during his initial term in office, which had been subsequently reversed by the Biden administration. The executive order signed by Trump initiates the process of relisting the Houthis as an FTO, with the White House emphasizing the group’s attacks on U.S. Navy ships, commercial vessels, and civilian infrastructure across the region. This measure, according to the administration, seeks to disrupt the group’s financial support and curtail its operations. By imposing the designation, the U.S. Treasury Department gains broader authority to enforce sanctions and warn foreign entities that engaging with the Houthis could jeopardize their access to the U.S. financial system. In addition to targeting the Houthis, the executive order directs the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department to review affiliations with United Nations agencies, contractors, and nongovernmental organizations operating in Yemen. Following this review, the administration plans to end partnerships with groups that make payments to the Houthis. The White House framed this as a necessary step to ensure U.S. resources are not indirectly supporting the militant group. “This action is critical to holding the Houthis accountable for their destabilizing activities,” the administration stated, underscoring the group’s ongoing threats to regional stability and U.S. interests. The relisting of the Houthis as an FTO has long been a contentious issue. While Trump originally designated the group during his first term, the Biden administration later reversed the decision over concerns that the designation could hinder humanitarian aid from reaching Yemen’s vulnerable population. Yemen remains embroiled in a protracted conflict that has resulted in a severe humanitarian crisis, with millions facing hunger and displacement. Notably, Trump’s initial designation of the Houthis as a terrorist organization drew rare criticism from Republican lawmakers. Many expressed concerns that such a move would exacerbate the humanitarian crisis by blocking critical aid to Yemen. However, the White House argued that the measures are designed to restrict the Houthis’ access to financial markets without obstructing aid delivery. In a related development, the Biden administration last week declared the Houthis as a “specially designated global terrorist group,” a classification that allows for targeted sanctions and funding restrictions. Although this designation was set to take effect within 30 days, Trump’s new order signals his administration’s commitment to accelerating efforts to curtail the Houthis’ influence. The decision to reinstate the terrorist designation highlights the broader tensions surrounding U.S. policy in Yemen and the challenge of balancing counterterrorism objectives with humanitarian considerations. The administration’s move signals a firm stance against the Houthis while leaving open questions about the implications for Yemen’s humanitarian crisis. Based on a report by The Hill 2025-01-24 -
0
Supermarkets Rally Behind Farmers in Opposition to Inheritance Tax Increase
A united front of British supermarkets has emerged in support of farmers protesting against the government’s planned inheritance tax reforms. Tesco, Aldi, Lidl, the Co-op, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, and Asda have all voiced their opposition to the proposed changes, joining calls for a pause and consultation on the policy, which many fear will have far-reaching consequences for the agricultural sector. The government’s plan, set to take effect in April next year, introduces a 20 percent inheritance tax on agricultural and business assets exceeding £1 million. Farmers argue that this policy will impact approximately 75 percent of commercial farms, potentially forcing many to sell their land and threatening the viability of family-owned farming businesses. Ashwin Prasad, Tesco’s chief commercial officer, emphasized the urgency of addressing farmers’ concerns, stating, “The UK’s future food security is at stake.” He urged the government to pause the implementation of the reforms and conduct a full consultation, calling for a long-term vision for UK agriculture that enables farmers to invest confidently while contributing to the nation’s transition to net-zero emissions. Lidl shared similar concerns, warning that the changes could undermine farmer confidence and deter investment in building a resilient and sustainable British food system. Aldi, which signed a National Farmers’ Union (NFU) letter urging the government to reconsider, stressed the importance of fostering a farming sector capable of investing in its future and delivering high-quality British food. Protests have been escalating, with farmers parking tractors in supermarket car parks to draw attention to the issue. Sainsbury’s, Morrisons, and Asda have also expressed public support for farmers, urging the government to listen to their concerns. In an earlier statement, Morrisons reassured farmers, saying, “We’re with you,” while Asda offered similar backing. The debate gained further traction with the release of a report by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). The report cast doubt on the government’s revenue projections, stating it was “highly uncertain” how much money the tax changes would generate. The OBR suggested that tax planning strategies, such as utilizing other reliefs, increasing charitable donations, or depleting estate values, could significantly reduce the policy’s impact. It also warned that the changes might not yield consistent revenue for at least 20 years. The government has estimated that the reforms could raise £500 million annually by 2029-30. However, the Country Land and Business Association (CLA), which represents landowners and rural businesses, has challenged this projection. CLA president Victoria Vyvyan argued that the economic implications of the policy had not been fully considered. “It is clear that neither the Treasury nor the Office for Budget Responsibility has fully considered the impact on the economy of these tax reforms,” she said. Vyvyan pointed to broader consequences, including reduced investment, job losses, and threats to food security. She urged the government to engage in meaningful consultation to understand the potential damage. “This means fewer jobs, less food security, less growth, and less money going into the Exchequer to pay for public services,” she warned. The CLA’s analysis suggests that over a generation, the reforms could affect as many as 70,000 farms, with at least 500 farms a year potentially facing significant inheritance tax bills. Even at the government’s lower estimate, more than 20,000 farms could be impacted over 40 years. Environment Secretary Steve Reed has defended the reforms, citing validation from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and the OBR. However, the IFS has recommended revising aspects of the policy to prevent family farms from being split up, acknowledging concerns raised by farmers and landowners. As the debate continues, the solidarity between supermarkets and farmers underscores the urgent need for a balanced approach that addresses the concerns of all stakeholders while safeguarding the future of British agriculture. Based on a report by BBC 2025-01-24
-
-
Popular in The Pub
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now