'Day Fine' System In Thailand Would Hit Rich Harder, Avoid Jail

[webfact]

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

'Day fine' system would hit rich harder, avoid jail

By THE NATION

TDRI recommends European scheme

A system of fining offenders based on their income, the so-called day fine, should be used in Thailand as an alternative to imprisonment for petty crimes, says the Thailand Development and Research Institute (TDRI).

A day fine adds an amount above the minimum fine for a particular offence, based on the offender's daily personal income. The system has proved successful in some European countries as a way to punish those committing non-felony offences, as it saves public funds by avoiding imprisonment, said Somkiat Tangkijwanich, a senior TRDI researcher.

For the offender, the day fine saves him or her from wasting time under detention in the case of those possessing unique skills or who are not violent or career criminals. They would also avoid the stigma of being a former inmate, as the record would show them as having only paid a fine, he said.

As the day fine is based on an offender's daily personal income, the wealthier pay higher rates, resulting in a perception of fairness among members of society, said Sunthorn Tanmanthong, a co-researcher on the subject.

In many countries including Thailand, a fine is not regarded as a substitute for a jail sentence, but is additionally imposed, mostly in place of suspended imprisonment. But in Sweden and Germany, day fines are imposed as the only sentence with or without suspended imprisonment.

In Thailand, offenders with high incomes, 20 per cent of the total, earn 15-20 times as much as the poorest, who make up another 20 per cent.

Several criteria are used to calculate the day-fine rates, including the number of days, and daily personal income based on various conditions. Courts need to have authorities check out offenders' financial records and determine whether they profited from their crimes, which would result in different calculation formulas.

However, there could be constitutional considerations involved, in Thailand and elsewhere - for example, the principle that one should be punished fairly and equally for crimes one commits.

In the case of Thailand, the TRDI concluded that day fines should be imposed for petty crimes, either together with other sentences including community service or as a standalone measure, while imprisonment should be imposed in case of violent crimes only.

The TRDI did not cite types of petty and violent crimes in this study.

-- The Nation 2011-06-07

[geriatrickid]

The suggestion is based on the premise that the wealthy will be brought to trial. Is that really the case in Thailand. Just asking.

[rmicheald]

The suggestion is based on the premise that the wealthy will be brought to trial. Is that really the case in Thailand. Just asking.

Of course they are!!! Your statement smacks of corruption and we all know there isn't any of that in Thailand

[rkidlad]

I can see it now. The lowly police officer pulling aside a nice new Mercedes Benz for breaking a traffic code and giving this rich person a nice big fine. It doesn't work like that here. The poor get stung while the rich do as they please. I believe you call it 'negative discrimination'

[Soutpeel]

The suggestion is based on the premise that the wealthy will be brought to trial. Is that really the case in Thailand. Just asking.

Cant see how this would work, after all a lot of petty theft is conducted because people dont have money to start with....

Also per "Courts need to have authorities check out offenders' financial records" This assumes all offenders will have financial records...what happens if they dont ?

If I was Thailand I woudl be very wary imposing systems which have their original with the gang of PC loonies in the EU

From an EU perspective would suspect determining the fine based on income is discrimination, as the punishment for a crime should be the same for rich or poor..call me cynical, but suspect the root of this scheme is an attempt to gouge more money of people because the goverments have suceeded in virtually bankrupting a lot of countries in Europe

From BIB perspective I could see their interest in this as a vehicle to generate addtional tea money revenue...

[3billygoats]

Well, if Thaksin's maid did anything wrong, she'd be in big trouble, wouldn't she?

[CMX]

I don't want to appear all paranoid, but the first thing that struck me was a personal point of view. A farang with a non-immigrant a-o is known to have a certain (relatively high) income, as law requires it. A similarly placed Thai, because said citizen speaks fluently and so forth, might not ever get to trial. So who's more likely to get a bigger fine if the flat-rate is not maintained? But that's paranoid.

For tax revenue overall, I saw floated an idea for a progressive tax on land ownership, increased according to the amount owned by that owner throughout the nation, would solve many revenue problems here - arguably all. The idea was floated in parliament. But that's ridiculous.

[fatfather]

A day fine adds an amount above the minimum fine for a particular offence, based on the offender's daily personal income. The system has proved successful in some European countries as a way to punish those committing non-felony offences, as it saves public funds by avoiding imprisonment, said Somkiat Tangkijwanich, a senior TRDI researcher.

It works quite good in Germany. The "daily rate" is set by court ruling and it reflects the lifestyle of the offender. The judge and the prosecution will find out what is true. Nevertheless the "rich" usually handle these fines easier than the poor, in this point there is not a really justice. It has no effect on charges on the road etc., claimed by police or authorities, it only effects the charges at court. It can be ok, depends on how it is handled in real life....

fatfather

[anotheruser]

So if you are rich you just pay more to stay out of prison? That doesn't seem very original to me. I thought such a thing already existed?

[Soutpeel]

A day fine adds an amount above the minimum fine for a particular offence, based on the offender's daily personal income. The system has proved successful in some European countries as a way to punish those committing non-felony offences, as it saves public funds by avoiding imprisonment, said Somkiat Tangkijwanich, a senior TRDI researcher.

It works quite good in Germany. The "daily rate" is set by court ruling and it reflects the lifestyle of the offender. The judge and the prosecution will find out what is true. Nevertheless the "rich" usually handle these fines easier than the poor, in this point there is not a really justice. It has no effect on charges on the road etc., claimed by police or authorities, it only effects the charges at court. It can be ok, depends on how it is handled in real life....

fatfather

Still of the opinion this is a revenue generating system for the state, not administering justice, no different from traffic camera's which have put in place to generate money, not to improve road safety

[jayjayjayjay]

Does this also work in reverse. If a someone kills a poor uncle riding his bicycle on a road you would only have to pay 20,000 baht, but if you murder a business man you have to pay 20,000,000 baht????

[OzMick]

The suggestion is based on the premise that the wealthy will be brought to trial. Is that really the case in Thailand. Just asking.

Cant see how this would work, after all a lot of petty theft is conducted because people dont have money to start with....

Also per "Courts need to have authorities check out offenders' financial records" This assumes all offenders will have financial records...what happens if they dont ?

If I was Thailand I woudl be very wary imposing systems which have their original with the gang of PC loonies in the EU

From an EU perspective would suspect determining the fine based on income is discrimination, as the punishment for a crime should be the same for rich or poor..call me cynical, but suspect the root of this scheme is an attempt to gouge more money of people because the goverments have suceeded in virtually bankrupting a lot of countries in Europe

From BIB perspective I could see their interest in this as a vehicle to generate addtional tea money revenue...

"........the fine based on income is discrimination, as the punishment for a crime should be the same for rich or poor."

You've missed the whole point. How is a THB1000 fine the same punishment for a labourer and a multi-millionaire. The idea is to fine them both an equal number of days earnings - equal pain equals equal punishment.

An easier system for traffic fines would base the fine on the book value of the vehicle being operated (don't borrow a Roller!)

[richieudon]

'Day fine' system would hit rich harder, avoid jail

By THE NATION

It would certainly hit farangs harder too !!

[tragickingdom]

The article is laughable. Not only has Germany another system than the Scandinavian countries, in Thailand the rich have no income. Look at the politicians. A man like Chavalit is paying less than 200,000 Baht in taxes per annum. This means that only the honest people get caught. If the taxman really did his job he would ask police, military and political figures to explain how they could buy a house, car or afford great luxury with their salaries. The day fine system is therefore completely unsuitable for a third world system.

[MickGC]

Well, if Thaksin's maid did anything wrong, she'd be in big trouble, wouldn't she?

That took awhile. 5 posts before someone tried to involve Thaksin in the topic of conversation.

[anterian]

As at least 25% of my village have no observable income, this would mean they could indulge in unlimited petty crimes Scot free.

A guaranteed vote winner if it became part of a political platform.

[snarky66]

Quote: "As the day fine is based on an offender's daily personal income, the wealthier pay higher rates, resulting in a perception of fairness among members of society, said Sunthorn Tanmanthong, a co-researcher on the subject."

And we know how progressives love "the perception of fairness". Just as they advocate wealth redistribution.

I'm still waiting for the Red Shirts to pay for the damage they did to the capital.

[SantiSuk]

I'm sure that the BIB would quickly latch on and find a way of doing roadside daily income assessments ('this car vely expensif - I tink you make 100 towsund baht today; give me five tousund baht pleez') to avoid cases having to go to court

[osiboy]

Quote: "As the day fine is based on an offender's daily personal income, the wealthier pay higher rates, resulting in a perception of fairness among members of society, said Sunthorn Tanmanthong, a co-researcher on the subject."

And we know how progressives love "the perception of fairness". Just as they advocate wealth redistribution.

I'm still waiting for the Red Shirts to pay for the damage they did to the capital.

your obviously not a supporter of fairness, or a fair world , .......who exactly do you suggest should pay for the damage ?...... the relatives of the dead ?

OR are you suggesting that the poor { the 90%majority of the redshirt support } should pay the likes of gucci,nike,McDons,etc etc ,...........

do you think they did'nt have insurance ? .....the poor always pay the most ,and are the first to suffer ,weather its in thailand or a western country ,...........who is bailing out the banks

of the UK now ? , who is having their benefits and welfare cut ? , who is loosing there jobs ? their wages cut or frozen ? , ..........the redshirts just want what

we all deserve ,................FAIRNESS !, i think its a great idea the "day fine" , the problem would be getting the BIB to pass it onto the relevent departments, the

poor already pay the "day fine " eg 200B,.. so why not the rich ???

[bkk_mike]

Quote: "As the day fine is based on an offender's daily personal income, the wealthier pay higher rates, resulting in a perception of fairness among members of society, said Sunthorn Tanmanthong, a co-researcher on the subject."

And we know how progressives love "the perception of fairness". Just as they advocate wealth redistribution.

I'm still waiting for the Red Shirts to pay for the damage they did to the capital.

your obviously not a supporter of fairness, or a fair world , .......who exactly do you suggest should pay for the damage ?...... the relatives of the dead ?

OR are you suggesting that the poor { the 90%majority of the redshirt support } should pay the likes of gucci,nike,McDons,etc etc ,...........

do you think they did'nt have insurance ? .....the poor always pay the most ,and are the first to suffer ,weather its in thailand or a western country ,...........who is bailing out the banks

of the UK now ? , who is having their benefits and welfare cut ? , who is loosing there jobs ? their wages cut or frozen ? , ..........the redshirts just want what

we all deserve ,................FAIRNESS !, i think its a great idea the "day fine" , the problem would be getting the BIB to pass it onto the relevent departments, the

poor already pay the "day fine " eg 200B,.. so why not the rich ???

Fairness?

Benefits and Welfare are fair?

Really?

Personally, I believe, in the UK, it's the person with a job that loses out. The only person that has to pay prescription charges is the same person whose taxes pay for the NHS. And with the loss of child benefit for higher rate taxpayers, the people paying a lot of tax actually get less back for the taxes they pay than people with a lower paid job.

And for those who study hard and go to University, taking out Student Loans that they pay off over years, do you really think they're happy that their former classmates without a job are paid to sit at home. When I was a student, it always struck me as unfair that a student doesn't get at least the same amount of money from the state as if they'd stayed at home jobless on supplementary benefit.

As for the day fine. You'll usually find the primary use for it is speeding fines. In fact you will find that the record speeding fines in places like Switzerland and Finland are enormous.

IF you're going to do it, it might be worth fining based on the value of the car (as that's easy to work out and will penalise someone doing 300km/h in their Ferrari), but unless your entire income is as an employee in the country where you were speeding, there's very little the courts can do to find out your genuine income, so basing it on income isn't going to always be fair. (Especially in a country like Thailand where corruption results in a group of people whose taxable income and actual income are significantly different.)

[Honolulu]

'Day fine' system would hit rich harder, avoid jail

By THE NATION

It would certainly hit farangs harder too !!

of course, if you don't commit crime, it shouldn't affect you at all.

[dinooz]

Quote: "As the day fine is based on an offender's daily personal income, the wealthier pay higher rates, resulting in a perception of fairness among members of society, said Sunthorn Tanmanthong, a co-researcher on the subject."

And we know how progressives love "the perception of fairness". Just as they advocate wealth redistribution.

I'm still waiting for the Red Shirts to pay for the damage they did to the capital.

your obviously not a supporter of fairness, or a fair world , .......who exactly do you suggest should pay for the damage ?...... the relatives of the dead ?

OR are you suggesting that the poor { the 90%majority of the redshirt support } should pay the likes of gucci,nike,McDons,etc etc ,...........

do you think they did'nt have insurance ? .....the poor always pay the most ,and are the first to suffer ,weather its in thailand or a western country ,...........who is bailing out the banks

of the UK now ? , who is having their benefits and welfare cut ? , who is loosing there jobs ? their wages cut or frozen ? , ..........the redshirts just want what

we all deserve ,................FAIRNESS !, i think its a great idea the "day fine" , the problem would be getting the BIB to pass it onto the relevent departments, the

poor already pay the "day fine " eg 200B,.. so why not the rich ???

Fairness?

Benefits and Welfare are fair?

Really?

Personally, I believe, in the UK, it's the person with a job that loses out. The only person that has to pay prescription charges is the same person whose taxes pay for the NHS. And with the loss of child benefit for higher rate taxpayers, the people paying a lot of tax actually get less back for the taxes they pay than people with a lower paid job.

And for those who study hard and go to University, taking out Student Loans that they pay off over years, do you really think they're happy that their former classmates without a job are paid to sit at home. When I was a student, it always struck me as unfair that a student doesn't get at least the same amount of money from the state as if they'd stayed at home jobless on supplementary benefit.

As for the day fine. You'll usually find the primary use for it is speeding fines. In fact you will find that the record speeding fines in places like Switzerland and Finland are enormous.

IF you're going to do it, it might be worth fining based on the value of the car (as that's easy to work out and will penalise someone doing 300km/h in their Ferrari), but unless your entire income is as an employee in the country where you were speeding, there's very little the courts can do to find out your genuine income, so basing it on income isn't going to always be fair. (Especially in a country like Thailand where corruption results in a group of people whose taxable income and actual income are significantly different.)

I would suggest the finaciers and organisers of the the arson and violence should be made to pay as they are not"poor"(they did state they will take responsibilities},sure some big multinationals were insured but a lot of smaller buisnesses within the complex were and still are struggling,not to mention the street vendors, ya reckon they were insured,decades old provincial halls? What about the waste of taxpayers money having to police the occupation, let alone the BMA clean up bill supplying ammeities only to be trashed,7/11s and atm,s if thats your idea of fairness 'osiboy' I feel ashamed to be Australian.

[DP25]

This is a good idea, but too much of the economy is off the books and many people's real income isn't recorded.

Maybe it could be based on what car you drive instead, imported luxury sports car the highest rate then Benz/BMW, and at the lowest rates people riding motorbikes and using the green bus. Take in to account if it's registered in a spouse or parent's name as well.

Edited June 7, 2011 by DP25

[Tanaka]

The suggestion is based on the premise that the wealthy will be brought to trial. Is that really the case in Thailand. Just asking.

Cant see how this would work, after all a lot of petty theft is conducted because people dont have money to start with....

Also per "Courts need to have authorities check out offenders' financial records" This assumes all offenders will have financial records...what happens if they dont ?

If I was Thailand I woudl be very wary imposing systems which have their original with the gang of PC loonies in the EU

From an EU perspective would suspect determining the fine based on income is discrimination, as the punishment for a crime should be the same for rich or poor..call me cynical, but suspect the root of this scheme is an attempt to gouge more money of people because the goverments have suceeded in virtually bankrupting a lot of countries in Europe

From BIB perspective I could see their interest in this as a vehicle to generate addtional tea money revenue...

First, the punishment should be equal in that the number of dayfines are the same for a crime but the sum differs. Say a crime is worth 100 dayfines, the streetsweeper gets the 100 dayfines x 30B= 3000B. The mogul also gets 100 dayfines but x 5000B= 500.000B. And it has nothing to do with BiB and teamoney, the fines are decided in court.

[OzMick]

Quote: "As the day fine is based on an offender's daily personal income, the wealthier pay higher rates, resulting in a perception of fairness among members of society, said Sunthorn Tanmanthong, a co-researcher on the subject."

And we know how progressives love "the perception of fairness". Just as they advocate wealth redistribution.

I'm still waiting for the Red Shirts to pay for the damage they did to the capital.

your obviously not a supporter of fairness, or a fair world , .......who exactly do you suggest should pay for the damage ?...... the relatives of the dead ?

OR are you suggesting that the poor { the 90%majority of the redshirt support } should pay the likes of gucci,nike,McDons,etc etc ,...........

do you think they did'nt have insurance ? .....the poor always pay the most ,and are the first to suffer ,weather its in thailand or a western country ,...........who is bailing out the banks

of the UK now ? , who is having their benefits and welfare cut ? , who is loosing there jobs ? their wages cut or frozen ? , ..........the redshirts just want what

we all deserve ,................FAIRNESS !, i think its a great idea the "day fine" , the problem would be getting the BIB to pass it onto the relevent departments, the

poor already pay the "day fine " eg 200B,.. so why not the rich ???

I'll put this in oz terms for you - if you fire-bomb the Packer mansion, would you expect not to have to pay the damages because he is relatively wealthy and has insurance?

If a thai running a small business in BKK has his livelihood destroyed by a mob of out-of-town yobbos camping on his doorstep for weeks, does he not deserve compensation?

And when exactly did the red mob ask for FAIRNESS? The only ambit claims were political, and boiled down to bring back Thaksin. FAIRNESS is a post-event attempt at justification for the arson attacks that occurred, and which should be paid for by the people were were involved. Whether they are poor or not is irrelevant.

[ginjag]

Well, if Thaksin's maid did anything wrong, she'd be in big trouble, wouldn't she?

:cheesy:

[softgeorge]

So does that mean farangs are considered rich so if they are stopped by the BIB then they will have to pay far more into the tea club? Will it be open to the BIB as to how much a farang will pay? 40 or 50K for speeding in a traffic jam?

[rmacdon61]

However, there could be constitutional considerations involved, in Thailand and elsewhere - for example, the principle that one should be punished fairly and equally for crimes one commits.

Ya Think!!!!!!

Maybe consider higher fines for shoplifting for taller people as they can reach more items???

Maybe age consideration? Older people should know better then young? Larger fine?

Only a draconian Society could consider penalties based on postion or status level within a society as a bench mark for law.

[nikster]

In Thailand, the law is not the problem. It's the enforcement, or lack thereof, that's the problem. As long as neither the judiciary nor the executive come anywhere close to being functional, changes in the law are pointless.

[endure]

From an EU perspective would suspect determining the fine based on income is discrimination, as the punishment for a crime should be the same for rich or poor..call me cynical, but suspect the root of this scheme is an attempt to gouge more money of people because the goverments have suceeded in virtually bankrupting a lot of countries in Europe

The courts in the UK have always taken a person's income into account when deciding what amount they should be fined.