Thaksin's Taxes: Democrat Files Nonfeasance Charges Against Finance Minister, Deputy

[koosdeboer]

I really don't get it. Why are there so many posters defending the shinawatras and Phua thai. It's like they are sitting behind their computer waiting for the next story. These people have the money and the resources to defend themselves. The only thing I see these people writing is Phua Thai, Thaksin, Ying luck good. Democrats bad. There are good and bad things on both sides. I'm getting bored. I can see these TV writers are educated people, why don't they spend their time helping and defending the people in need? I don't sleep a night less if thaksin has to pay some million in tax, or Suthep if you want to hear that.

Not defending the Shinawatras or PTP. I have zero tolerance for those that don't pay their taxes.

This has nothing to do with the PTP. The party itself is not accused of non payment of tax.

Perhaps the former PM or his ex wife owe taxes. it is up to the revenue department and the court(s) to decide. A decision was rendered. Action can be brought to contest the decision. If there is an assumption of political wrongdoing, have the courtesy and respect for the Thai electorate to raise it in the House. The issue in this case arises from political groups circumventing the existing procedures and attempting to create a political issue. The problem the Democrats have is that they hung their hat on a case where they assumed they would get the verdict they wanted. They lost and now they try a circuitous route to pursue a political vendetta.

Do you honestly think the Democrats are bringing this case because of they want to see people pay taxes due? I don't think so. If it was, they would stand up and deal with the sordid corrupt mess that Phuket is. Phuket is a democrat stronghold. It is also a major source of party funds. And yet, the democrats have never ever dealt with the corruption and tax avoidance that distinguishes Phuket. When the Democrats were in power, they never ever once made an effort to deal with the problems of Patong. Patong isn't low hanging fruit, its so bad, the rot and stench cannot be avoided. The very same people crying foul in this case considered Patong to be a garden of fragrant flowers. That is why I voice an opinion. if the Democrats and Abhisit could just one time be open and honest and to practice what they preach, I would be quiet.

Thank you for proving my point. You're only able to criticize the democrat's, I never see you criticizing PTP or the shinawatras.

LOL, Bullsh*t.

I suggest you read my comments when the finance minisiter was changed, or my comments on the PMO press office or in respect to general health policies. My concerns in respect to public health policy have been consistent for all administrations.

in respect to my comments, what is wrong with my position. If you disagree, please explain why. You will have a rough road in front of you as you address the stinking, filthy, depraved, corrupt democrat stronghold of Phuket, but feel free to give it shot. It should be amusing.

I have no interest in a discussion like this. Cool down please. I didn't say the democrats are angels.

[FOODLOVER]

"Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off".

Like Yingluck?

[jerrysteve]

Pursuant to the American gentleman that is headed back to the U.S.A., You will find the same "scum bag" politican types there. If you think the U.S.A.

congressman, senators, governors of each state right down to the local officials, including the dead beats who are running for president. If you think they are not for their own pockets, your dead wrong and suffering from delusion.

[sparebox2]

Nonfeasance charges are irrevelant in a this country where judges in both the civil and criminal courts can be bought for a song and dance, and some money for their performance.

If Nonfeasance were to be taken serious which may happen in a couple more lifetimes from now, they would have to criminally prosecute Thai Government.

What does Nonfeasance mean...Failue to Act when under the legal oblication to do so without any sufficient excuse under or defined by legal

statues passed by the legislature.

They should let Taksin come back and upon arrival, handcuff him, put chains around his feet, and throw into the monkey house with the rest of the criminals. He can clean toilets; a fitting job.

Failue to Act when under the legal oblication to do so. Does that include Mark & Korn while they were in office?

[fxe1200]

On Friday,January 20 2006 Thaksin's 3 children bought 329. 2 million shares in Shin Corp from Ample Rich at a value of 1 baht a share.

On the following Monday,January 23, they sold the 329.2 million shares to Temasek on the stock exchange for a value of 49.25 baht per share!!

Making a nice profit of 15.88 billion baht tax free because the transaction occurred on the stock exchange and thus is tax free.

Except when the shares are traded below market price, whether on the stock exchange or not , then the difference is taxable.

Now why are the authorities not taking action?

Another question: "Sansern said he hoped that there would be another channel to collect the Bt12 billion taxes from Thaksin and Pojaman because the two might not have filed their tax forms in 2007 thus the department would have five more years to demand them to pay the relevant taxes."

Imagine Thaksin and Pojaman have filed their tax forms (correctly or deliberately incorrect), when does the statue of limitation ends? Does anybody know?

[sparebox2]

On Friday,January 20 2006 Thaksin's 3 children bought 329. 2 million shares in Shin Corp from Ample Rich at a value of 1 baht a share.

On the following Monday,January 23, they sold the 329.2 million shares to Temasek on the stock exchange for a value of 49.25 baht per share!!

Making a nice profit of 15.88 billion baht tax free because the transaction occurred on the stock exchange and thus is tax free.

Except when the shares are traded below market price, whether on the stock exchange or not , then the difference is taxable.

Now why are the authorities not taking action?

Another question: "Sansern said he hoped that there would be another channel to collect the Bt12 billion taxes from Thaksin and Pojaman because the two might not have filed their tax forms in 2007 thus the department would have five more years to demand them to pay the relevant taxes."

Imagine Thaksin and Pojaman have filed their tax forms (correctly or deliberately incorrect), when does the statue of limitation ends? Does anybody know?

31-Dec-2011 as I understand it.

Question: Where was Mark & Korn while they were in office?

[geriatrickid]

Thank you for proving my point. You're only able to criticize the democrat's, I never see you criticizing PTP or the shinawatras.

LOL, Bullsh*t.

I suggest you read my comments when the finance minisiter was changed, or my comments on the PMO press office or in respect to general health policies. My concerns in respect to public health policy have been consistent for all administrations.

in respect to my comments, what is wrong with my position. If you disagree, please explain why. You will have a rough road in front of you as you address the stinking, filthy, depraved, corrupt democrat stronghold of Phuket, but feel free to give it shot. It should be amusing.

I have no interest in a discussion like this. Cool down please. I didn't say the democrats are angels.

You now have no interest in a discussion like this? Hello? You made an accusation, which I rebutted. I provide an explanation as to my motives twice, to which you now say the democrats are no angels.The point here is that the threads are filled with people bashing a legitimately elected government typically using lies, fabrications and misrepresentations because they are either incapable of offering an intelligent comment or are so ignorant and nasty that they don't care.

There are many issues on which the current government can and should be constructively criticized. I do't have a problem with that. I've done it myself. However, the Democrats are engaging in a vendetta in large part because they are incapable of offering an alternative policy. The democrats had every chance to change Thailand for the better. They could have ruthlessly attacked corruption, they could have implemented responsible government. They did not. And not one of the people that persistently accuses Thaksin or bashes the PTP wants to acknowledge that.

There would be no issue with Thaksin returning, no PTP government if only the Democrats had provided an ethical, honest and competent alternative. Mr. Abhisit s one of the most incompetent political leaders in Asia. Had he possessed any leadership skills and held the respect of his party he could have changed the direction of Thailand with one simple act; Practice what you preach.

[geriatrickid]

"Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off".

Like Yingluck?

She's worked. Despite some newsmedia outlets attempts to find something critical about her work ethic, the articles all came back showing that her industry colleagues, her competitors and employees all respected her.

Try again.

[TAWP]

GK >> I have not defended either of the governments in this thread. I have however implied that Thaksin is morally bankrupt and that his defenders really don't care about the poor - as they will post here and pretend they do - as none has posted and said that it is a disgrace that Thaksin skipped out on paying 12 BILLION baht in taxes and that he should never be allowed to pretend to care about the poor as he clearly has no interest in contributing - he only loves to spend other peoples money and pretend it comes out of the goodness of his heart.

[FOODLOVER]

"Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off".

Like Yingluck?

She's worked. Despite some newsmedia outlets attempts to find something critical about her work ethic, the articles all came back showing that her industry colleagues, her competitors and employees all respected her.

Try again.

She's worked? Ok, has she worked anywhere where the position was not given or inherited from a family member?

[sparebox2]

"Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off".

Like Yingluck?

She's worked. Despite some newsmedia outlets attempts to find something critical about her work ethic, the articles all came back showing that her industry colleagues, her competitors and employees all respected her.

Try again.

She's worked? Ok, has she worked anywhere where the position was not given or inherited from a family member?

The PM position was mandated by the nation, not an inherited from a family member.

If you argue that it is, so is Big Bush - Small Bush, John Adams - John Quincy Adams (US), Lee Kuan Yew - Lee Sian Long (Singapore), etc

Edited April 5, 2012 by sparebox2

[waza]

Thank you for proving my point. You're only able to criticize the democrat's, I never see you criticizing PTP or the shinawatras.

LOL, Bullsh*t.

I suggest you read my comments when the finance minisiter was changed, or my comments on the PMO press office or in respect to general health policies. My concerns in respect to public health policy have been consistent for all administrations.

in respect to my comments, what is wrong with my position. If you disagree, please explain why. You will have a rough road in front of you as you address the stinking, filthy, depraved, corrupt democrat stronghold of Phuket, but feel free to give it shot. It should be amusing.

I have no interest in a discussion like this. Cool down please. I didn't say the democrats are angels.

You now have no interest in a discussion like this? Hello? You made an accusation, which I rebutted. I provide an explanation as to my motives twice, to which you now say the democrats are no angels.The point here is that the threads are filled with people bashing a legitimately elected government typically using lies, fabrications and misrepresentations because they are either incapable of offering an intelligent comment or are so ignorant and nasty that they don't care.

There are many issues on which the current government can and should be constructively criticized. I do't have a problem with that. I've done it myself. However, the Democrats are engaging in a vendetta in large part because they are incapable of offering an alternative policy. The democrats had every chance to change Thailand for the better. They could have ruthlessly attacked corruption, they could have implemented responsible government. They did not. And not one of the people that persistently accuses Thaksin or bashes the PTP wants to acknowledge that.

There would be no issue with Thaksin returning, no PTP government if only the Democrats had provided an ethical, honest and competent alternative. Mr. Abhisit s one of the most incompetent political leaders in Asia. Had he possessed any leadership skills and held the respect of his party he could have changed the direction of Thailand with one simple act; Practice what you preach.

GK on a personal note I have difficulty reading your posts due to verbosity, However I agree the previous administration was an slow and inefficient government, but remember they were a minority government. They were a loose coalision of parties from both side of the political spectrum. The PM Mark did well to achieve consensus on any issue let alone a contentious one, like this. I applaud his leadership.

The present administration has no such excuse, they have a majority and would only lack commitment to act rather than consensus.

[FOODLOVER]

"Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off".

Like Yingluck?

She's worked. Despite some newsmedia outlets attempts to find something critical about her work ethic, the articles all came back showing that her industry colleagues, her competitors and employees all respected her.

Try again.

She's worked? Ok, has she worked anywhere where the position was not given or inherited from a family member?

The PM position was mandated by the nation, not an inherited from a family member.

If you argue that it is, so is Big Bush - Small Bush, John Adams - John Quincy Adams (US), Lee Kuan Yew - Lee Sian Long (Singapore), etc

She has had every position previous to her position as PM given to her through her family name. She does not work for her position but is given her positions.

[waza]

Yingluck is PM because Thaksin gave her the position. Do you realy expect us to believe she was selected to be PM by her party because of her record of public service.

While Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister because she is Thaksin's sister, the fugitive ex-prime minister seems at the same time to be her weakest link.

After leading the country for eight months, the first female prime minister of Thailand faces several problems.

The most troublesome issue for her right now is her brother's desire to return to Thailand. Thaksin has frequently sent a strong signal that he may come back sooner rather than later. http://www.nationmul...k-30179403.html

Thaksin said he feared that Yingluck would be attacked and destroyed by the Democrat if she became the government leader.

Thaksin said he was considering several PM choices, including Mingkwan Saengsuwan, Pracha Promnok and Yongyuth Wichaidit as well as a few other outsiders.

http://www.nationmul...n-30155984.html

Mr. Thaksin is back at the center of Thai politics in the guise of the person he calls his clone: his younger sister Yingluck, who in July 2011 became prime minister herself as the leader of the main opposition party.

http://topics.nytime...atra/index.html

Edited April 5, 2012 by waza

[sparebox2]

Yingluck is PM because Thaksin gave her the position. Do you realy expect us to believe she was selected to be PM by her party because of her record of public service.

While Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister because she is Thaksin's sister, the fugitive ex-prime minister seems at the same time to be her weakest link.

After leading the country for eight months, the first female prime minister of Thailand faces several problems.

The most troublesome issue for her right now is her brother's desire to return to Thailand. Thaksin has frequently sent a strong signal that he may come back sooner rather than later. http://www.nationmul...k-30179403.html

Thaksin said he feared that Yingluck would be attacked and destroyed by the Democrat if she became the government leader.

Thaksin said he was considering several PM choices, including Mingkwan Saengsuwan, Pracha Promnok and Yongyuth Wichaidit as well as a few other outsiders.

http://www.nationmul...n-30155984.html

Mr. Thaksin is back at the center of Thai politics in the guise of the person he calls his clone: his younger sister Yingluck, who in July 2011 became prime minister herself as the leader of the main opposition party.

http://topics.nytime...atra/index.html

I get it.

In 2011 election, Thai people elected Thaksin as PM.

He than say, Thank you for electing me. I decline, and according to Thai law, I give it to me sister.

Is this the correct interpretation.

[FOODLOVER]

Yingluck is PM because Thaksin gave her the position. Do you realy expect us to believe she was selected to be PM by her party because of her record of public service.

While Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister because she is Thaksin's sister, the fugitive ex-prime minister seems at the same time to be her weakest link.

After leading the country for eight months, the first female prime minister of Thailand faces several problems.

The most troublesome issue for her right now is her brother's desire to return to Thailand. Thaksin has frequently sent a strong signal that he may come back sooner rather than later. http://www.nationmul...k-30179403.html

Thaksin said he feared that Yingluck would be attacked and destroyed by the Democrat if she became the government leader.

Thaksin said he was considering several PM choices, including Mingkwan Saengsuwan, Pracha Promnok and Yongyuth Wichaidit as well as a few other outsiders.

http://www.nationmul...n-30155984.html

Mr. Thaksin is back at the center of Thai politics in the guise of the person he calls his clone: his younger sister Yingluck, who in July 2011 became prime minister herself as the leader of the main opposition party.

http://topics.nytime...atra/index.html

I get it.

In 2011 election, Thai people elected Thaksin as PM.

He than say, Thank you for electing me. I decline, and according to Thai law, I give it to me sister.

Is this the correct interpretation.

Do you not understand your own system?

[waza]

Yingluck is PM because Thaksin gave her the position. Do you realy expect us to believe she was selected to be PM by her party because of her record of public service.

While Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister because she is Thaksin's sister, the fugitive ex-prime minister seems at the same time to be her weakest link.

After leading the country for eight months, the first female prime minister of Thailand faces several problems.

The most troublesome issue for her right now is her brother's desire to return to Thailand. Thaksin has frequently sent a strong signal that he may come back sooner rather than later. http://www.nationmul...k-30179403.html

Thaksin said he feared that Yingluck would be attacked and destroyed by the Democrat if she became the government leader.

Thaksin said he was considering several PM choices, including Mingkwan Saengsuwan, Pracha Promnok and Yongyuth Wichaidit as well as a few other outsiders.

http://www.nationmul...n-30155984.html

Mr. Thaksin is back at the center of Thai politics in the guise of the person he calls his clone: his younger sister Yingluck, who in July 2011 became prime minister herself as the leader of the main opposition party.

http://topics.nytime...atra/index.html

I get it.

In 2011 election, Thai people elected Thaksin as PM.

He than say, Thank you for electing me. I decline, and according to Thai law, I give it to me sister.

Is this the correct interpretation.

You cant be that naive, the electorate dont vote for a PM, they vote for a local member to represent them. The political party who get the most elected members can for a government. Then the elected members then decide who will be their leader. Thaksin paid for and organised her registration and election campaign. Selected her for membership to his party, the PTP and leadership of that party. Then told his party to select her as PM. Therefore Thaksin gave her the PM position.

[bigbamboo]

Is it not strange that people who decry "inheritance" in political roles, for example, the Bush family, the Shinawatra family, are happy to accept it in monarchical roles. Surely the monarchists' argument that royal children are trained for their role can equally apply to the families of politicians.

You could add other political dynasties to that, the Ghandis or even the Kennedys but they still have to be elected.

[whybother]

decision on August 8 2011 = also before the PTP government took control...

Just for the record.

Not quite.

check again ...

http://www.asiantrib...fficially-sworn

Yes ... "Officially sworn in". You can think that they didn't start using their new connections until they were officially sworn in if you want.

[anterian]

Is it not strange that people who decry "inheritance" in political roles, for example, the Bush family, the Shinawatra family, are happy to accept it in monarchical roles. Surely the monarchists' argument that royal children are trained for their role can equally apply to the families of politicians.

You could add other political dynasties to that, the Ghandis or even the Kennedys but they still have to be elected.

There are numerous examples all around the world, the Churchills in Britain, Le Pen in France, Marcos and Arroyo families in the Philippines, the Castros in Cuba, The Kims in North Korea, the Lee family of Singapore.

[whybother]

Actually, they are not. The procedure is to first go to the department responsible and seek redress there. This is a politically motivated attempt to create more negativity. The charges will be dismissed as they are groundless. The correct procedure would also be to raise this in the House. The Democrats are very good at trying to impeach ministers, unfortunately their success rate has not been so good with a 100% failure rate. Perhaps the Democrats are afraid to raise this issue in the appropriate forum, the House, as they do seem to be afraid of anything connected to the electorate.

What's the point of raising it in the house. They don't have a majority there, so anything they raise will just get voted down regardless of the legality of it. At least if they take it to the courts, it gets looked at within the confines of the law.

Are you really serious? Is your position really one that believes the lack of a majoriy prevents the Democrats from acting as a responsible opposition party? I suggest you have a look at parliaments in the UK, Canada, Australia to see how its done.

Basically, your statement is a tacit admission of the democrats incompetence.

Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off.

In the UK, Canada and Australia, if a government politician does something that could be considered illegal, there are independent bodies that will investigate and prosecute if necessary. It would be brought up in parliament to score political points, and generally the electorate and media is aware enough to ask the right questions and put pressure on the politician to step down.

In Thailand, if a politician does something that is considered illegal, bringing it up in parliament does nothing. The electorate doesn't care or doesn't understand. The media don't investigate. There is no pressure for the politician to do anything. The only ones that can do anything about it are the courts.

A responsible opposition highlights issues where the government are doing things that may be considered illegal or may be pushing the boundaries. But the only way to actually stop the government from continuing on with illegal issues is for the issue to be brought before the courts. Just raising it in parliament will mean it gets swept under the carpet by the majority parties.

[sparebox2]

Yingluck is PM because Thaksin gave her the position. Do you realy expect us to believe she was selected to be PM by her party because of her record of public service.

While Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister because she is Thaksin's sister, the fugitive ex-prime minister seems at the same time to be her weakest link.

After leading the country for eight months, the first female prime minister of Thailand faces several problems.

The most troublesome issue for her right now is her brother's desire to return to Thailand. Thaksin has frequently sent a strong signal that he may come back sooner rather than later. http://www.nationmul...k-30179403.html

Thaksin said he feared that Yingluck would be attacked and destroyed by the Democrat if she became the government leader.

Thaksin said he was considering several PM choices, including Mingkwan Saengsuwan, Pracha Promnok and Yongyuth Wichaidit as well as a few other outsiders.

http://www.nationmul...n-30155984.html

Mr. Thaksin is back at the center of Thai politics in the guise of the person he calls his clone: his younger sister Yingluck, who in July 2011 became prime minister herself as the leader of the main opposition party.

http://topics.nytime...atra/index.html

I get it.

In 2011 election, Thai people elected Thaksin as PM.

He than say, Thank you for electing me. I decline, and according to Thai law, I give it to me sister.

Is this the correct interpretation.

You cant be that naive, the electorate dont vote for a PM, they vote for a local member to represent them. The political party who get the most elected members can for a government. Then the elected members then decide who will be their leader. Thaksin paid for and organised her registration and election campaign. Selected her for membership to his party, the PTP and leadership of that party. Then told his party to select her as PM. Therefore Thaksin gave her the PM position.

"Thaksin paid for and organised her registration and election campaign. "

I hope you have proves.

Else equally I can say that

"Thaksin paid for and organised Sonthi coup. "

Edited April 5, 2012 by sparebox2

[rixalex]

In the UK, Canada and Australia, if a government politician does something that could be considered illegal, there are independent bodies that will investigate and prosecute if necessary. It would be brought up in parliament to score political points, and generally the electorate and media is aware enough to ask the right questions and put pressure on the politician to step down.

In Thailand, if a politician does something that is considered illegal, bringing it up in parliament does nothing. The electorate doesn't care or doesn't understand. The media don't investigate. There is no pressure for the politician to do anything. The only ones that can do anything about it are the courts.

A responsible opposition highlights issues where the government are doing things that may be considered illegal or may be pushing the boundaries. But the only way to actually stop the government from continuing on with illegal issues is for the issue to be brought before the courts. Just raising it in parliament will mean it gets swept under the carpet by the majority parties.

Indeed.

And at the end of the day, all PTP needs to do to thwart those mean and pesky Dems, is follow the law. What a wonderful in-your-face response that would be.

[FOODLOVER]

Parachuting in a candidate is a time honoured tradition in parliamentary democracies. However, it can only get a candidate so far. If the election is lost, so much for the parachuting. The electorate were aware of the circumstances surrounding Yingluck and yet, the PTP still managed to gain seats while the Democrats lost seats. Think about the results. Had it not been for the lifesaver of proportional allocation from the party lists, the Democrats would have been decimated and the smaller parties wiped out. The people passed judgement on the Yingluck circumstances by way of the election.

In respect to Yingluck's private sector work experience, she held other positions long before she became an executive. Look at her CV. Sorry to say, but that's how it is at a great many family businesses. The undercurrent of the criticism from some people on TVF is that they resent her family's business success.

"Perhaps if they had a leader with actual real world work experience they would be better off".

I believe you brought this up for scrutiny. This was your argument and your leader has only held positions that were given to her on a silver platter in fact resigning when her family no longer held shares within a certain company. No shares no protection for Mrs. Yingluck. In fact she was accused of insider trading as she sold her stock right before the acquisition. You now claim resentment for her families success since this was brought to your attention. Baffling

[rixalex]

In respect to Yingluck's private sector work experience, she held other positions long before she became an executive. Look at her CV.

What exactly is your definition of long before? She was about 35 when she became CEO of AIS. From finishing her studies to that time, seems pretty short to me.

Sorry to say, but that's how it is at a great many family businesses. The undercurrent of the criticism from some people on TVF is that they resent her family's business success.

Plenty of successful business people about. Time to open your mind and consider the possibility of there being more than envy to all this dislike.

[bigbamboo]

Most people in most countries vote for a party not it's leader. In the UK and the US for example a large proportion of voters are so entrenched right or left that they would vote for anyone so long as their party won.

[waza]

phiphidon and sparebox2 I found both your posts interesting but I failed to see your points. Its not inappropriate for Thaksin to pay or organise things for Yingluck after all he has a great deal of experience in politics and has the connections. But why would Thaksin fund a coup against himself? If you have proves (sic) of this it would be dynamite. Edited April 5, 2012 by waza

[marquess]

The Revenue Department have been astonishing on this issue, it is basically a bunch of crooks protecting a bunch of crooks. These people make the rules to they believe that whatever they do is right.

[Buchholz]

Everyone has to pay

The question over fair tax collection also resonates among taxpayers in Thailand. Thai government officials often talk about the need for tax reform, but realistic changes have never materialised. Thailand currently uses a progressive income tax system, with taxes on personal income charged at five rates: zero per cent, 10 per cent, 20 per cent, 30 per cent and 37 per cent for people earning Bt4m or more per year in taxable income.

The progressive rate is designed to keep inequality in check. However, loopholes in the system have made tax collection ineffective and unjust. Income tax fraud and evasion are widespread. Meanwhile, the rich manage to exploit the loopholes to evade paying their fair share, and are assisted by waivers for such items as special investment income.

The hard-working middle classes are squeezed in between. The country has an estimated 10 million individual taxpayers, but only around two million actually pay taxes.

The loopholes are leading to wider debate over tax payment. The recent decision by the revenue department not to collect Bt12bn in tax incurred by Panthongtae and Pinthongta Shinawatra from the convoluted sale of ShinCorp shares by their father Thaksin is among these topics.

The revenue department decided not to pursue a case against Panthongtae and Pinthongta, citing a court decision that the shares actually belonged to fugitive former premier Thaksin, not his children. The verdict raises the question whether the revenue department will apply this kind of lenient treatment to ordinary people, especially when there are issues regarding tax assessment.

http://www.dawn.com/...has-to-pay.html

[metisdead]

Off topic posts have been removed.