Do You Support Thaksin?

[jdinasia]

kriswillems ... there's a book available on the last 50 years of Thai politics ... if you are here it is worth reading

[Octaviousbp]

kriswillems ... there's a book available on the last 50 years of Thai politics ... if you are here it is worth reading

Don't suppose you have a name for that book, do you jdinasia? Much appreciated!

[penzman]

NO BASHING ABOUT OTHER MEMBERS LANGUAGE/WRITING SKILLS!

Don't post in block capitals:it is considered rude.And while I'm at it, try and write grammatical English."No bashing about" is illiterate and sloppy.The whole point of writing clear English is so that others know exactly what you mean.It is not a question of being pedantic or seeking to find fault.If clear English is not used there is a problem with interpretation of meaning as I am afraid is the case with your rather post.If you are not up to a minimum standard of clear expression, with the greatest respect, you had better reconsider your position as a moderator.

I sincerely hope you are close to a beach.

Enjoy your holiday.

I will not tolerate members criticizing other members about their language/writing skills.

Edited March 27, 2006 by penzman

[wolf5370]

I think the usual is true. Thaksin is a known quantity - he is certainly no worse than the other 'known quantities' vying for his job.

Like most people I don't like his nepotism. I also do not like the fact that he uses the system to avoid tax and make himself (or his family etc) richwer. I also did not like the the alledged rumour that he used his police powers (and contacts - Daddy-in-law) and polictical position to remove his American partner and other foreign and native business rivals. Like I said alledged.

Having said that, name a politician that doesn't make use of his/her position and I'll show you someone who is a good liar. The same goes for big business - its often as dirty as hel_l at the top (or on the way up) and you rarely get there without blood stains on the carpet. We are all nepolistic - who would not throw their brother a lifeline before a stranger - the Christains call them Saints.

In short, he is not a perfect PM. He does much to further his cause by manipulating the press - which earns him much disdain from thinking-peoples-groups, but again, Tony Blair sacked the head of the BBC for upsetting his little apple cart! The golden rule of politics is 'keep the people like mushrooms: keep them in the dark and every now and then feed them sh!t to keep them happy'

I'm more scared of who we will get to replace him! Choices anyone?

Better the devil you know...

PS: Stop knocking H90 - you know who you are - anyone with half a brain can read between the lines when the English gets a bit tricky. He usually writes sense (and sometimes I even agree with him ). We have a Swiss guy staying with us at the moment (just for a week) - he can speak German, French and English fluently and he is only 17!!!! - no Thai though, so I got him there and can still talk about him behind his back - now if I could just get that bl**dy remote away from him! Hey H90 how do I say "Give me the <deleted>' remote" in German?

Edited March 27, 2006 by wolf5370

[sriracha john]

I second Wolf's sentiment and I truly appreciate H90's posts. I also have no trouble understanding his posts which are valid and honest and accurate assessments of Thailand. A solid asset to the thaivisa community.

I will say I am jealous of these folks with quad- and pent-lingual skills? Feel a bit cheated my Baden-Baden born grandmother didn't impart more of the language onto this dumb American.

Thumbs up to Penzman for appropriately dispatching Cassandra to the Siberian tundra. He can correct the grammar of those piss-writing in the snow there.

As for topic of Thaksin... and whether I support him... uhmm... no.

[Stephen Cleary]

The issue of Thaksin which has disgusted the opposition is money politics and the vast wealth of the man.

Thaksin sold his shares in Shin and made a huge gain. He didnt pay a single Baht in tax. This is probably legal. But this has caused immense anger among many who rightly see corruption as a moral issue rather than a legal one.

The anti-government movement was initially sparked by a fall out within the business class. Sondhi Limthongkul, a media tycoon, was once a friend of Thaksin. After the fall out he found that some of his programmes were blocked by the government. He then started a conservative royalist campaign to oust Thaksin and to return power to the King. Sondhis supporters attended rallies in yellow T-shirts, waving yellow monarchist flags. Thailand has had a constitutional monarchy since the 1932 revolution and considering the events in Nepal, the demand to return power to the King is obviously extremely reactionary. Yet Sondhi was able to tap into the anger against the government among people who might not share such conservative views.

The Thaksin government and the Thai Rak Thai Party enjoy significant support from the urban and rural poor. This is because it is the first government in decades which seeks to improve welfare and the incomes of the poor. The government introduced a universal health care system and other measures to stimulate the economy at grass roots level, all of which were attacked by neo-liberal academics and opposition parties. Of course, these populist policies were not paid for by progressive taxation of the rich. The government also pushed ahead with privatisation and neo-liberal Free-trade agreements. This government has also been condemned for committing gross human rights abuses in the Muslim South and in its war on drugs.

Thaksin has thrown down the gauntlet by dissolving parliament and calling a snap election in early April. He calls this returning power to the people in marked contrast to the royalists. The opposition parties have announced a boycott of the election because they know they will lose. Thaksin has responded to this by saying that if more than 50% of those who vote, register an abstention (which is possible on Thai ballot papers), he will step down. But the conservative opposition has dismissed this, claiming that much of the electorate is badly educated.

The Peoples Movement is split heavily down the middle. The more progressive sections of the Peoples Movement are unhappy with the close association with Sondhi and the conservatives.

(J G Ungpakorn Asst Prof Faculty of Political Science Chulalongkorn University)

Both sides are in a no-win battle.

Why do most Farang back the opposition movement?

Cause they claim, as the opposition does, that most of Thailands electorate is badly educated and easily manipulated by government propaganda. They have no belief in the democratic system and see it as flawed in contradictions. They are also angered at the human-rights abuses.

Edited March 28, 2006 by stevesuphan

[Thaible]

I also do not like the fact that he uses the system to avoid tax and make himself (or his family etc) richwer.

Would you rather pay taxes on every stock trade you make?

Because that's the law he supposedly took advantage of - no capital gains taxes.

[h90]

Toxin did corruption in uncountable amount of cases, I think he is much worse than previous gouverments (but I am not long enough here to be sure on that).

On a change there is always the hope that they do better and most important if some leader get kicked because of corruption there is a hope that the next one is more carefully and less corrupt just to keep his a*s in power.

As for monarchist: I was never one, but as for Thailand I think it would be good to have an royal appointed premier for say 2 or 3 years and make an election than. Just to get back to normality and forget the hate between the parties.

The issue of Thaksin which has disgusted the opposition is money politics and the vast wealth of the man.

Thaksin sold his shares in Shin and made a huge gain. He didnt pay a single Baht in tax. This is probably legal. But this has caused immense anger among many who rightly see corruption as a moral issue rather than a legal one.

The anti-government movement was initially sparked by a fall out within the business class. Sondhi Limthongkul, a media tycoon, was once a friend of Thaksin. After the fall out he found that some of his programmes were blocked by the government. He then started a conservative royalist campaign to oust Thaksin and to return power to the King. Sondhis supporters attended rallies in yellow T-shirts, waving yellow monarchist flags. Thailand has had a constitutional monarchy since the 1932 revolution and considering the events in Nepal, the demand to return power to the King is obviously extremely reactionary. Yet Sondhi was able to tap into the anger against the government among people who might not share such conservative views.

The Thaksin government and the Thai Rak Thai Party enjoy significant support from the urban and rural poor. This is because it is the first government in decades which seeks to improve welfare and the incomes of the poor. The government introduced a universal health care system and other measures to stimulate the economy at grass roots level, all of which were attacked by neo-liberal academics and opposition parties. Of course, these populist policies were not paid for by progressive taxation of the rich. The government also pushed ahead with privatisation and neo-liberal Free-trade agreements. This government has also been condemned for committing gross human rights abuses in the Muslim South and in its war on drugs.

Thaksin has thrown down the gauntlet by dissolving parliament and calling a snap election in early April. He calls this returning power to the people in marked contrast to the royalists. The opposition parties have announced a boycott of the election because they know they will lose. Thaksin has responded to this by saying that if more than 50% of those who vote, register an abstention (which is possible on Thai ballot papers), he will step down. But the conservative opposition has dismissed this, claiming that much of the electorate is badly educated.

The Peoples Movement is split heavily down the middle. The more progressive sections of the Peoples Movement are unhappy with the close association with Sondhi and the conservatives.

(J G Ungpakorn Asst Prof Faculty of Political Science Chulalongkorn University)

Both sides are in a no-win battle.

Why do most Farang back the opposition movement?

Cause they claim, as the opposition does, that most of Thailands electorate is badly educated and easily manipulated by government propaganda. They have no belief in the democratic system and see it as flawed in contradictions. They are also angered at the human-rights abuses.

[Thaible]

Why do most Farang back the opposition movement?

Farangs will lose regardless of which party wins.

If people get this upset over Singaporeans owning 49% of one company, imagine how they would feel when farangs start demanding 100% ownership over property which affects everyone.

[sriracha john]

Why do most Farang back the opposition movement?

If people get this upset over Singaporeans owning 49% of one company, imagine how they would feel when farangs start demanding 100% ownership over property which affects everyone.

When is that starting and in what form?

[steveromagnino]

Why do most Farang back the opposition movement?

Farangs will lose regardless of which party wins.

If people get this upset over Singaporeans owning 49% of one company, imagine how they would feel when farangs start demanding 100% ownership over property which affects everyone.

Sorry, you've lost me.... other than Americans companies must be majority Thai owned... we now know that Shin has been sold in far greater amount than this using nominees.... but anyway, are you talking about condominiums and cars and refridgerators that farang own?

I must say I am perplexed as to your point; besides which other than the increases in fees for visas etc, and a few possble benefits provided to farangs engaging in vice (which seems to have become more accessible in the last 5 years, if due to nothing else other than the power of the internet, more tourism and more places to go - excluding the brief Purachai period), I cannot see that much has changed between this and other administrations before it. How would farangs lose no matter who wins?

งง

[monochaser]

This topic is a real snoozer. I mean like who cares? YAWN

[Thaible]

Why do most Farang back the opposition movement?

Farangs will lose regardless of which party wins.

If people get this upset over Singaporeans owning 49% of one company, imagine how they would feel when farangs start demanding 100% ownership over property which affects everyone.

Sorry, you've lost me.... other than Americans companies must be majority Thai owned... we now know that Shin has been sold in far greater amount than this using nominees.... but anyway, are you talking about condominiums and cars and refridgerators that farang own?

I must say I am perplexed as to your point; besides which other than the increases in fees for visas etc, and a few possble benefits provided to farangs engaging in vice (which seems to have become more accessible in the last 5 years, if due to nothing else other than the power of the internet, more tourism and more places to go - excluding the brief Purachai period), I cannot see that much has changed between this and other administrations before it. How would farangs lose no matter who wins?

งง

When I say lose, I'm referring to the probability of getting the right to own land someday.

After the protests against Singapore, there is no way the government would ever give 100% land rights to foreigners. In other words, a 5% probability is reduced to 0.5%.

[Plus]

Yes, there were corrupt leaders in Thailand before Thaksin but he surely outshines them all. It's the first time Thai people try to oust a leader for corruption.

Thaksin's snap election is a diversonary tactic - to shift people's attention from corruption charges against him onto things like "policies" and "alternatives".

He should have cleared his name in the court of law, not through ballot boxes. He can't claim he is innocent because people still like his policies - it's absurd, two issues have nothing to do with eachother.

If Thaksin thinks that people will forget his crimes after he obtains a few millions votes, he is mistaken.

[meadish_sweetball]

Remember Thaksin was elected despite the anti-corruption trial against him. He was given a chance, most people already knowing he was corrupt (a no brainer really, if you want to reach his heights here in terms of wealth and influence it would be impossible without a large degree of corruption) and all the same, these people made the decision his CEO skills weighed heavier than his obvious attempts at tax evasion. Perhaps they also thought they should let democracy run its cause.

It is a bit of a perpetual problem. No Thais I know feel it is truly wrong with tax evasion on a personal level - since the taxes are allegedly not used for anything beneficial anyway... on the same note, corruption continues because it more or less permeates the entire system from high to low, and the very few people who question it or try to live 'clean' are either eliminated or live very difficult lives if they attempt to live according to the law and within their means.

Perhaps Thaksin's corruption and the public attention it has derived actually means that Thailand is becoming more democratic. Perhaps some earlier leaders were just as corrupt, but nobody took them to task on the issue?

Either way, Thaksin's corrupt behaviour is unacceptable. It disturbs me though, that what people here are most upset about is the sale of a company to foreign interests, and not the fact that he changed the law before the sale to avoid paying tax.

He is not the only proponent of nationalism, it runs strong in this country, for better and for worse.

[Thaible]

Either way, Thaksin's corrupt behaviour is unacceptable. It disturbs me though, that what people here are most upset about is the sale of a company to foreign interests, and not the fact that he changed the law before the sale to avoid paying tax.

He is not the only proponent of nationalism, it runs strong in this country, for better and for worse.

Do you want to pay taxes on every stock trade? I've never met anyone that did.

What Thaksin did was the morally correct thing - there should be absolutely no capital gains tax.

It's completely dishonest for governments to tax people who want to invest their retirement money in the stock market. The stock market provides capital for Thai companies which allows them to grow. Why in the world would you want to discourage that by taxing.

[h90]

Either way, Thaksin's corrupt behaviour is unacceptable. It disturbs me though, that what people here are most upset about is the sale of a company to foreign interests, and not the fact that he changed the law before the sale to avoid paying tax.

He is not the only proponent of nationalism, it runs strong in this country, for better and for worse.

Do you want to pay taxes on every stock trade? I've never met anyone that did.

What Thaksin did was the morally correct thing - there should be absolutely no capital gains tax.

It's completely dishonest for governments to tax people who want to invest their retirement money in the stock market. The stock market provides capital for Thai companies which allows them to grow. Why in the world would you want to discourage that by taxing.

[Stephen Cleary]

Remember Thaksin was elected despite the anti-corruption trial against him. He was given a chance, most people already knowing he was corrupt (a no brainer really, if you want to reach his heights here in terms of wealth and influence it would be impossible without a large degree of corruption) and all the same, these people made the decision his CEO skills weighed heavier than his obvious attempts at tax evasion. Perhaps they also thought they should let democracy run its cause.

It is a bit of a perpetual problem. No Thais I know feel it is truly wrong with tax evasion on a personal level - since the taxes are allegedly not used for anything beneficial anyway... on the same note, corruption continues because it more or less permeates the entire system from high to low, and the very few people who question it or try to live 'clean' are either eliminated or live very difficult lives if they attempt to live according to the law and within their means.

Perhaps some earlier leaders were just as corrupt, but nobody took them to task on the issue?

Either way, Thaksin's corrupt behaviour is unacceptable. It disturbs me though, that what people here are most upset about is the sale of a company to foreign interests, and not the fact that he Perhaps Thaksin's corruption and the public attention it has derived actually means that Thailand is becoming more democratic.changed the law before the sale to avoid paying tax.

He is not the only proponent of nationalism, it runs strong in this country, for better and for worse.

Good comment from our moderating friend.

Quote (Swedish Meatball) "Perhaps some earlier leaders were just as corrupt, but nobody took them to task on the issue?"

In fact, that is not just a perception, but historical accuracy. Many an essay has been been written on the 'corruption' and human- rights abuses which were rampant in Thailand especially from the 1957 coup to the movement of 1973. The era of FM Por Pibulsongkran runs a close second.

Thailand's elitist capitalists have done very little in the way of forming any movement to combat corruption. Furthermore, as Swedish Meatball said "it (corruption) more or less permeates the entire system from high to low"

The Meadish Sweetball has argued that "Perhaps Thaksin's corruption and the public attention it has derived actually means that Thailand is becoming more democratic" Certainly it does. But it isn't new. Thailand forgets easily........

What Thaible mentioned, is the exact argument which has befriended Thaksin from day one.

Edited March 28, 2006 by stevesuphan

[wolf5370]

(wolf5370 @ 2006-03-27 23:12:21)

I also do not like the fact that he uses the system to avoid tax and make himself (or his family etc) richer.

(Thaible @ 2006-03-28 19:08:41)

Would you rather pay taxes on every stock trade you make?

Because that's the law he supposedly took advantage of - no capital gains taxes.

I didn't actually mention any particular instance, I mentioned the fact that he uses the system to avoid tax - he changed the law. He also used the Gov's compulsory buying rights to buy up land and sell back to his family at a knockdown price without allowing bids - he later decided these areas would make fine places for his policy of moving red light districts to specific areas. Come now, lets not be so gullible and call a fig a fig.

PS: In the UK if I had a company and gave myself a lot of shares on floatation and then sold those shares, guess what, I'd get taxed!

[Thaible]

(wolf5370 @ 2006-03-27 23:12:21)

I also do not like the fact that he uses the system to avoid tax and make himself (or his family etc) richer.

(Thaible @ 2006-03-28 19:08:41)

Would you rather pay taxes on every stock trade you make?

Because that's the law he supposedly took advantage of - no capital gains taxes.

I didn't actually mention any particular instance, I mentioned the fact that he uses the system to avoid tax - he changed the law.

Yes but he changed the law to make it better.

He got rid of capital gains taxes, which results in increased foreign investment, improves the stock market, helps people retire, companies raise money, and people get jobs.

Yes he benefited, but so did all of Thailand. But because he's rich, jealous people are trying to knock him down. The funny thing is that the opposition doesn't even talk about repealing the law at all.

I honestly did not realize until now how little the anti-Thaksin faction understood about capital gains taxes and its effect on the economy - the removal of capital gains tax was an obvious positive for Thailand.

Edited March 28, 2006 by Thaible

[mbkudu]

Mr T - hmmmmm wish he was booted out via an electoral process. Smart businessmen who's self serving, but he has done alot for the poor considering in the past this wasnt a concern for the usual suspects.

This is his strongest point and why I have always thought that he is much better than the past few idiots Thailand has had. The poor in Thailand had such a raw deal for so long that it was nice to see someone actually take notice of them and help them. Whether or not he used this help as a tool to his advantage is irrelevant to a farmer whose fields have been ruined and needs some help so his land isn't confiscated. His heavy handed dealings in the South were too much though as well the shooting and killing of drug dealers. His business dealings? Tell me of one politician whos has clean hands in business.

[Khutan]

He has certainly won the heart of the Northeast and the North. Stuff like the 30 B Hospital program, the Village fund and OTOP have certainly changed the poor people's lives.

It is strange that such a capitalist has found his grass-roots support from the poor.

As my family comes from the North East, they will certainly be supporting Mr Taxin.

I therefore support my family.

[Jai Dee]

He has certainly won the heart of the Northeast and the North. Stuff like the 30 B Hospital program, the Village fund and OTOP have certainly changed the poor people's lives.

I was just talking to my missus about this very subject last night... without the 30 baht hospital program, her mother would have never been able to have open heart surgery and a replacement valve. She would have had to fend for herself as there was no way her familiy could afford the medical treatment necessary to save her life.

This was prior to our engagement and subsequent marriage.

You've met her Khutan... you know how healthy she now looks.

So many of the poor villagers in the North and North-East have healthy lives now... all due to Thaksin.

It's difficult to argue that he's a crook robbing Thailand and flaunting the law... and should be ousted, ... when your loved ones are alive... because of him.

[jdinasia]

Jai Dee ... who was the official that said that TRT/Thaksin doesn't own the 30b scheme?

[giulio]

i'm not sure about him,but i look that freedom in general with thaksin is decreasing a lot,look internet and website,this is china-style and this example is not good for freedom off everybody

Edited March 28, 2006 by giulio

[steveromagnino]

Yes but he changed the law to make it better.

He got rid of capital gains taxes, which results in increased foreign investment, improves the stock market, helps people retire, companies raise money, and people get jobs.

Yes he benefited, but so did all of Thailand. But because he's rich, jealous people are trying to knock him down. The funny thing is that the opposition doesn't even talk about repealing the law at all.

I honestly did not realize until now how little the anti-Thaksin faction understood about capital gains taxes and its effect on the economy - the removal of capital gains tax was an obvious positive for Thailand.

As far as I recall, there was not enforcement of capital gains tax prior to Thaksin...and while he was not subject to them, in MOST countries you have gift duties and this is the issue that has many people up in arms; he gave a chunk of shares at 1b to certain connected family members, who then were able to sell on the open market.

Additionally, there was rampant insider trading from family and connected executives prior to the announcements.

He also changed the law twice, first introducing the ownership restriction and also blocking any telco reform through stacking the NTTC (the regulatory body), then changing it back when it suited him.

I think I know capital gains tax; if you are in the business of buying and selling shares, then income on shares is taxed, as I am sure you also know. If you are in the business of investing, then the sale is by the by and untaxed. I can dig up a million cases to back this assertion up. I would say there is enough evidence to suggest that shuffling shares around at 1 baht then selling at the market rate (for one parcel anyway) is suspect, although mahbe not in a capital gains way.

While some may say he should be taxed, I say not. After all, capital gains does not apply here. However, he should be hung out to dry on insider trading, irrigularities in ownership and non declared transfers of shares, and Shin is now IMHO exceeding the 49% allowed by law. There is also the feeling among many that he has a moral obligation of leadership; and THAT is what they feel let down by. The guy uses govt money to make us like him (e.g. forcing the expressway fee to 20 baht so that Isaan people like him) while he has so much money to do good things and doesn't.

In an unrelated topic, you know why Microsoft is no longer as hated as it was? The research suggests that there is a rub off effect from the Gates Foundation.

Here you are talking about a leader who has ruthlessly used his power as PM for his own businesses; look at his state trip to India (to negotiate for Shinsattelite); his FTA with Australia (satallite concessions) and so on. All this is widely documented.

For many Thai people, they accept that; he paid for a lot of votes (as all ruling parties do in Thailand) to get in; to control the factions. He needs to get some back.

But there are some things that are now just too much to bear:

- balls up in the south

- CTX and airport scandals

- megaprojects distrust

- PTT share allocation to nominees and a suspicion that he was a main beneficiary (bought at 35b, current price within 2 years around 200+ baht and public allocation sold out within under 60 seconds in Thailand)

- 30 baht healthcare and the allegation that the medicine required under the scheme must be purchased by the agent who is part of Khunying Sudarat's family

- the land acquisition by the Shinawatra family for SC Asset made with no rival bids

- the use of a plane requested for the purposes of transportation of someone else, and subsequently used by the Shinawatra family as a personal transport service at tax payer expense

- acquisition of hospitals including the use of suspicious methods in the Phaya Thai acquisition

- doubt over deregulation of EGAT when there is no framework in place for deregulation; no master plan for energy management and expected feeding time again like PTT

- failure of BKK Fashion City, Elite Card, massive cost overruns for 30b healthcare, no proven benefit from village fund

- mismanagement of the diesel subsidy which cost billions for no real benefit (since he had to lift it)

- failure of dark forces to establish or catch any key gang figures

- increasing awareness/suspicion that TAMC has been used for distressed asset purchases by connected people

- failure to manage bird flu properly; lying to EU was not the best idea

- control of the media, including the ITV rebels, shutting down radio stations, etc

- suspicion of use of govt policy to favour himself (the telco deregulation process, building an expressway right outside his own wife's property developement, etc)

Then there is the party itself:

- increasing problems within TRT as various factions fail to secure positions (everything was promised to everyone), and some are demoted

- lack of support in BKK (shown in the governor election, when, even though she is allegedly a publicity seeking person of questionable ethics and intelligence Paveena failed to gain the job even though she had TRT support)

And stuff outside his control hasn't helped - tsunami, bird flu, oil prices, Phra prom.

But against this, the guy still controls rural Thailand, because he is the first PM to market to them; there was a healthcare scheme before him. There was some debt forgiveness. but this is the first guy to go around handing out money, land, cows, rubber plants, and so on. It works. And the social order campaign has been popular (although not among many of the readers here!). And he is a proactive kind of a guy and has overseen a period of growth (admittedly a fair chunk due to the previous administration) and got things moving (like the airport, admittedly with massive corruption).

Therefore, the share thing is a bit of a red herring. It is the final straw in a whole mess of factors that BKK voters have increasingly become aware of; not easy when most of the media is controlled and restricted.

Why have the other parties not joined in more? IMHO because they don't like or trust Sondhi; a former business partner of Thaksin who also used the 'below the belt' tactics of involving a higher power in this whole thing, which many people do not like at all.

However, let's see where this thing ends up. To me, it shows that democracy exists and is developing, within BKK anyway. I actually wonder whether parts of rural Thailand should be stripped of the right to vote based on the vote buying that goes on e.g. if you accept money to vote, you are banned from voting for XYZ years, and if XYZ%^ of your province is banned, then we no longer have elections in that province and only count the remaining areas....the problem is then how to get a PM who would actually do something to improve the lot of the poor who make up 70% of this country>?? using this system, I would guess that the number of votes in Isaan would drop by abuot 80%.

no easy answers...

[Plus]

It's completely dishonest for governments to tax people who want to invest their retirement money in the stock market.

You make it sound like it has any relevance to Thaksin.

In my understanding you should pay taxes on off market trading. Like you got shares for 1 baht from your daddy and then sell them for 3 baht to your best friend - you should pay taxes on that sale, shouldn't you? Your best friend then runs to the stockbroker and put the stocks on the market, their value immediately increases from 3 baht to 49 baht. Should he pay tax? Good question. I think he should. He shouldn't pay tax if the stock goes from 49 to 53 and he sells his shares.

Employees who get "stock options" as part of their package pay taxes on them, even if they have no intention of selling them. It's not the same case, but it shows that not everything related to stocks is tax-free.

I won't insist on it - it should be reviewed by lawyers.

[Siripon]

Yes but he changed the law to make it better.

He got rid of capital gains taxes, which results in increased foreign investment, improves the stock market, helps people retire, companies raise money, and people get jobs.

Yes he benefited, but so did all of Thailand. But because he's rich, jealous people are trying to knock him down. The funny thing is that the opposition doesn't even talk about repealing the law at all.

I honestly did not realize until now how little the anti-Thaksin faction understood about capital gains taxes and its effect on the economy - the removal of capital gains tax was an obvious positive for Thailand.

As far as I recall, there was not enforcement of capital gains tax prior to Thaksin...and while he was not subject to them, in MOST countries you have gift duties and this is the issue that has many people up in arms; he gave a chunk of shares at 1b to certain connected family members, who then were able to sell on the open market.

Additionally, there was rampant insider trading from family and connected executives prior to the announcements.

He also changed the law twice, first introducing the ownership restriction and also blocking any telco reform through stacking the NTTC (the regulatory body), then changing it back when it suited him.

I think I know capital gains tax; if you are in the business of buying and selling shares, then income on shares is taxed, as I am sure you also know. If you are in the business of investing, then the sale is by the by and untaxed. I can dig up a million cases to back this assertion up. I would say there is enough evidence to suggest that shuffling shares around at 1 baht then selling at the market rate (for one parcel anyway) is suspect, although mahbe not in a capital gains way.

While some may say he should be taxed, I say not. After all, capital gains does not apply here. However, he should be hung out to dry on insider trading, irrigularities in ownership and non declared transfers of shares, and Shin is now IMHO exceeding the 49% allowed by law. There is also the feeling among many that he has a moral obligation of leadership; and THAT is what they feel let down by. The guy uses govt money to make us like him (e.g. forcing the expressway fee to 20 baht so that Isaan people like him) while he has so much money to do good things and doesn't.

In an unrelated topic, you know why Microsoft is no longer as hated as it was? The research suggests that there is a rub off effect from the Gates Foundation.

Here you are talking about a leader who has ruthlessly used his power as PM for his own businesses; look at his state trip to India (to negotiate for Shinsattelite); his FTA with Australia (satallite concessions) and so on. All this is widely documented.

For many Thai people, they accept that; he paid for a lot of votes (as all ruling parties do in Thailand) to get in; to control the factions. He needs to get some back.

But there are some things that are now just too much to bear:

- balls up in the south

- CTX and airport scandals

- megaprojects distrust

- PTT share allocation to nominees and a suspicion that he was a main beneficiary (bought at 35b, current price within 2 years around 200+ baht and public allocation sold out within under 60 seconds in Thailand)

- 30 baht healthcare and the allegation that the medicine required under the scheme must be purchased by the agent who is part of Khunying Sudarat's family

- the land acquisition by the Shinawatra family for SC Asset made with no rival bids

- the use of a plane requested for the purposes of transportation of someone else, and subsequently used by the Shinawatra family as a personal transport service at tax payer expense

- acquisition of hospitals including the use of suspicious methods in the Phaya Thai acquisition

- doubt over deregulation of EGAT when there is no framework in place for deregulation; no master plan for energy management and expected feeding time again like PTT

- failure of BKK Fashion City, Elite Card, massive cost overruns for 30b healthcare, no proven benefit from village fund

- mismanagement of the diesel subsidy which cost billions for no real benefit (since he had to lift it)

- failure of dark forces to establish or catch any key gang figures

- increasing awareness/suspicion that TAMC has been used for distressed asset purchases by connected people

- failure to manage bird flu properly; lying to EU was not the best idea

- control of the media, including the ITV rebels, shutting down radio stations, etc

- suspicion of use of govt policy to favour himself (the telco deregulation process, building an expressway right outside his own wife's property developement, etc)

Then there is the party itself:

- increasing problems within TRT as various factions fail to secure positions (everything was promised to everyone), and some are demoted

- lack of support in BKK (shown in the governor election, when, even though she is allegedly a publicity seeking person of questionable ethics and intelligence Paveena failed to gain the job even though she had TRT support)

And stuff outside his control hasn't helped - tsunami, bird flu, oil prices, Phra prom.

But against this, the guy still controls rural Thailand, because he is the first PM to market to them; there was a healthcare scheme before him. There was some debt forgiveness. but this is the first guy to go around handing out money, land, cows, rubber plants, and so on. It works. And the social order campaign has been popular (although not among many of the readers here!). And he is a proactive kind of a guy and has overseen a period of growth (admittedly a fair chunk due to the previous administration) and got things moving (like the airport, admittedly with massive corruption).

Therefore, the share thing is a bit of a red herring. It is the final straw in a whole mess of factors that BKK voters have increasingly become aware of; not easy when most of the media is controlled and restricted.

Why have the other parties not joined in more? IMHO because they don't like or trust Sondhi; a former business partner of Thaksin who also used the 'below the belt' tactics of involving a higher power in this whole thing, which many people do not like at all.

However, let's see where this thing ends up. To me, it shows that democracy exists and is developing, within BKK anyway. I actually wonder whether parts of rural Thailand should be stripped of the right to vote based on the vote buying that goes on e.g. if you accept money to vote, you are banned from voting for XYZ years, and if XYZ%^ of your province is banned, then we no longer have elections in that province and only count the remaining areas....the problem is then how to get a PM who would actually do something to improve the lot of the poor who make up 70% of this country>?? using this system, I would guess that the number of votes in Isaan would drop by abuot 80%.

no easy answers...

Excellent post Steve, you could have mentioned the sale of Shin products to the junta in Burma using Thailand's Exim bank providing loans to them at a lower interest rate than the norm- the remaining to be paid by Thailand's taxpayers. A double sin.

Everything you mentioned is why Thaksin will not resign easily, the can of worms will be opened if he has to face an investigation like previous rulers suspected of ill-gotten gains.

Seizure of his assets, I wonder if he has nightmares about this?

He was clever about the vote buying, no need to use the old crude methods with the dogs barking on pre-election night at the unfamiliar faces of the canvassers, handing out cash. He replaced this with the populist policies paid for by the middle class taxpayers, never mind if they fail, they win votes.

[steveromagnino]

Excellent post Steve, you could have mentioned the sale of Shin products to the junta in Burma using Thailand's Exim bank providing loans to them at a lower interest rate than the norm- the remaining to be paid by Thailand's taxpayers. A double sin.

Everything you mentioned is why Thaksin will not resign easily, the can of worms will be opened if he has to face an investigation like previous rulers suspected of ill-gotten gains.

Seizure of his assets, I wonder if he has nightmares about this?

He was clever about the vote buying, no need to use the old crude methods with the dogs barking on pre-election night at the unfamiliar faces of the canvassers, handing out cash. He replaced this with the populist policies paid for by the middle class taxpayers, never mind if they fail, they win votes.

I could mention FAR more than this, and I could further point out that a number of my TRT friends (who were to the point of being nominated for running in the last election) are also part of the Sondhi mob.

I am however not sure the mob are playing their cards right. However, should this election be voided (which despite Marcos style efforts may end up being the case if enough refrain from voting OR vote for no candidate in the south or BKK) and there is another election, EVEN if Taksin gets back in, then he may be subject to a censure, which I doubt he could survive; there is so much dirt the opposition have been waiting to hurl but haven't had the ability to do so (you cannot censure the PM without sufficient support in the house which they have not had since 2001). The CTX thing was nothing by comparison.

My concern is.... the mob just want him out; some are saying Somkid would be a good leader; others are merely saying that anyone would be better than this guy. Truth be told, there are a number of pieces missing in Thai politics at the moment, that anyone replacing him will probably run things in the same way, albiet on a smaller scale; will Supachai or Abhisit, Chuwit or even Somkid have the ability to run things cleanly and yet with clear leadership and marketing? hard to say....

Plus, whoever gets in will inherit an economy in a mess thanks to some of the policies from TRT (as well as some good things and a few outside influences outside their control) as did Bush in 2000 or the Labour Govt of NZ in 1984.... then they have to figure out how to fix it - Labour in NZ did well; Bush less so, and I suspect the next leader of Thailand will really have their work cut out for them, given that you cannot 'undo' some of the things like the FTAs Thailand is now part of, or the asset sell off to friends, and so on.

[Plus]

Yes but he changed the law to make it better.

He got rid of capital gains taxes..

This is abslolutely NOT TRUE.

I honestly did not realize until now how little the anti-Thaksin faction understood about capital gains taxes

Is it why you decided to post the false statement above? To get advantage of people not familiar with the actual laws?