The 30 baht scheme under threat? true or false?

[aussieinthailand]

My wife was telling yesterday that there is talk of dismantling the 30 Baht national health program, dose any one out there know if this is true and it's implications on those that can not afford to buy insurance or have a preexisting condition that insurance company's will not take on.

[Neeranam]

Where did she hear this from?

[JockPieandBeans]

aussieinthailand

I think you will find that the 30 Baht scheme is being discontinued for foreign migrant workers ( Cambodians, Laos etc ) Not Thai's.

As far as Insurance Companies are concerned, you will find very few that will cover pre-existing conditions, and if they will cover them, it will cost you an arm and a leg.

[aussieinthailand]

aussieinthailand

I think you will find that the 30 Baht scheme is being discontinued for foreign migrant workers ( Cambodians, Laos etc ) Not Thai's.

As far as Insurance Companies are concerned, you will find very few that will cover pre-existing conditions, and if they will cover them, it will cost you an arm and a leg.

Well that's not what is being said on F/B, Thai people will loose this is what is being said, but just wondering if any others have heard about this???

the scuttle butt is that it will be dismantled completely or a co payment of 50% for treatment.

[CharlieH]

Moving to health forum.

MOVED

[khunken]

'Scheem', 'faulce'. I know Aussies have some of their own slang but this is ridiculous.

Actually your wife is partly right. Dr Narong, the interim health minister, is not a fan of the 30 Baht scheme and has made suggestions that Thais pay 30% to 50% of the cost of their hospital care. A number of other health officials have completely disagreed with him.

The article was in the Bangkok Post recently. I have a feeling that it won't happen & hope so.

[JockPieandBeans]

aussieinthailand

As khunken says, there is an article in the BKP from 2 days ago. Not sure if I can post a link, but it is easily found.

The report I had previously read, referred to migrant workers.

[aussieinthailand]

'Scheem', 'faulce'. I know Aussies have some of their own slang but this is ridiculous.

Actually your wife is partly right. Dr Narong, the interim health minister, is not a fan of the 30 Baht scheme and has made suggestions that Thais pay 30% to 50% of the cost of their hospital care. A number of other health officials have completely disagreed with him.

The article was in the Bangkok Post recently. I have a feeling that it won't happen & hope so.

thanks guy's and yu'p Aussie slang get the better of me at times, ie, Bugga, stone the crows, and my favorite, fair suck of the sav, cheers

[AyG]

Undoubtedly something needs to be done. Thaksin put this scheme in place, but didn't put in place the funding necessary to support it, creating severe financial problems at government hospitals.

However, to the best of my knowledge, the junta hasn't yet announced what it's going to do, and all discussion is simply speculation at this stage.

[Sheryl]

Ever since its creation the scheme has been considered politically untouchable due to its high popularity.

It can be fine tuned but I would be amazed if it were stopped.

Last thing the current regime needs or wants is to mobilize the masses in outrage, which is what stopping ti would do.

Not going to happen, IMO. They might alter the "30 baht" aspect - dropping it or increasing it a bit -- but the basic principal of universal access isn't going to disappear. Worldwide, governments have found that once instituted it can never be dropped.

[CaptHaddock]

I very much hope Sheryl is right, but I have my doubts. One of the rallying cries for Suthep's mob was an end to "populist" programs. I think Prayuth mentioned a provision against them in the constitution that the junta is writing. When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor. If they do curb it, the junta won't have to worry about a voter backlash since there isn't going to be any real voting going forward. Probably, they will not simply dismantel the program, but will impose fees that effectively destroy it. Unversal access to healthcare may be irreversible in a democracy, but Thailand has neither a government nor a constitution.

Edited July 14, 2014 by CaptHaddock

[robblok]

It won't get stopped, the OP and others are trying to mobilize support against the junta for PTP based on groundless rumors. Nothing about this available in the news. The democrats even abolished the 30 bt because administration of this cost more as what was coming int. The PTP stubbornly brought it back afraid that Taksin would be forgotten else.

Nobody would ever do that even the anti government supporters (majority of the news forum) would not want to see this go. I have many anti government Thai friends and unlike CaptHaddock they don't talk about stopping this program at all. There is one person talking about it a Dr so I have read but he is a minority.

They indeed want to limit popular poicies.. but in a different context they want to have a feasibility study (financial and other) before they can put it in programs. They were not talking about the heath program only the oil program and that is normal.

This is just used as propaganda the fact that the OP stared a smiliar topic again in general (that got rightly closed) shows it that he is trying to push a political agenda based on rumors.

[AyG]

When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor.

There's a much broader issue of inequality of income taxation in this country. Only about 2.5 million people pay income tax. That's a lot of poor (and extremely rich) people that pay no income tax at all. An unfair burden falls upon the middle class, and it's not surprising some of them feel resentful.

The junta has said it will consider taxation reform, and has actively suggested introducing land tax. Of course, that will never happen, given that it would disproportionately hit the wealthiest and most powerful in society. However, we can hope for other tax reforms.

And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects, then that will free up a vast amount of money which could be used for social programmes. However, that's a big "if". It seems suspicious to me that the junta has committed to going ahead with the 350 billion Baht water management at the same price as under Pheu Thai - a price that was heavily padded to line the pockets of certain individuals. Why hasn't the cost come down significantly? Or are different people's pockets to be padded now?

[cooked]

Do a search of BKP. End of thread

฿100.- would be more like it, many go to the local clinlc when they have a headache.

Edited July 14, 2014 by cooked

[robblok]

Do a search of BKP. End of thread

฿100.- would be more like it, many go to the local clinlc when they have a headache.

Indeed... in the BKP they deny this rumor.

Again scaremongering by people who are against the good work the junta is doing.

[CaptHaddock]

When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor.

There's a much broader issue of inequality of income taxation in this country. Only about 2.5 million people pay income tax. That's a lot of poor (and extremely rich) people that pay no income tax at all. An unfair burden falls upon the middle class, and it's not surprising some of them feel resentful.

The junta has said it will consider taxation reform, and has actively suggested introducing land tax. Of course, that will never happen, given that it would disproportionately hit the wealthiest and most powerful in society. However, we can hope for other tax reforms.

And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects, then that will free up a vast amount of money which could be used for social programmes. However, that's a big "if". It seems suspicious to me that the junta has committed to going ahead with the 350 billion Baht water management at the same price as under Pheu Thai - a price that was heavily padded to line the pockets of certain individuals. Why hasn't the cost come down significantly? Or are different people's pockets to be padded now?

While it's true that the number of income tax payers is small, about 40% of Thai tax revenue comes from the VAT tax:

http://www.quandl.com/WORLDBANK/THA_GC_TAX_GSRV_RV_ZS-Thailand-Taxes-on-goods-and-services-of-revenue

VAT and sales taxes are inherently regressive since they consume a far greater portion of the income of poor families than rich or middle-class ones. In addition, other sources of income available to the wealthy are not taxed at all such as land, inheritance, and capital gains on securities transactions. These exclusions amount to substantial subsidies for the rich.

"And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects" - Would you be at all interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn at a very reasonable discount? Following the 2006 coup independent evaluations found that corruption in Thailand did not decrease, but increased. With 1600 generals to feed for a military of 300,000 (compare with 450 generals for the US active armed forces of 1.4 million) coupled with the ongoing takeover of the state-owned enterprises by the junta, it requires extreme wishful thinking to believe that corruption is somehow going to decline in the future.

Here's a graph from the Economist of 2011 on income inequality by country with Thailand coming out almost at the top to show that although only the relatively well-off pay the income tax here, that one inconvenience hasn't prevented them from sequestering most of the country's income to an astonishing degree.

[cooked]

When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor.

There's a much broader issue of inequality of income taxation in this country. Only about 2.5 million people pay income tax. That's a lot of poor (and extremely rich) people that pay no income tax at all. An unfair burden falls upon the middle class, and it's not surprising some of them feel resentful.

The junta has said it will consider taxation reform, and has actively suggested introducing land tax. Of course, that will never happen, given that it would disproportionately hit the wealthiest and most powerful in society. However, we can hope for other tax reforms.

And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects, then that will free up a vast amount of money which could be used for social programmes. However, that's a big "if". It seems suspicious to me that the junta has committed to going ahead with the 350 billion Baht water management at the same price as under Pheu Thai - a price that was heavily padded to line the pockets of certain individuals. Why hasn't the cost come down significantly? Or are different people's pockets to be padded now?

While it's true that the number of income tax payers is small, about 40% of Thai tax revenue comes from the VAT tax:

http://www.quandl.com/WORLDBANK/THA_GC_TAX_GSRV_RV_ZS-Thailand-Taxes-on-goods-and-services-of-revenue

VAT and sales taxes are inherently regressive since they consume a far greater portion of the income of poor families than rich or middle-class ones. In addition, other sources of income available to the wealthy are not taxed at all such as land, inheritance, and capital gains on securities transactions. These exclusions amount to substantial subsidies for the rich.

"And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects" - Would you be at all interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn at a very reasonable discount? Following the 2006 coup independent evaluations found that corruption in Thailand did not decrease, but increased. With 1600 generals to feed for a military of 300,000 (compare with 450 generals for the US active armed forces of 1.4 million) coupled with the ongoing takeover of the state-owned enterprises by the junta, it requires extreme wishful thinking to believe that corruption is somehow going to decline in the future.

Here's a graph from the Economist of 2011 on income inequality by country with Thailand coming out almost at the top to show that although only the relatively well-off pay the income tax here, that one inconvenience hasn't prevented them from sequestering most of the country's income to an astonishing degree.

Wildly off topic, which isn't a genuine topic at all.

[robblok]

When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor.

There's a much broader issue of inequality of income taxation in this country. Only about 2.5 million people pay income tax. That's a lot of poor (and extremely rich) people that pay no income tax at all. An unfair burden falls upon the middle class, and it's not surprising some of them feel resentful.

The junta has said it will consider taxation reform, and has actively suggested introducing land tax. Of course, that will never happen, given that it would disproportionately hit the wealthiest and most powerful in society. However, we can hope for other tax reforms.

And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects, then that will free up a vast amount of money which could be used for social programmes. However, that's a big "if". It seems suspicious to me that the junta has committed to going ahead with the 350 billion Baht water management at the same price as under Pheu Thai - a price that was heavily padded to line the pockets of certain individuals. Why hasn't the cost come down significantly? Or are different people's pockets to be padded now?

While it's true that the number of income tax payers is small, about 40% of Thai tax revenue comes from the VAT tax:

http://www.quandl.com/WORLDBANK/THA_GC_TAX_GSRV_RV_ZS-Thailand-Taxes-on-goods-and-services-of-revenue

VAT and sales taxes are inherently regressive since they consume a far greater portion of the income of poor families than rich or middle-class ones. In addition, other sources of income available to the wealthy are not taxed at all such as land, inheritance, and capital gains on securities transactions. These exclusions amount to substantial subsidies for the rich.

"And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects" - Would you be at all interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn at a very reasonable discount? Following the 2006 coup independent evaluations found that corruption in Thailand did not decrease, but increased. With 1600 generals to feed for a military of 300,000 (compare with 450 generals for the US active armed forces of 1.4 million) coupled with the ongoing takeover of the state-owned enterprises by the junta, it requires extreme wishful thinking to believe that corruption is somehow going to decline in the future.

Here's a graph from the Economist of 2011 on income inequality by country with Thailand coming out almost at the top to show that although only the relatively well-off pay the income tax here, that one inconvenience hasn't prevented them from sequestering most of the country's income to an astonishing degree.

Actually your wrong, the real wealthy don't pay income tax the middle class do not the real wealthy.

Actually if you make over 20k (a month) and are employed you are starting to pay income tax. But the real rich don't pay.

[samran]

'Scheem', 'faulce'. I know Aussies have some of their own slang but this is ridiculous.

Actually your wife is partly right. Dr Narong, the interim health minister, is not a fan of the 30 Baht scheme and has made suggestions that Thais pay 30% to 50% of the cost of their hospital care. A number of other health officials have completely disagreed with him.

The article was in the Bangkok Post recently. I have a feeling that it won't happen & hope so.

thanks guy's and yu'p Aussie slang get the better of me at times, ie, Bugga, stone the crows, and my favorite, fair suck of the sav, cheers

I quite like 'get your hand off it'.

[citizen33]

The article in the other place is well worth reading, and is based on a Thai language article from Matichon

http://www.matichon.co.th/news_detail.php?newsid=1405116754

It seems that the longstanding tensions between the MoPH and the NHSO are again coming to the surface as the conservative group in the Ministry has become more influential. Permanent Secretary Dr Narong’s recent policy statements are about strengthening coordination at the regional (health keet) level and getting a stronger performance management framework in place. However, many are beginning to suspect that the real subtext is to claw power and money back to the MoPH from the NHSO, end the purchaser/provider split (which relegates the MoPH to being system manager of the provider side), and water down the universal coverage principle on grounds of affordability.

As Sheryl says, up until now this has been regarded by (almost) all as a step too far politically. However, there is an extremely interesting excerpt from Mongkol Na Songkhla’s Facebook page translated into English in the Post article. Mongkol Na Songkhla was the public health minister in the post-coup technocratic government who abolished the 30 baht co-payment in 2007. He recalls correctly that that the universal coverage scheme was not really a TRT policy – having been devised by the late Dr Sanguan Nittyarumpong and other reformist MoPH experts (who talked to Thaksin after Leekpai said ‘no’). Tellingly Dr Mongkol writes: "I'm deeply concerned about the news the ministry's management prohibited hospitals and officials from cooperating with the NHSO and proposed scrapping the principle aimed at separating buyers and service providers to pull the power back to the ministry … The principle is a good one because it ensures the budget will not be used for other purposes. It will be closely monitored by the buyer (NHSO) for utmost public benefit”.

https://th-th.facebook.com/mongkol.nasongkhla

(see Dr Mongkol's comment of July 11 which has quite a lot to say about the UCS. NHSO, MoPH and the Minister, but is in Thai)

We shall have to wait to see how far Dr Narong comes out into the open about what I suspect are his actual preferences. Dr Sanguan must be looking down aghast.

Edited July 14, 2014 by citizen33

[BossBar]

Do a search of BKP. End of thread

฿100.- would be more like it, many go to the local clinlc when they have a headache.

Indeed... in the BKP they deny this rumor.

Again scaremongering by people who are against the good work the junta is doing.

dkhead springs to mind lol

[prakhonchai nick]

100baht would be a fair starting price, which should be increased annually in line with the % cost increase of alcohol.

Thais never have a problem finding money for alcohol - let them contribute more for their health care.

Normal exemptions of kids, preganant women and the over 60's

[sgtsabai]

Not quite on subject, but I think close enough. What is the current status of the farang husband of Thai wife joining the 30 baht program? I know it was possible months ago but haven't heard anything lately.

[gabruce]

When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor.

There's a much broader issue of inequality of income taxation in this country. Only about 2.5 million people pay income tax. That's a lot of poor (and extremely rich) people that pay no income tax at all. An unfair burden falls upon the middle class, and it's not surprising some of them feel resentful.

The junta has said it will consider taxation reform, and has actively suggested introducing land tax. Of course, that will never happen, given that it would disproportionately hit the wealthiest and most powerful in society. However, we can hope for other tax reforms.

And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects, then that will free up a vast amount of money which could be used for social programmes. However, that's a big "if". It seems suspicious to me that the junta has committed to going ahead with the 350 billion Baht water management at the same price as under Pheu Thai - a price that was heavily padded to line the pockets of certain individuals. Why hasn't the cost come down significantly? Or are different people's pockets to be padded now?

While it's true that the number of income tax payers is small, about 40% of Thai tax revenue comes from the VAT tax:

http://www.quandl.com/WORLDBANK/THA_GC_TAX_GSRV_RV_ZS-Thailand-Taxes-on-goods-and-services-of-revenue

VAT and sales taxes are inherently regressive since they consume a far greater portion of the income of poor families than rich or middle-class ones. In addition, other sources of income available to the wealthy are not taxed at all such as land, inheritance, and capital gains on securities transactions. These exclusions amount to substantial subsidies for the rich.

"And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects" - Would you be at all interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn at a very reasonable discount? Following the 2006 coup independent evaluations found that corruption in Thailand did not decrease, but increased. With 1600 generals to feed for a military of 300,000 (compare with 450 generals for the US active armed forces of 1.4 million) coupled with the ongoing takeover of the state-owned enterprises by the junta, it requires extreme wishful thinking to believe that corruption is somehow going to decline in the future.

Here's a graph from the Economist of 2011 on income inequality by country with Thailand coming out almost at the top to show that although only the relatively well-off pay the income tax here, that one inconvenience hasn't prevented them from sequestering most of the country's income to an astonishing degree.

I think it's interesting to compare the World Bank figures for:

United States: 45 (2007)

Thailand: 40 (2009)

I didn't see any numbers for more recent years, however for the USA I would expect the number to be much higher now given the changes in the last few years.

Interesting that Thailand has less income inequality the the USA.

[TerryLH]

"What is the current status of the farang husband of Thai wife joining the 30 baht program? I know it was possible months ago but haven't heard anything lately."

Legally that has never been an option. That's not to say that someone didn't make a mistake...

Of the several different health schemes available from the government, the only one that covers spouses is the one for government employees.

[harrry]

When I have spoken with middle-class Thai supporters of Suthep they were all against the 30 bath scheme because they didn't want to pay to provide healthcare to the poor.

There's a much broader issue of inequality of income taxation in this country. Only about 2.5 million people pay income tax. That's a lot of poor (and extremely rich) people that pay no income tax at all. An unfair burden falls upon the middle class, and it's not surprising some of them feel resentful.

The junta has said it will consider taxation reform, and has actively suggested introducing land tax. Of course, that will never happen, given that it would disproportionately hit the wealthiest and most powerful in society. However, we can hope for other tax reforms.

And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects, then that will free up a vast amount of money which could be used for social programmes. However, that's a big "if". It seems suspicious to me that the junta has committed to going ahead with the 350 billion Baht water management at the same price as under Pheu Thai - a price that was heavily padded to line the pockets of certain individuals. Why hasn't the cost come down significantly? Or are different people's pockets to be padded now?

While it's true that the number of income tax payers is small, about 40% of Thai tax revenue comes from the VAT tax:

http://www.quandl.com/WORLDBANK/THA_GC_TAX_GSRV_RV_ZS-Thailand-Taxes-on-goods-and-services-of-revenue

VAT and sales taxes are inherently regressive since they consume a far greater portion of the income of poor families than rich or middle-class ones. In addition, other sources of income available to the wealthy are not taxed at all such as land, inheritance, and capital gains on securities transactions. These exclusions amount to substantial subsidies for the rich.

"And if the junta is capable of reducing corruption substantially in government purchasing and in capital projects" - Would you be at all interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn at a very reasonable discount? Following the 2006 coup independent evaluations found that corruption in Thailand did not decrease, but increased. With 1600 generals to feed for a military of 300,000 (compare with 450 generals for the US active armed forces of 1.4 million) coupled with the ongoing takeover of the state-owned enterprises by the junta, it requires extreme wishful thinking to believe that corruption is somehow going to decline in the future.

Here's a graph from the Economist of 2011 on income inequality by country with Thailand coming out almost at the top to show that although only the relatively well-off pay the income tax here, that one inconvenience hasn't prevented them from sequestering most of the country's income to an astonishing degree.

Actually your wrong, the real wealthy don't pay income tax the middle class do not the real wealthy.

Actually if you make over 20k (a month) and are employed you are starting to pay income tax. But the real rich don't pay.

If you add countries like Canada and the US where income distribution is even more unequal than this you get a more complete picture. Life is not fair at the top, everyone wants a piece of the cake.

[HUAHIN62]

Undoubtedly something needs to be done. Thaksin put this scheme in place, but didn't put in place the funding necessary to support it, creating severe financial problems at government hospitals.

However, to the best of my knowledge, the junta hasn't yet announced what it's going to do, and all discussion is simply speculation at this stage.

The truth is rather different from what you believe you know. The program was innitiated by health care officials and was proposed to the TS government which approved it. The cost of the program is only 7% of the total annual Thai health care budget (so I don't see your point of TS not putting the funding inplace as its part of the health care budget). The reason why this program has been attacked recently is about power. The power hungry want the program's money to be paid to them directly, instead of the existing system where the hospitals only get paid for services they render under the program. What is worse is that the power hungry is now preventing new medicines from being added to the list thats used in the B 30 program (this is done by refusing to call a meeting for its approval). This in endangering the health of thousands of people, one such medicine which needs approval is for hep C, which if not treated could lead to liver cancer.

If they stop the program or change it to a 30% to 50% contribution, it will be suicide by a thousand cuts.

[wwest5829]

It won't get stopped, the OP and others are trying to mobilize support against the junta for PTP based on groundless rumors. Nothing about this available in the news. The democrats even abolished the 30 bt because administration of this cost more as what was coming int. The PTP stubbornly brought it back afraid that Taksin would be forgotten else.

Nobody would ever do that even the anti government supporters (majority of the news forum) would not want to see this go. I have many anti government Thai friends and unlike CaptHaddock they don't talk about stopping this program at all. There is one person talking about it a Dr so I have read but he is a minority.

They indeed want to limit popular poicies.. but in a different context they want to have a feasibility study (financial and other) before they can put it in programs. They were not talking about the heath program only the oil program and that is normal.

This is just used as propaganda the fact that the OP stared a smiliar topic again in general (that got rightly closed) shows it that he is trying to push a political agenda based on rumors.

And yet, the Post had an article about this in their news today so perhaps it has been discussed.

[robblok]

It won't get stopped, the OP and others are trying to mobilize support against the junta for PTP based on groundless rumors. Nothing about this available in the news. The democrats even abolished the 30 bt because administration of this cost more as what was coming int. The PTP stubbornly brought it back afraid that Taksin would be forgotten else.

Nobody would ever do that even the anti government supporters (majority of the news forum) would not want to see this go. I have many anti government Thai friends and unlike CaptHaddock they don't talk about stopping this program at all. There is one person talking about it a Dr so I have read but he is a minority.

They indeed want to limit popular poicies.. but in a different context they want to have a feasibility study (financial and other) before they can put it in programs. They were not talking about the heath program only the oil program and that is normal.

This is just used as propaganda the fact that the OP stared a smiliar topic again in general (that got rightly closed) shows it that he is trying to push a political agenda based on rumors.

And yet, the Post had an article about this in their news today so perhaps it has been discussed.

Its been discussed and rejected every article about it shows there is only a small minority for it. Seems more like a way to attack the Junta by spreading false rumors. The false part being its under threat while in reality it is not as the majority of people discussing it will not allow it to be stopped.

[Toscano]

I may be mistaken , but as I understand the democrat party replaced bt30 with for free . My father-in-law has all his medical treatment for free .

It used to be possible for the foreign husbands of government professionals to have free medicine too , but I believe that has been stopped . My wife is a school teacher and collects all my receips from the hospital and I believe is able to claim back on her medical insurance .