Military junta endorses 2.575 trillion baht budget bill for 2015 fiscal year

[webfact]

Military junta endorses 2.575 trillion baht budget bill for 2015 fiscal year



BANGKOK: -- The budget bill will see a deficit of 250 billion baht, according to Budget Bureau director Somsak Chotrattanasiri.

He said the approval of the budget bill was made at the weekly meeting Tuesday of the NCPO chaired by Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha.

The budget will have a deficit of 250 billion baht and is based on a gross domestic product growth of between 3.5 and 4.5% and an inflation rate under 2.3%, he said.

Among the biggest beneficiary of the allocation will be the Ministry of Education, which received a 3.2% increase in allocation to 498.16 billion baht, the central budget increased 8.6% to 372.74 billion baht and the interior ministry’s allocation rose 2.4% to 341.16 billion baht.

The defence ministry’s budget was increased 5% to 193.065 billion baht but the allocation for the Ministry of Finance was slashed 8.6% to 186.216 billion baht.

Somsak said the bill would be checked by the Office of the Council of State and would be sent back to the NCPO for a final approval before it will be tabled to the National Legislative Assembly on August 6.

The NLA has yet to be set up under the provision of an interim charter, which has yet to be enacted.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/military-junta-endorses-2-575-trillion-baht-budget-bill-2015-fiscal-year/


-- Thai PBS 2014-07-16

[noitom]

In two years, who is accountable for the success/accountability of these investments? Would it be the military dictator or the budget director? What if they both die during the next year? What is the succession plan? Who in their right mind would invest in Thailand without a leadership succession plan?

[terryp]

there is something wrong as it doesnt add up to magic number 9......2575 = 19 = 1

[Thai at Heart]

Among the biggest beneficiary of the allocation will be the Ministry of Education, which received a 3.2% increase

But thr MOD got 5%????

Well. Spin away

[kriswillems]

Of course, if the army takes over it will be finished with the dirty money grabbing practices of the old, corrupt, elected government. That's clear.

Wait a minute.... 5 % increase for defense ....?

Edited July 16, 2014 by kriswillems

[HUAHIN62]

How much was allocated for the B 3 tn infrastructure projects? If they are financing it through the budget as they said they would do it should have been included in Departmental budgets which would have increased substantially. As there is no mention of this are one to assume that they will be financing it like it was proposed before, with loans?

[HUAHIN62]

there is something wrong as it doesnt add up to magic number 9......2575 = 19 = 1

2+5+7-5=9

555

[Prbkk]

One saving for the next budget: abolish the ridiculous uniforms worn by officials. They make Thailand look like Argentina c 1970. They must cost a fortune. Who has that contract?

[smutcakes]

How much was allocated for the B 3 tn infrastructure projects? If they are financing it through the budget as they said they would do it should have been included in Departmental budgets which would have increased substantially. As there is no mention of this are one to assume that they will be financing it like it was proposed before, with loans?

Of course they will, like anyone with half an investment brain knows you borrow when the interest rates are low like now on fixed terms. Considering there were reports of it being approved previously i presume it has been left out and 'forgotten' about, in the orgy of happiness.(and censorship)

If you have 5 mill sitting in the bank attracting 2% (the lowest in many years) interest and you need money for a 7 million place do you:

a) cut other budgets and take from that

borrow at low interest rates knowing the rate will go up soon (probably globally) and hopefully below GDP/capital appreciation value

c) not do anything

d) when your budget shows a deficit of 250 bln you make up money or 'do it in the budget deficit'

Any investor with an ounce of a brain knows is the right and financially prudent option.

At the end of the day Thailand needs to invest in infrastructure, long term borrowing if you don't have the financial power to hand is the normal way to do it.

[HUAHIN62]

How much was allocated for the B 3 tn infrastructure projects? If they are financing it through the budget as they said they would do it should have been included in Departmental budgets which would have increased substantially. As there is no mention of this are one to assume that they will be financing it like it was proposed before, with loans?

Of course they will, like anyone with half an investment brain knows you borrow when the interest rates are low like now on fixed terms. Considering there were reports of it being approved previously i presume it has been left out and 'forgotten' about, in the orgy of happiness.(and censorship)

If you have 5 mill sitting in the bank attracting 2% (the lowest in many years) interest and you need money for a 7 million place do you:

a) cut other budgets and take from that

borrow at low interest rates knowing the rate will go up soon (probably globally) and hopefully below GDP/capital appreciation value

c) not do anything

d) when your budget shows a deficit of 250 bln you make up money or 'do it in the budget deficit'

Any investor with an ounce of a brain knows is the right and financially prudent option.

At the end of the day Thailand needs to invest in infrastructure, long term borrowing if you don't have the financial power to hand is the normal way to do it.

I agree with the borrowing when interest rates are low, but if you remember the financing of these projects by loans was shotdown in flames before (when the interest rates/ bond yields was even lower than now). It was recently said that it would be financed by savings and would be financed within the budget. If they did finance it within the budget the transport departments budget should have increased dramatically, which it didn't, which means they are going to take longterm loans (30 yrs to 50 yrs) and not finance it through the budget and budget deficit (normally financed with shorter term bonds). Interesting to see how no question are asked when absolute power comes into the equation.

[Eric Loh]

How much was allocated for the B 3 tn infrastructure projects? If they are financing it through the budget as they said they would do it should have been included in Departmental budgets which would have increased substantially. As there is no mention of this are one to assume that they will be financing it like it was proposed before, with loans?

Of course they will, like anyone with half an investment brain knows you borrow when the interest rates are low like now on fixed terms. Considering there were reports of it being approved previously i presume it has been left out and 'forgotten' about, in the orgy of happiness.(and censorship)

If you have 5 mill sitting in the bank attracting 2% (the lowest in many years) interest and you need money for a 7 million place do you:

a) cut other budgets and take from that

borrow at low interest rates knowing the rate will go up soon (probably globally) and hopefully below GDP/capital appreciation value

c) not do anything

d) when your budget shows a deficit of 250 bln you make up money or 'do it in the budget deficit'

Any investor with an ounce of a brain knows is the right and financially prudent option.

At the end of the day Thailand needs to invest in infrastructure, long term borrowing if you don't have the financial power to hand is the normal way to do it.

I agree with the borrowing when interest rates are low, but if you remember the financing of these projects by loans was shotdown in flames before (when the interest rates/ bond yields was even lower than now). It was recently said that it would be financed by savings and would be financed within the budget. If they did finance it within the budget the transport departments budget should have increased dramatically, which it didn't, which means they are going to take longterm loans (30 yrs to 50 yrs) and not finance it through the budget and budget deficit (normally financed with shorter term bonds). Interesting to see how no question are asked when absolute power comes into the equation.

The infrastructure project will be funded by short and long term domestic and foreign loans.

<snip>

Edited July 16, 2014 by Tywais
Link to bangkok post removed as per forum rules

[philw]

Easy to imagine the reactions on here if an elected former gov't made such an announcement...............

[smutcakes]

How much was allocated for the B 3 tn infrastructure projects? If they are financing it through the budget as they said they would do it should have been included in Departmental budgets which would have increased substantially. As there is no mention of this are one to assume that they will be financing it like it was proposed before, with loans?

Of course they will, like anyone with half an investment brain knows you borrow when the interest rates are low like now on fixed terms. Considering there were reports of it being approved previously i presume it has been left out and 'forgotten' about, in the orgy of happiness.(and censorship)

If you have 5 mill sitting in the bank attracting 2% (the lowest in many years) interest and you need money for a 7 million place do you:

a) cut other budgets and take from that

borrow at low interest rates knowing the rate will go up soon (probably globally) and hopefully below GDP/capital appreciation value

c) not do anything

d) when your budget shows a deficit of 250 bln you make up money or 'do it in the budget deficit'

Any investor with an ounce of a brain knows is the right and financially prudent option.

At the end of the day Thailand needs to invest in infrastructure, long term borrowing if you don't have the financial power to hand is the normal way to do it.

I agree with the borrowing when interest rates are low, but if you remember the financing of these projects by loans was shotdown in flames before (when the interest rates/ bond yields was even lower than now). It was recently said that it would be financed by savings and would be financed within the budget. If they did finance it within the budget the transport departments budget should have increased dramatically, which it didn't, which means they are going to take longterm loans (30 yrs to 50 yrs) and not finance it through the budget and budget deficit (normally financed with shorter term bonds). Interesting to see how no question are asked when absolute power comes into the equation.

No its okay mate, not worry they are financing the 2+ trillion infrastructure team within the budget, that is the budget of a total of 2.575 trillion... and a 250 bn deficit......

The numbers just dont stack up

[ginjag]

Easy to imagine the reactions on here if an elected former gov't made such an announcement...............

Just depends who is handling the money and if records of accounts are kept. if so it doesn't really matter. Money is going for the goods ordered, and contracts agreed.

[smutcakes]

Easy to imagine the reactions on here if an elected former gov't made such an announcement...............

Just depends who is handling the money and if records of accounts are kept. if so it doesn't really matter. Money is going for the goods ordered, and contracts agreed.

In two months, wow they are efficient....write the TOR, send out for first bids, explanation etc

[HUAHIN62]

How much was allocated for the B 3 tn infrastructure projects? If they are financing it through the budget as they said they would do it should have been included in Departmental budgets which would have increased substantially. As there is no mention of this are one to assume that they will be financing it like it was proposed before, with loans?

Of course they will, like anyone with half an investment brain knows you borrow when the interest rates are low like now on fixed terms. Considering there were reports of it being approved previously i presume it has been left out and 'forgotten' about, in the orgy of happiness.(and censorship)

If you have 5 mill sitting in the bank attracting 2% (the lowest in many years) interest and you need money for a 7 million place do you:

a) cut other budgets and take from that

borrow at low interest rates knowing the rate will go up soon (probably globally) and hopefully below GDP/capital appreciation value

c) not do anything

d) when your budget shows a deficit of 250 bln you make up money or 'do it in the budget deficit'

Any investor with an ounce of a brain knows is the right and financially prudent option.

At the end of the day Thailand needs to invest in infrastructure, long term borrowing if you don't have the financial power to hand is the normal way to do it.

I agree with the borrowing when interest rates are low, but if you remember the financing of these projects by loans was shotdown in flames before (when the interest rates/ bond yields was even lower than now). It was recently said that it would be financed by savings and would be financed within the budget. If they did finance it within the budget the transport departments budget should have increased dramatically, which it didn't, which means they are going to take longterm loans (30 yrs to 50 yrs) and not finance it through the budget and budget deficit (normally financed with shorter term bonds). Interesting to see how no question are asked when absolute power comes into the equation.

No its okay mate, not worry they are financing the 2+ trillion infrastructure team within the budget, that is the budget of a total of 2.575 trillion... and a 250 bn deficit......

The numbers just dont stack up

yes mate they are financing it over 7 years which equals +- B 300 on average per year which could be accommodated within the budget. But which it seems they are not going to do.

[Payboy]

Among the biggest beneficiary of the allocation will be the Ministry of Education

They're gonna get it in 7-11 stamps.

[ginjag]

Easy to imagine the reactions on here if an elected former gov't made such an announcement...............

Just depends who is handling the money and if records of accounts are kept. if so it doesn't really matter. Money is going for the goods ordered, and contracts agreed.

In two months, wow they are efficient....write the TOR, send out for first bids, explanation etc

Depends who you can trust most of all, the last LOT, or this cleaner management, For now I'll back the latter---up to you, but did you trust PTP ??

[smutcakes]

Easy to imagine the reactions on here if an elected former gov't made such an announcement...............

Just depends who is handling the money and if records of accounts are kept. if so it doesn't really matter. Money is going for the goods ordered, and contracts agreed.

In two months, wow they are efficient....write the TOR, send out for first bids, explanation etc

Depends who you can trust most of all, the last LOT, or this cleaner management, For now I'll back the latter---up to you, but did you trust PTP ??

Umm yes, or they could take there time and do their own studies etc, I thought PTP took 40% cut, but seemingly the price has gone up! So it has gone down by 40% and then the price has inflated even without that or oh wait......