Thai Constitution: CDC inserts articles to help ease income gap

[webfact]

CONSTITUTION WATCH
CDC inserts articles to help ease income gap
KRIS BHROMSUTHI
THE NATION

New section will cover universal pension scheme, fairer taxation levels and better tax-collection system

BANGKOK: -- Charter drafters yesterday inserted a provision to create a universal pension scheme for retirees whose pensions are not enough to cover basic living standards.

Many of the provisions created by the charter drafters were designed to help and support the low-income sector, such as setting up a fairer tax system, a more effective system of tax collection and a national pension scheme.

The Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) drafted the chapter on "financial, budget and tax reform", which is comprised of four articles.

One of the articles is on national pensions, stating that "a national pension scheme has to be established that provides enough funds for a sustainable standard of living".

The article also states that an independent committee on finance, budget and tax reform should be set up within a year after the new constitution is implemented. This committee will consist of public and private sector representatives and academics, and will be responsible for studying, analysing and proposing finance, budget and tax legislative reform.

Another article is on reforming the tax system, and it states that "tax reform should emphasise fairness, which will lead to economic equality".

An article also states that "a law should be created that obliges all citizens to declare their income to relevant public offices, so the government can have a complete income record of all citizens so it can use this information to plan its support for low-income taxpayers".

CDC members yesterday also drafted a section on economic reform, where some articles also demonstrated the charter drafters' aim to reduce the income gap and support those in the low-income strata of society.

One of the articles states "there should be continuous distribution of a special developmental budget targeting low economics areas and low-income citizens in order to create a strong community and reduce inequality".

Another article states that "legislation should be designed and implemented so ordinary people can participate in solving social and economic inequality".

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/CDC-inserts-articles-to-help-ease-income-gap-30254504.html


-- The Nation 2015-02-20

[NeverSure]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

[lildragon]

Ok finally something tangible being changed for the better! Let's see if it actually happens.

[djjamie]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

What, the pension? This is far from a populist policy. It should be a basic human right afforded to any citizen by its government in any country to promote income security in old age. Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so. In return governments should do more to support their human rights and freedoms, including their right to live in dignity and security—free from want and free from fear.

If you think that is a populist policy then shame on you.

In April, 2009 The Right Honorable Ahbisit introduced the 500 baht pension scheme helping 5 million old age citizens while acknowledging that it is still not enough to bridge the income gap and asked for time to find funding sources elsewhere to increase it. Had the rice scheme, costing over 700 billion baht not been introduced this pension could have allowed those 5 million citizens access to over 1000 baht a month.

Well done I say and a wonderful initiative giving dignity and respect to the truly needy. Not warehouse owners or millers or politicians or transport companies.

[FangFerang]

An article also states that "a law should be created that obliges all citizens to declare their income to relevant public offices, so the government can have a complete income record of all citizens so it can use this information to plan its support for low-income taxpayers".

Translation: "Now that we all have ours, we want more of yours."

[casualbiker]

An article also states that "a law should be created that obliges all citizens to declare their income to relevant public offices, so the government can have a complete income record of all citizens so it can use this information to plan its support for low-income taxpayers".

Translation: "Now that we all have ours, we want more of yours."

No.. it means let's get a clear idea of what's going on.. it doesn't take a great brain to work out that there are millions of Thais shirking their tax liability, in a country that only has 20% of working age adults paying income tax.

[phoenixdoglover]

This could be a strange and unwieldy "Constitution", larded up with various policies that may not stand the test of time or political differences.

[Thai at Heart]

Why does this.need to be put in a constitution.

Is it even affordable?

[Thai at Heart]

An article also states that "a law should be created that obliges all citizens to declare their income to relevant public offices, so the government can have a complete income record of all citizens so it can use this information to plan its support for low-income taxpayers".

Translation: "Now that we all have ours, we want more of yours."

No.. it means let's get a clear idea of what's going on.. it doesn't take a great brain to work out that there are millions of Thais shirking their tax liability, in a country that only has 20% of working age adults paying income tax.

It isn't against the law to not declare ones earned income? Bizarro.

[casualbiker]

Why shouldn't it be in there?

[greenchair]

An article also states that "a law should be created that obliges all citizens to declare their income to relevant public offices, so the government can have a complete income record of all citizens so it can use this information to plan its support for low-income taxpayers".

Translation: "Now that we all have ours, we want more of yours."

Yes, we want more of yours to pay for all the committees we are setting up, and those lovely lifetime benefits for government workers.

We now have so many committees to do everything for the people, there will no longer be a need for the prime minister to much at all. Keeping all the people safe in case we get a bad one.

[hawker9000]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

What, the pension? This is far from a populist policy. It should be a basic human right afforded to any citizen by its government in any country to promote income security in old age. Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so. In return governments should do more to support their human rights and freedoms, including their right to live in dignity and security—free from want and free from fear.

If you think that is a populist policy then shame on you.

In April, 2009 The Right Honorable Ahbisit introduced the 500 baht pension scheme helping 5 million old age citizens while acknowledging that it is still not enough to bridge the income gap and asked for time to find funding sources elsewhere to increase it. Had the rice scheme, costing over 700 billion baht not been introduced this pension could have allowed those 5 million citizens access to over 1000 baht a month.

Well done I say and a wonderful initiative giving dignity and respect to the truly needy. Not warehouse owners or millers or politicians or transport companies.

"Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so."

You know, that's SUCH total B$. True for some. Definitely NOT true for some. If you can make sweeping statements like that, then I can make another one and assert that most of those for whom it IS true have ALSO responsibly planned and provided for their own old age. Yours is purely an emotional argument designed to appeal to the easily led, non-thinking, non-productive, do-gooders who always seem to know what's good for everybody else and that government must be the one to do it, and expand the concept of the TRULY needy to include as much of the electorate as possible (for obvious reasons). Arguments and policies just like this are responsible for debacles like the one in Greece right now (with more to come...)! They dilute NEEDED benefits, and bankrupt economies.

Edited February 20, 2015 by hawker9000

[Balance]

It appears that many, if not most, of the people on this threat have not the slightest idea that a society is run paid for by the people through taxes. In the industrialized west, the people at the bottom are helped, given money and services paid for by people who make much more money. This is progressive taxation and opporates on the principle that people making B200,000 a month can aford to pay a larger percentage of their income that people making B15,000 per month.

The problem here is that the only people paying taxes are those that employeed by companies that withhold taxes from paychecks. Put another way, it has been estimated that only 20% of working age Thais pay taxes. This was/is the same problem that brought Greece to it's knees.

There seems to be an effort going on to correct some of this. Let's hope that it works.

There are, of course, sociopaths in every country that think that they are not a member of the society in which they live, and that they do not owe any government any of their money. These people should rightly receive only one benefit, a clean jail cell.

[Thai at Heart]

Why shouldn't it be in there?

Why should an enelected govt be able to mandate anything financial into untouchable law for the future. Just because its a nice law doesn't make it right that it happens. And also a fairer tax system? What the hell does that mean? Define "fair"?

So, cut taxes for the rich, is that fair? Cut them for the poor? Is that fair? They might as well legistlate that all Thai food must be "arooy"..

[emilymat]

An article also states that "a law should be created that obliges all citizens to declare their income to relevant public offices, so the government can have a complete income record of all citizens so it can use this information to plan its support for low-income taxpayers".

Translation: "Now that we all have ours, we want more of yours."

No.. it means let's get a clear idea of what's going on.. it doesn't take a great brain to work out that there are millions of Thais shirking their tax liability, in a country that only has 20% of working age adults paying income tax.

I agree it's ludicrous that only 20% pay tax. But, the logic in this is that a system has to be devised that can deliver.

For example, and I'm not being frivolous, but, say, in the sex industry users will need to be given a receipt for services provided and that income then has to be declared by the provider. The same wuld technically apply to, say, motor-bike taxi's etc.

Does anyone seriously think that could be implemented, in a country where 'cash in hand ' is the normal way for a huge majority of the citizens?.

If they can come up with a system then good luck to them. I feel however it's a pipe-dream unfortunately.

[tbthailand]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

what is absolutely weird is that they keep putting "policy" in the constitution.

[Thai at Heart]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

what is absolutely weird is that they keep putting "policy" in the constitution.

What is even more dangerous is that they state things like fairness into the constution. It is a political judgement as to whether something is fair, and taxes need to be used to stuimulate economies or pull them back that goes way beyond just funding the govt.

THis basically means that anyone can point the finger at any government anytime to claim something is unfair, if it effects them personally, and hey presto the government has broken the constitution. The absolute nature of government is that it cannot be fair to all, all the time.

I reckon a fair system would prevent the concentration of wealth into the hands of so few. Hmmmm. Good luck changing that in Thailand.

[Dogmatix]

The government keeps going on about creating income equality through tax reform but always refuse to quantify how much net revenue is expected from new taxes like inheritance and gift tax and land and buildings tax or how exactly net revenue, if indeed positive, will be used to help the poor. There are good reasons for this because the poor will see no benefit from any of it. Ultimately they will have to raise VAT which hits the poor hardest, since they spend all of their income and pay VAT on all of it.

The best way to improve the lot of the poor would be to come up with genuine ideas to stimulate the economy and improve wage growth but they are not doing this because they have no idea how.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Dogmatix

[Thai at Heart]

The government keeps going on about creating income equality through tax reform but always refuse to quantify how much net revenue is expected from new taxes like inheritance and gift tax and land and buildings tax or how exactly net revenue, if indeed positive, will be used to help the poor. There are good reasons for this because the poor will see no benefit from any of it. Ultimately they will have to raise VAT which hits the poor hardest, since they spend all of their income and pay VAT on all of it.

The best way to improve the lot of the poor would be to come up with genuine ideas to stimulate the economy and improve wage growth but they are not doing this because they have no idea how.

They can keep loading up duties on all sorts of things to raise money.

I just dont' think the constitution should mandate this type of thing. And why if a political party owuld do it, it woudl be populist, but for the junta to do it , it is cool is beyond me.

[djjamie]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

What, the pension? This is far from a populist policy. It should be a basic human right afforded to any citizen by its government in any country to promote income security in old age. Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so. In return governments should do more to support their human rights and freedoms, including their right to live in dignity and security—free from want and free from fear.

If you think that is a populist policy then shame on you.

In April, 2009 The Right Honorable Ahbisit introduced the 500 baht pension scheme helping 5 million old age citizens while acknowledging that it is still not enough to bridge the income gap and asked for time to find funding sources elsewhere to increase it. Had the rice scheme, costing over 700 billion baht not been introduced this pension could have allowed those 5 million citizens access to over 1000 baht a month.

Well done I say and a wonderful initiative giving dignity and respect to the truly needy. Not warehouse owners or millers or politicians or transport companies.

"Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so."

You know, that's SUCH total B$. True for some. Definitely NOT true for some. If you can make sweeping statements like that, then I can make another one and assert that most of those for whom it IS true have ALSO responsibly planned and provided for their own old age. Yours is purely an emotional argument designed to appeal to the easily led, non-thinking, non-productive, do-gooders who always seem to know what's good for everybody else and that government must be the one to do it, and expand the concept of the TRULY needy to include as much of the electorate as possible (for obvious reasons). Arguments and policies just like this are responsible for debacles like the one in Greece right now (with more to come...)! They dilute NEEDED benefits, and bankrupt economies.

Wonderful compassionate view point.

So my grandfather that worked all his life as a factory worker, paid tax and his house off, but had limited savings should starve to death with his wife who was a nurse because they "bankrupt economies"

But that is digressing. I was talking about the pension NOt being a populist policy, but a basic human right for the people that need it. Not the people that don't.

[Srikcir]

It will be interesting to see how many words will be in the final constitution considering the "kitchen sink" approach being used by CDC/NRC.

The USA Constitution is about 8,500 words. India's english version of its constitution is 40 times longer than the USA as the longest national constitution in the world. The english version of Thailand's 2007 Constitution is somewhat more than 47,000 words.

I expect the final NCPO constitution will be around 300,000 words in the english version. Unfortunately, most of it will be focused on constraining an open and free democratic society. And do nothing to safeguard its sanctity from further military intervention. The Thai 2015 Constitution will be long on words and short on life.

[casualbiker]

Why shouldn't it be in there?

Why should an enelected govt be able to mandate anything financial into untouchable law for the future. Just because its a nice law doesn't make it right that it happens. And also a fairer tax system? What the hell does that mean? Define "fair"?

So, cut taxes for the rich, is that fair? Cut them for the poor? Is that fair? They might as well legistlate that all Thai food must be "arooy"..

Personally I think any law that is for the good of the people is good, also note that these do nit BECOME law until an elected government forms the required laws and committees . These are guidelines that MAY possibly be written into the charter.

I didn't see many complaining when Yinglucks government cut 5% off the corporation tax or when the reduced the initial income tax increment down to 5%. Mainly to make the corporate tax cut palatable.

[seajae]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

so your country doesnt have a pension plan for its citizens or does your country deal in populist schemes as well, pensions and proper tax collection is how a country should be run but then that would mean the rich paying their fair share and all citizens treated equally(poor included) being taken care of in their old age, says a lot about those against or trying to ridicule it.

[hawker9000]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

What, the pension? This is far from a populist policy. It should be a basic human right afforded to any citizen by its government in any country to promote income security in old age. Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so. In return governments should do more to support their human rights and freedoms, including their right to live in dignity and security—free from want and free from fear.

If you think that is a populist policy then shame on you.

In April, 2009 The Right Honorable Ahbisit introduced the 500 baht pension scheme helping 5 million old age citizens while acknowledging that it is still not enough to bridge the income gap and asked for time to find funding sources elsewhere to increase it. Had the rice scheme, costing over 700 billion baht not been introduced this pension could have allowed those 5 million citizens access to over 1000 baht a month.

Well done I say and a wonderful initiative giving dignity and respect to the truly needy. Not warehouse owners or millers or politicians or transport companies.

"Throughout their lives, our elders have given their time and energy to helping others and they continue to do so."

You know, that's SUCH total B$. True for some. Definitely NOT true for some. If you can make sweeping statements like that, then I can make another one and assert that most of those for whom it IS true have ALSO responsibly planned and provided for their own old age. Yours is purely an emotional argument designed to appeal to the easily led, non-thinking, non-productive, do-gooders who always seem to know what's good for everybody else and that government must be the one to do it, and expand the concept of the TRULY needy to include as much of the electorate as possible (for obvious reasons). Arguments and policies just like this are responsible for debacles like the one in Greece right now (with more to come...)! They dilute NEEDED benefits, and bankrupt economies.

Wonderful compassionate view point.

So my grandfather that worked all his life as a factory worker, paid tax and his house off, but had limited savings should starve to death with his wife who was a nurse because they "bankrupt economies"

But that is digressing. I was talking about the pension NOt being a populist policy, but a basic human right for the people that need it. Not the people that don't.

'Nothing at all compassionate about enslaving people through government dependency. ('Nothing very intelligent about it either, unless you're one of the politicians or bureaucrats who get the actual benefit from it...)

Today, people buy new cars every year, take their expensive annual vacations overseas, eat out regularly, dutifully buy the latest & greatest of everything, keep "buying up" into homes they really can't afford, etc., etc., etc., avoiding the hard choices and making saving and financial planning their very last priority. Then, they arrive at retirement - surprise - broke & needy. OR, captured by the welfare system early on, they never put any effort into a productive career in the first place. Nearly the same result - broke, needy AND utterly dependent. And encouraged by every instrument of government to be precisely that. Everybody loves to share their anecdotes about the truly needy & deserving, and the rest of us are supposed to be stupid enough to extrapolate the simple truth of that into a massive fiction justifying creation of a welfare state with unearned benefits for everybody (except, of course, the poor dumb slobs who worked hard & saved and had the foresight to provide for themselves - THEY'RE punished with confiscation!).

MY grandfather ALSO worked hard all his life, ALSO paid tax, ALSO paid his house off. 'Was an immigrant and started with nothing! All six of his kids got through college, by helping each other mostly, and ended up nurses, a businessman, a university professor, and an engineer. HIs grandchildren ended up doctors, attorneys, engineers - not a single welfare case in the bunch. He certainly never got rich, but didn't starve or live in want in his old age. And the government never paid him a penny!

Edited February 20, 2015 by hawker9000

[tbthailand]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

what is absolutely weird is that they keep putting "policy" in the constitution.

What is even more dangerous is that they state things like fairness into the constution. It is a political judgement as to whether something is fair, and taxes need to be used to stuimulate economies or pull them back that goes way beyond just funding the govt.

THis basically means that anyone can point the finger at any government anytime to claim something is unfair, if it effects them personally, and hey presto the government has broken the constitution. The absolute nature of government is that it cannot be fair to all, all the time.

I reckon a fair system would prevent the concentration of wealth into the hands of so few. Hmmmm. Good luck changing that in Thailand.

Well, looking at it from that perspective, then if they intend to build trip-wires into the constitution, they are doing a fine job...

[englishoak]

Nevermind, this constitution will only have a very short life, just like all the rest.

[Thai at Heart]

No more populist ideas, huh? No more buying popularity?

what is absolutely weird is that they keep putting "policy" in the constitution.

What is even more dangerous is that they state things like fairness into the constution. It is a political judgement as to whether something is fair, and taxes need to be used to stuimulate economies or pull them back that goes way beyond just funding the govt.

THis basically means that anyone can point the finger at any government anytime to claim something is unfair, if it effects them personally, and hey presto the government has broken the constitution. The absolute nature of government is that it cannot be fair to all, all the time.

I reckon a fair system would prevent the concentration of wealth into the hands of so few. Hmmmm. Good luck changing that in Thailand.

Well, looking at it from that perspective, then if they intend to build trip-wires into the constitution, they are doing a fine job...

They are just creating massive policy paralysis.

It will also mean that Thailand won't be able to move to manage financial crisis properly and will never be able to reform its financial structures.

Right now Thailand is possibly one of the mist inequitable countries in the world. It is to many an unfair society. Problem is you cannot legislate fairness. You can legislate legality and right and wrong.

But, who decides if a redistributive system is fair or not, putting taxes up or down is political not moral. This constitution will end up being a horses ass.