OPINION

Mitigate global risks

Re: "What's next for India's Modi after poll win?" (Opinion, June 8).

The major elections across Asia in 2024 could have significant implications for global economic dynamics. As large nations like India potentially consolidate power under nationalist incumbents, there is a risk of rising protectionism and new trade barriers. This inward-looking shift among economic superpowers may create challenges for smaller countries in accessing international markets and maintaining diverse trade relationships.

To navigate this changing landscape, smaller nations must prioritise regional cooperation and explore alternative economic alliances. Strengthening ties within regional blocs can counterbalance protectionist tendencies and open new avenues for trade. Additionally, actively participating in multilateral forums and upholding international trade rules will be crucial for maintaining an open and inclusive global trading system.

Ultimately, fostering economic integration, diversifying trade relationships and advocating for a rules-based global order will be key for smaller countries to thrive amid potential shifts in the economic landscape resulting from the 2024 elections across Asia. Proactive engagement and cooperation will be essential to mitigate risks and seize opportunities for regional sustainable growth.

Tax plan needs time

Re "New overseas income rules", (Business, June 5).

Although no one welcomes additional taxes, the proposal to introduce global taxation on all income, whether remitted or not, would put Thailand on a par with most developed economies at a time when the government's revenue collection is falling below target due to sluggish economic growth that looks like persisting for some time. What is puzzling, though, is the move to initiate work on global taxation only six months into the first year of the introduction of a remittance tax on foreign source income, introduced last September through a legally questionable reinterpretation of the Revenue Code by the Revenue Department director-general, reversing a 1985 ruling.

While these two methods of taxing foreign source income are overlapping, there are differences that appear to mitigate in favour of taking a longer term view and opting for one method only, probably global taxation, and focusing on introducing that with detailed preparations.

Yet the Revenue Department trying to have its cake and eat it by precipitously introducing the remittance tax as a stopgap measure to raise some incremental revenue for a couple of years before introducing global taxation a couple of years later. One thing investors like is certainty and these flip-flops between tax regimes in a short space of time will be unnerving for foreigners and are likely to drive investment flows away from Thailand, as well as disincentivise foreigners from coming to work or retire in Thailand.

One example is that moving to a global taxation system regardless of remittance will blow up the tax exemption on remittances given to LTR visa holders through a Royal Decree, as they will have to pay Thai tax on their foreign source income whether they remit it or not. Many LTR visa are not even a year into their 10-year visas for which they paid high fees in the expectation of living in Thailand on tax free foreign income.

Surely it would make more sense for the department to spend two or three years, while a proper bill goes through the parliamentary process, to develop adequate supporting regulations.

More to China's story

Re: "Cycle of empires", (PostBag, June 1).

ML Saksiri Kridakorn's statement, "During the 18th century, China was the preeminent global power, with an economy that dwarfed those of other nations", seemed preposterous.

Human wisdom might have added that ML Kridakorn is an habitual Chinese apologist who fabricates his understanding upon a foundation of dubiously biased presumptions.

He blames the West for ruining China and creating a century of poverty. In fact, the Qing dynasty was pervasively corrupt, especially during the 100 years prior to its demise in 1912. Incompetence and systemic failures ruined China in the 18th century, not a few foreigners living in restricted quarters. From a human rights perspective it may be said the current authoritarian dictatorship in China is also a ruin of an especially pernicious kind. This is not, as ML Kridakorn would suggest, history repeating itself, but rather a new kind of destruction of the human soul, the extent of which humanity has yet to fathom.