OPINION

Leadership call

Re: "I'm not certain whether the conflicts (at the Royal Thai Police) will ever be solved", (InQuote, June 21) and "RTP probe lacks results", (Editorial, June 21).

I fully agree with PM Srettha, who said, "I'm not certain whether the conflicts (at the Royal Thai Police) will ever be solved," for as the Srettha-appointed panel reported, "there are conflicts at every level of the RTP."

But, Mr Srettha, one must at least try. As PM, you oversee the Police Commission; the final responsibility is yours. In 2020, ex-graft buster Vicha Mahakun submitted his report on the mishandling of the Red Bull scion Vorayuth "Boss" Yoovidhaya case with recommendations on how to reform the RTP and public prosecutor's office. Mr Srettha, live up to your duty. Reveal, update, and implement the Vicha Mahakun report.

Thai tax bites

Re: "Retirees seek clarity", (PostBag, June 19).

Thai banks do not tax remittances on arrival. If correspondent Joninnak's 800,000 baht is taxable, it will be payable via his tax forms in the first three months of the following year.

The final straw

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

I treat this news with sadness that I compose and forward these reflections, but this announcement that the Revenue Department may now try to impose payment of income tax on foreign revenues of non-citizens of this country staying more than 180 days per year, irrelevant if they remit money in the country or not during a given year, is the last straw.

I decided 35 years ago to remain in Thailand after completing a two-year MBA programme at the then "Graduate Institute of Business Administration" of Chulalongkorn University. I found love during this process, got married, and worked in Thailand and nearby Asian countries up to retirement 20 years ago. We built a house in Nonthaburi and lived happily ever after.

Up to now.

When we decided to establish ourselves in Thailand, it was based on numerous factors, the taxation system being a crucial one. But now, the government wants to change all that by taxing, in my case, at a rate of 35%, worldwide income even though no remittance is transferred to the country during a given year and seemingly without consideration of any potential double taxation issue.

In Canada, my home country, as a resident, I would be subjected to a similar tax rate, but, and this is a major difference, I would also receive free health care and multiple other social benefits that I will never get in Thailand. Furthermore, I could work again if necessary without having to beg for a work permit, own land to build another house or acquire citizenship. In the case of my spouse, these last two elements are both a pipe dream for us "aliens" living in Thailand.

Taxation is a social contract between the taxman (or woman) and the taxpayer, not a one-way ticket to rob people of their money without giving anything in return. This is not just unfair but despicable; "scam the foreigners as much as you can" seems the motivation to initiate such a strategy. It may be inspired from the infamous dual pricing policy practised by government managed national parks, museums, and many other institutions.

Therefore, we have to initiate the process of identifying some suitable countries more friendly to retirees, and to our surprise, there are at least a dozen that offer special visas for pensioners that include the right to remain in the country tax-free. Belize and Panama are two of these, both closer to my home country but with a gentler climate than either Montreal (too cold) or Nonthaburi (now too hot).

So, it is with great sadness that we may be forced to sell the house and relocate outside Thailand; as we have grown older and frailer, this is proving way more difficult and stressful for the spouse who never thought about leaving her country.

And we suspect that we may not be alone in deciding that enough is enough. We will miss the Thai smiles, the easygoing atmosphere, and the excellent food, but we will have no regrets about forgetting the Immigration Department's various hassles, treating us as inmates on parole with never-ending 90 days of reporting, yearly painful visa extensions, etc. So, maybe sooner than later, we may forward to our beloved PostBag a final "Adios Amigos"; for the time being we will monitor very attentively what is coming out from this ominous announcement.

To tax or not to tax

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

The new tax on foreign income seems to be a major issue among the expat community. The massive amount of information/misinformation/ seems to make this a horror story for foreigners, resulting in a mass exodus. As a long-term retiree, I have a number of concerns.

Anyone having tax taken from their income here will have to have a Thai tax ID. It has been suggested that this will be the responsibility of the banking community, whose job is to enforce the new regulations. There is also the issue of what is and isn't taxable based on local tax law. I am under the impression that my US Social Security is not taxable here in the kingdom. I have my SS cheque deposited in a US brokerage account and have the 65,000 baht wired here monthly. I have all the necessary documentation to substantiate these transactions, but will the banks sit down with each individual to ascertain their income source and whether it is taxable?

Secondly, it is a fact that most Thai people file no income tax, but in the US, we have the option of taking a standard deduction or itemised deductions when filing to lower our tax liability. These deductions include medical expenses, mortgage payments, interest and others. The total is deducted from your income to determine your liability or refund. If we have Thai taxes deducted from our forced income here, will we have the option to file a tax return and as a non-person, how will all that work? Do they even have deductions allowable on Thai tax returns?

I'm sure that someone has some answers which should be disseminated to the foreign community so we can prepare for what is to come. It is sad when a government forces retirees to bring money into the country and then use that money to support their projects, as their own tax base is inadequate.

Broken promises

Re: "Nato chief urges PM to meet defence GDP target", (World, June 21).

The US attacks Russia for invading Ukraine but the US provoked the invasion by insisting on Ukraine's right to join Nato.

In 1990, to secure Gorbachev's agreement to German reunification, the US promised that the West would not move east "not an inch". Gorbachev did not get the promise in writing, but material in US National Archives shows that it was repeated verbally several times by US and other Western leaders.

When the US broke the promise, there was nothing the Russians could do about it, but it was clear that they would regard Nato next door in Ukraine as an unacceptable threat to their national security, much as Russian missiles in Cuba were seen as a threat by the US. Before the invasion, Mr Putin warned that an unacceptable threat would provoke a reaction on their part. The US ignored the warnings and continued to insist that Ukraine would join. We all know what happened next.

Between 2 titans

The US-China technological rivalry has emerged as a defining feature of contemporary geopolitics, affecting global technology and economic landscapes. This conflict is characterised by the two countries' competition over the development, control, and influence of advanced technologies.

The roots of this tech war lie in China's rapid technological advancement and its ambitions to become a global tech leader, as articulated in its "Made in China 2025" policy. In response, the US has taken several measures to curb China's technological rise, including imposing tariffs on Chinese goods, banning Chinese telecom giant Huawei from US markets, and restricting Chinese access to critical technologies like advanced semiconductors. Furthermore, the US has scrutinised and imposed restrictions on Chinese tech companies like TikTok and WeChat, with potential bans citing data privacy and national security risks.

What does this mean for Thailand? The escalating tensions between the US and China over technology and trade have cast a long shadow across the global economy. The ramifications of this tech war extend far beyond the two combatants, rippling outward to impact nations around the world, including Thailand.

As a major manufacturing hub and a key player in regional supply chains, Thailand faces disruptions from the US-China trade frictions and technology decoupling. Its economic reliance on China, its largest trading partner, is juxtaposed against its strategic alliance with the US through the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework.

Thailand's 5G rollout exemplifies this precarious position, with the US pressuring countries to exclude Huawei from their 5G networks while China promotes Huawei technology as cost-effective and reliable. Geopolitical considerations must be balanced with economic incentives.

Nevertheless, every cloud has a silver lining. In response to the imposed tariffs and restrictions, China may look to expand its EV manufacturing within Asia, potentially shifting its export base to Thailand. Additionally, the tech war could also spur Thailand to bolster domestic innovation capabilities to reduce over-reliance on foreign technologies.

As the tech war rages on, Thailand must carefully find its way through the intertwining dynamics that are in play. This requires strategic foresight and a balanced approach to maximise opportunities and mitigate risks, positioning Thailand favourably in the evolving global tech ecosystem.