Printable View
Any decisions made by these kangeroo junta appointed courts need to be reheard by unbiased impartial judiciary put in place by the newly elected democratic legal government of the people, and headed up by that democratically elected PM Yingluk who won the election in a historic landslide victory, against the illegitimate murderous amart junta PAD yellow nutters proxy government and hijackers of democracy and practicers of oppression and censorship :)
You can't argue with that
Could be worse ... could be raining
So Thaksin could have given them the money to buy them at full market price and there would not be a problem. It is common place in Thailand for families with money to move assets within the family. Is the Shinawatra family the only ones who are asked to pay tax on movement of assets within the family?Quote:
Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
Surely you can't be that stupid?
In terms of a black hole where ethics and some concept of equity should exist, Thaksins snaking out of paying capital gains tax on his profitable sale of Shincorp takes the cake. The national political leader, and I believe Thailands richest man at the time- I rest my case.
But in terms of legality it was Tried, and found not to be illegal.
I thought he originally had done it to abide ( bwahahaha ) by laws concerning the shareholdings of politicians then when they were sold the price came to light which saw him hoisted by his own retard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
I don’t think the capital gains issue was tried; all I can recall is the then head of the Thailand Securities and Exchange Commission, Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala, saying there was no wrong doing in the sale. This of course is the same Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala who is now the Finance Minister.
Can you find a link that shows there was trial on the capital gains issue?
TH
Ignoring the obvious...Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Thaksin was a greedy corrupt bastard, we know that. How about checking the others out: Banharn, Nevin, army generals, PAD funding, others, the list goes on and is never ending - Thaksin is just the standard red herring.
abhisit and korn had a chance to move the country forward and show their honesty, credentials, decency, call it what you want, they failed miserably time after time... miserably and murderously...
This is just more political crap. I'd love to see Thailand cleansed of corruption and abuse of power, so instead of picking on one chap for political reasons let's do it properly: all generals, privy council members, former PM's and cabinet ministers, head of all ministries, judges, etc, lets go through their accounts with a fine tooth comb and start jailing the corrupt bastards... We don't want to, can't do that... okay then, back to this red herring Thaksin crap...
The fact that propaganda brother no 1, TH, is vocal on this thread, shows us what a load of rubbish it is... What will the PADites do next? Start more troubles with Cambodia? Rumours of a republic? Newin doing his Cambodian black magic? Or will they just stick to the "but, Thaksin..." dummy spitting... Right, well let's do Thaksin properly, start with his Singaporean deal that caused all the outcry and go through it with a fine tooth comb in a transparent manner with ALL details made available to the public, let's get going... can't? Why not? SCB... Oh, right, best not go there then, let's hide that and start somewhere else...
Actually the Shin Corp sale as been pretty well picked over. What details are you missing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bettyboo
The only missing piece that I know of is WinMark and the dividends on the hidden assets that it used to buy Shin Corp shares at 38 a week before it was sold at 49. So, why don't we start with the 2001 assest concealment case? Or maybe the PTT IPO? Or the TPI bankruptcy case just to name a few.
TH
Said it on the other thread. The sister is the emu to Thaksin's Rod Hull.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded. The Shinawatra fingers will be back in the collective cookie jar soon enough.
You know exactly what I'm talking about, if you don't then you should. Starts with "T"...Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaihomeActually the Shin Corp sale as been pretty well picked over. What details are you missing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bettyboo
The only missing piece that I know of is WinMark and the dividends on the hidden assets that it used to buy Shin Corp shares at 38 a week before it was sold at 49. So, why don't we start with the 2001 assest concealment case? Or maybe the PTT IPO? Or the TPI bankruptcy case just to name a few.
TH
In fact, running through all of the CPB deals would be as good a place to start as any, or army procurement deals, etc... If you PADites want to talk about corruption then lets do it properly...
But you don't want to talk about corruption, you just use Thaksin as a red herring as your group is the most corrupt going. Your little smokescreen is so very boring. & as voted time after time by the masses, they are very aware of the PADite tricks and lies. That's not to say that Thaksin isn't a tricky liar, he is, but just not on the scale as the group that persecute him the most...
the offshore sale was illegal for Thaksin to carry
the offshore sale was also taxable,
he got away with it as usual, but technically, they took away his capital gains, so not sure how he can pay taxes on something they took away by court order
^ that's two good posts today, Paps, you're on a roll (or has somebody hacked your account?). :)
Bangkok Post : The world's your oyster if your aunt is PM
MAKING SENSE
The world's your oyster if your aunt is PM
This week, Revenue Department officials acknowledged publicly that the department would not appeal a judgement by the Central Tax Court overturning a multi-billion-baht tax judgement against Panthongtae and Pinthongta Shinawatra.
- Published: 11/08/2011 at 12:00 AM
- Newspaper section: News
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
Non-taxable: Panthongtae Shinawatra and his younger sister Pinthongta. Revenue officials have decided not to appeal against a court ruling on the 12-billion-baht tax case against the two multimillionaires.
This news comes the same week their aunt Yingluck Shinawatra has been named Thailand's 28th prime minister and first female leader.
Serendipity, no doubt.
A refresher course: In January 2006, then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, Ms Yingluck's brother, announced the sale of the family's 49% stake in telecom giant Shin Corp, to Singapore's Temasek Holdings.
It emerged later that the shares were partially held in an offshore holding company, Ample Rich Investment. On Jan 20, 2006, Ample Rich sold 329.2 million Shin shares to Thaksin's children at the price of one baht a share. The following business day, Mr Panthongtae and Ms Pinthongta sold off the shares to Temasek at a price of 49.25 baht each, pocketing capital gains of 15.88 billion baht.
The Revenue Department announced that the transaction was subject to taxes worth some 12 billion baht, prompting an appeal by the Shinawatra siblings.
The Central Tax Court, on Dec 29, 2010, ruled in favour of Mr Panthongtae and Ms Pinthongta, arguing that the two acted as nominees for Thaksin and thus could not be considered as the share owners for tax purposes. This was despite the fact that Mr Panthongtae and Ms Pinthongta had both offered testimony in court attesting that they were the owners of the Shin shares and that they were not acting as proxies for their parents.
But the court judgement was logical if viewed from the perspective that it was consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling in early 2010, which found that Thaksin was the actual owner of the Shin shares and thus guilty of conflict of interest in policy-making during his term as premier. The Supreme Court ordered the confiscation of 46 billion baht in funds gained from the Temasek sale as a penalty.
The original argument put forth by the department was that the purchase of the shares by Mr Panthongtae and Ms Pinthongta, as directors of Ample Rich, at a below-value price represented a fringe benefit subject to taxation on the gains received, equal to 7.94 billion baht per person.
The two Shinawatra siblings, as part of their defence, presented a letter from a department official stating that the purchase of shares at a below-market price, if purchased outside of the Stock Exchange of Thailand, was not subject to tax.
The department's actions in the case have been in line with precedent.
A 1995 ruling on the issue of personal tax liability for shares received free or at a discount from fair value, states clearly that taxes are owed on the benefits received.
The ruling by the tax panel, chaired by then finance permanent secretary Aran Thammano, said directors or staff receiving shares at below-market value from a juristic person are liable for tax liability on the difference between the market value and sale price under Section 39 of the Tax Code.
The Central Tax Court, however, essentially ruled that the 1995 rule did not apply in the case of the Shinawatra children, as they were not the legitimate owners of the Shin shares from the start.
I can understand why the Revenue Department has declined to appeal the tax case. Though at the same time, I can't help but feel a sense of unease about the entire issue. After all, the fact of the matter is that the Shin shares were sold at a hefty profit - must there not be taxes paid by someone?
And the fact that the Shinawatra children originally testified before the Central Tax Court that they were the "original owners" of the shares, only to reverse their defence after the Supreme Court ruling came down... well, that also is troubling.
Personally, I feel justice will not really be served so long as such questions remain. If we really desire answers, then the department must exhaust all of its legal options, including appealing the lower court ruling. Appeal not with any real expectations of a different outcome, but to prove the point that the tax authority is genuinely committed to the principles of equality, fairness and justice - for all.
Wichit Chantanusornsiri
Well, lets face it, rich people avoiding tax is a full time profession in the West too. I was a part of it. US politicians put their considerable stake in companies they controlled, or had considerable equity in, into "Blind Trusts" that they nominally do not control- but everyone knows thats bullshit. It's not so different.
The whole idea that parents cannot give their children their assets while they are still alive is totally stupid. The price of the shares and what they could be sold for is totally irrelevant. This is not a gift to staff as a benefit to offset taxable wages. The assets would have been theirs by inheritance if their parents died any way.
Anyway, via punitive (and judicially dubious) measures, he ended up paying tax. I don't think he should get it back- that should be part of the 'deal'.
Yes but here it is about Thaksin. Everybody knows he is evil.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Really he should have given all his buisnesses to charities before he took office. But I am sure people could find blame in that too.
^ Funny as hell that you 3 are defending what is in anyone's book a blatant abuse of power. That others do it is a failed argument. In Syria now they are murdering citizens on the streets. Does that mean the red shirt murders of last year are justified...? One government does it so another government is okay to do it....your argument....not mine, right?
11 Billion in avoided taxes is not some minor infringement. He was Prime Minister. And if you recall, laws were played with to enable a lot of the process and sale to Temasek to proceed (such as the foreign ownership laws being changed from 25% to 49%). Thaksin could've only achieved this due to his position.
https://teakdoor.com/business-finance...tml#post303348
Getting proof on whether Mr Thaksin managed the shares is crucial because the stakes are high in what many suspect were conflicts of interest. For example, two days before the Shinawatra and Damapong families' sale of a 49.6% stake in Shin Corp to Temasek, parliament approved the Telecommunications Business Operations Act (No.2) 2006, increasing the foreign ownership limit in telecom businesses from 25% to 49%.
You haven't seen me defending the illegal and unconstitutional military coup SD, neither the abuse of power that lead to Abhisit's shoe-in, neither Thaksin's corruption and tax avoidance- at least ethically, because legally the case seems closed. So your 'point' is?
I am defending, and always will, the peoples Right of Suffrage. Thailand turned it's back on that, and the results speak for themselves. At least we have a legitimately appointed government now, but beyond commenting on the promising Cabinet line-up, I am certainly not going to hang my hat on predicting their results. We will be witness to that in real time, unless the country is subjected to establishment/ military thuggery again.
I remember from some posts in TeakDoor that the laws that allowed Thaksin taxfree sale of his assets were sponsored by the Democrats and already in the parliamentary process before Thaksin was elected. He was just one of the first who took advantage of it.
Is that correct?
You seem a little confused here. The 11 billion was estimated by taxing the difference the children paid for the shares and the amount they made in the sale. The court basically nullified the original share transfer therefore there is no 11 billion capital gains tax to be collected.Quote:
Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
What makes this ridiculous is that Thaksin could have sold the shares to his children at a greater price per share all the way up to market value and the so called capital gains would have been reduced towards zero.
Revenue explains Thaksin tax let offThe Revenue Department has explained its decision not to pursue a tax claim against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra on huge profits gained from the 2006 sale of ShinCorp shares to the Singapore government-owned Temasek Holdings.
- Published: 11/08/2011 at 05:57 PM
Department chief Sathit Rangkhasiri said on Thursday the shares were sold on the stock market.
The department therefore could not pursue the capital gains tax claim against the former prime minister.
The department had not appealed a judgement by the Central Tax Court dismssing a 12-billion-baht tax assessement against Pinthongta and Panthongtae Shinawatra for the Shin Corp sale following a ruling by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions that the two were not real owners of the shares, but were instead acting as nominees for their father, Thaksin.
Because of the court’s ruling, the actual owner of the Shin Corp shares was Thaksin, said Mr Sathit. The ousted prime minister was not required to pay tax because he sold his shares to Temasek Holdings on the stock market, not outside the market.
Former finance minister Korn Chatikavanij has slammed the Revenue Department for its failure to pursue the tax claim against Thaksin, saying he had asked it several times to clarify its position.
The shares were sold to Temasek immediately after the Thaksin caretaker cabinet changed the law by ministerial regulation to allow the sale of the family's entire 49% share in ShinCorp to a foreign entity, far in excess of the previous level.
The article was doing well up until this point but it didn't include that other telco's at the time had higher foreign ownership then the law allowed and the change brought these companies into line with the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by DroversDog
but its been done before ......Quote:
Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
does that include the burmese generals' shares in shinsat ?Quote:
Originally Posted by DroversDog