Abhisit queries 'no tax' for Thaksin kids

**Butterfly** · 12-08-2011, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by nostromo

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

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.

typical right wing authoritarian thinking, do as I say, not as I do. Double standards is their MO.

Originally Posted by sabang

I am defending, and always will, the peoples Right of Suffrage.

glad to see you are a strong supporter of Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini.

You are not getting anywhere with that .

the truth needs to be told. That's always getting somewhere when the truth is told.

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 02:33 PM

Butters thanks for a very intelligent reply. Not that I agree. What you said of Ample Rich is your take. All large corporations have offshore companies, I have one too.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by nostromo

"The transaction, done through the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), was made without capital gains tax" Your BKK Post. There is no tax on stock exchange deals made on open market in Thailand. For Thaksin or anyone else involved in stock trading. I suppose you dont have any shares - except of TAN and Yellow Shirt Co-op - so you might not be familiar with this.

This is true for Individuals, not for companies. In the case of "Ample Rich", it was a corporation, located offshore, and therefore was tax liable on the amount they would SELL with first a 10% withholding tax on total proceeds, and then a declaration to the Revenue department to calculate the full amount tax due based on cost.

Technically the offshore company is tax liable, not the individual shareholders, that's why they couldn't ask the tax to Thaksin children. I suspect that Ample Rich had received only 90% of the sale proceeds and 10% was withhold by the Exchange for the tax authority. It's still a good deal for Thaksin but the purpose of the Ample Rich offshore corporation wasn't tax avoidance, au contraire since the tax code here is very harsh for corporation investing in listed shares. The real purpose of the offshore company was share manipulation and asset concealment. They already ruled on that and I am sure Ample Rich came into the equation for the decision.

**Butterfly** · 12-08-2011, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by nostromo

All large corporations have offshore companies, I have one too.

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by nostromo

All large corporations have offshore companies, I have one too.

You do not have one? Fucking loser? Everyone in City has one or 10

**Butterfly** · 12-08-2011, 03:46 PM

we all have one, that's not the question, it's just your silly one liner making such assumptions

**baldrick** · 12-08-2011, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by sabang

and they can't pin anything on him with regard to this.

or they are too scared now ?

Originally Posted by sabang

but it has been found to be legal.

then why did he got to all the trouble of transferring to the kids ?

butters answered the question - ample rich was there for asset concealment , and the transaction was structured like it was for tax avoidance

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by Butterfly

we all have one, that's not the question, it's just your silly one liner making such assumptions

Actually looking at you, I think you dont have one. (Whistling Casablanca and Hump Bogart) Now what is your recipe for better future?

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by sabang

and they can't pin anything on him with regard to this.

or they are too scared now ?

Originally Posted by sabang

but it has been found to be legal.

then why did he got to all the trouble of transferring to the kids ?

butters answered the question - ample rich was there for asset concealment , and the transaction was structured like it was for tax avoidance

Which is all the norm for any corporation in eastern or western world. And to take it further, human rights issue

Should a man or a woman be free to transfer his or her wealth to her or his minors

**Perota** · 12-08-2011, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by nostromo

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by nostromo

"The transaction, done through the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET), was made without capital gains tax" Your BKK Post. There is no tax on stock exchange deals made on open market in Thailand. For Thaksin or anyone else involved in stock trading. I suppose you dont have any shares - except of TAN and Yellow Shirt Co-op - so you might not be familiar with this.

This is true for Individuals, not for companies. In the case of "Ample Rich", it was a corporation, located offshore, and therefore was tax liable on the amount they would SELL with first a 10% withholding tax on total proceeds, and then a declaration to the Revenue department to calculate the full amount tax due based on cost.

Technically the offshore company is tax liable, not the individual shareholders, that's why they couldn't ask the tax to Thaksin children. I suspect that Ample Rich had received only 90% of the sale proceeds and 10% was withhold by the Exchange for the tax authority. It's still a good deal for Thaksin but the purpose of the Ample Rich offshore corporation wasn't tax avoidance, au contraire since the tax code here is very harsh for corporation investing in listed shares. The real purpose of the offshore company was share manipulation and asset concealment. They already ruled on that and I am sure Ample Rich came into the equation for the decision.

Butters thanks for a very intelligent reply. Not that I agree. What you said of Ample Rich is your take. All large corporations have offshore companies, I have one too.

Mine is bigger than yours ...

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 08:04 PM

Dont think so. But we can trade

**baldrick** · 12-08-2011, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by nostromo

Which is all the norm for any corporation in eastern or western world.

and as a leader it surely is an abuse of trust and a bad example to be setting.

**Gerbil** · 12-08-2011, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by sabang

Nobody has been able to set up a viable third party in the UK, Australia or US, ever

In the UK, the viable third party formed and still around is the Labour party, until then it was a 2-horse race between Libs & Tories. It was only in the 1920's it overtook the Libs.

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by nostromo

Which is all the norm for any corporation in eastern or western world.

and as a leader it surely is an abuse of trust and a bad example to be setting.

And where there is no abuse?

**DroversDog** · 12-08-2011, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by nostromo

Which is all the norm for any corporation in eastern or western world.

and as a leader it surely is an abuse of trust and a bad example to be setting.

It is right everybody to minimize what the government takes.

**nostromo** · 12-08-2011, 11:39 PM

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by nostromo

Which is all the norm for any corporation in eastern or western world.

and as a leader it surely is an abuse of trust and a bad example to be setting.

It is right everybody to minimize what the government takes.

Somehow, I have felt for some years, better the less politicians affect our life or business, better our life is

**StrontiumDog** · 13-08-2011, 09:54 AM

Bangkok Post : Shinawatra tax collection haunts big bureaucrats

Shinawatra tax collection haunts big bureaucrats

Published: 13/08/2011 at 12:00 AM
Newspaper section: News

The issue of taxing the profits which the Shinawatra family made from selling their stake in Shin Corp to Temasek Holdings is in the news again after the Revenue Department decided not to appeal against the decision of the Central Tax Court in favour of Panthongtae and Pinthongtha Shinawatra.

Panthongtae Shinawatra and his younger sister Pinthongta will escape tax on proceeds from the sale of Shin Corp to Temasek Holdings, after the Revenue Department decided not to appeal the decision of the Central Tax Court which found they were not the legal owners of the shares.

It found they are not obliged to pay tax on their 12 billion baht profit, notes Post Today.

The Finance Ministry and the Revenue Department decided to return the confiscated cash, land title deeds and stock certificates belonging to the two children of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra which they deposited as surety against the assessed tax amount. The department cited a ruling by the Central Tax Court that the department could not tax the pair as they were not the real owners of the Shin Corp shares as ruled by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions. Thaksin, not his children, was the real owner.

The resolution to not appeal the tax case to the higher court was approved by the Finance Ministry and former finance minister Korn Chatikavanich, it added, as if to protect itself from claims that it acted arbitrarily.

Post Today notes the department may think that if it appeals, the chance of victory is slight as the Central Tax Court's decision was in accord with the ruling of the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions.

However, Post Today insists the department should appeal to the highest court to establish a precedent as the department has often done in the past when it lost tax cases to individuals and corporates.

Panthongtae and Pinthongta were accomplices in agreeing to allow Thaksin to transfer his holding in Ample Rich to them at a one baht a share, it said.

They sold their shares for 49 baht, reaping a profit of 48 baht per share on which the paper says they should pay tax.

The transaction resulted in a 12 billion baht profit although the transaction did not actually occur on the stock exchange but was reached outside beforehand.

Post Today speculated the decision of the department in favour of the pair was aimed at currying favour with the Shinawatra family.

The annual reshuffle of the bureaucracy is nearing. Revenue Department director-general Sathit Rangkasiri, who was appointed by the former Democrat-led government, could be replaced by deputy permanent secretary Benja Luicharoen, who is well-known for his opinion that the two children should not have to pay tax on their profits from selling their holding in Ample Rich to Temasek Holdings.

Earlier, Mr Sathit announced the department was ready to cut the corporate tax to 20% when it was known Pheu Thai Party had won the July 3 election.

It was unusual for a high-ranking bureaucrat to come out to announce such a tax policy change when the new government had yet to be formed.

Post Today also wonders why Mr Sathit failed to elaborate on how the department will tax the profit earned by the Shinawatra family in selling its stake to Temasek Holdings, now the department acknowledges that the stake belonged to Thaksin and Khunying Potjaman.

He simply brushes the question aside, saying the department's legal division is looking into the issue.

The department should immediately declare it will tax Thaksin and Khunying Potjaman for their profits, it says.

The tax case has a statutory limit of five years.

The profit was earned in 2006. Thaksin and Khunying Potjaman were supposed to file a tax return concerning the profit in 2007. They failed to do so.

If the department does not proceed with charging both for tax evasion, the case will expire in 2012, just a few months away.

Post Today believes the department is aware of the five-year statutory expiration date for formally charging people with tax evasion.

Yet the department and the Finance Ministry could face legal suits from interested parties for failing to carry out their duty honestly and causing damage to the state as detailed in Section 157 of the Criminal Code, it warns.

Post Today would like to remind the department of the plight of Siroj Sawatpanich, who was promoted from deputy director-general to director-general for helping Khunying Potjaman not pay tax after transferring her shares to her brother, and for insisting the two children did not have to pay tax after selling their Shin Corp stake in 2006.

He was later judged guilty by the National Anti-Corruption Commission which recommended his dismissal without pension in 2009.

The Finance Ministry's disciplinary committee later reduced the penalty to dismissal with a pension. After the September 2006 coup, Mr Siroj promptly proceeded with taxing the children.

It was too late. The Revenue Department's reputation was severely damaged.

Even his new gambit could not save him from being dismissed from his post as the NACC found him to be at fault for helping the Shinawatra family avoid paying tax.

Post Today is warning the Revenue Department and Finance Ministry not to fall victim to the curse of Shinawatra tax avoidance again.

**Butterfly** · 13-08-2011, 03:05 PM

I am sure our red supporters for the cause of the poor will be pleased of such double standards

as long as Khun Thaksin has his billions back, the cause of the poor will be served

**DroversDog** · 13-08-2011, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I am sure our red supporters for the cause of the poor will be pleased of such double standards

as long as Khun Thaksin has his billions back, the cause of the poor will be served

There is no double standards if the law was equally applied. If the law is only used to go after one person then the use of the law is wrong and the law itself is brought into question.

**DroversDog** · 13-08-2011, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

It was too late. The Revenue Department's reputation was severely damaged.

The revenue department reputation was severely damaged by complying with the wishes of the coup leaders. Of course we know that they didn't have a choice and it is good to see them start putting things right again.

**DroversDog** · 13-08-2011, 03:34 PM

Bangkok Post : Shinawatra tax collection haunts big bureaucrats

The Bangkok Post has made 'The Nation' look good over the last couple of months. Their journalistic standards have plummeted from an already low value right into the abyss. This so called 'News Item' is just total crap.

**LooseBowels** · 13-08-2011, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by DroversDog

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

It was too late. The Revenue Department's reputation was severely damaged.

The revenue department reputation was severely damaged by complying with the wishes of the coup leaders. Of course we know that they didn't have a choice and it is good to see them start putting things right again.

Not just the revenue, the whole fcuckin lot was totally and utterly debased by the illegal junta coup, and the "coup-issued law", whatever the fcuck that was,

**StrontiumDog** · 30-08-2011, 04:25 PM

Thai-ASEAN News Network

Revenue Dept Asked to Clarify Tax Issues on Shin Corp Share Sales

UPDATE : 30 August 2011

The deputy finance minister has demanded a report from the Revenue Department on its decision not to collect 12 billion baht worth of taxes from the sale of Shin Corp shares by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Deputy Finance Minister Boonsong Teriyapirom says he has ordered Revenue Department Director-General Satit Rungkasiri to prepare a report and issue an official statement to the media to clarify the agency's decision to not to collect retroactive taxes worth 12 billion baht on the sale of Shin Corp shares by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

He said it is important to issue a clarification as the issue involves many legal matters and is in the spotlight.

Meanwhile, Satit said he will make a statement after September 2, which is the agency's anniversary.

He added that he will also clarify whether any Revenue Department officials must be responsible for liabilities and damage in relation to the case, in which Bannapot Damapong, brother of Thaksin's divorced wife Pojaman, was convicted of evading tax payments worth 546 million baht from share sales since 1997.

**fridgemagnet** · 30-08-2011, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I am sure our red supporters for the cause of the poor will be pleased of such double standards

as long as Khun Thaksin has his billions back, the cause of the poor will be served

The one & only real current agenda of this new government...

**StrontiumDog** · 07-09-2011, 11:56 AM

Thai-ASEAN News Network

Revenue Department Cheif Avoids Questions Over Tax Return to Shinawatra Family

UPDATE : 7 September 2011

The revenue department's chief bolted when the press questioned him on his decision not to appeal the court order for a tax return to the children of ousted Premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

Director-General of the Revenue Department Sathit Rangkhasri rushed to the exit after yesterday's press conference on the RD Giving Art Award.

Sathit's escape came when he saw a throng of press members waiting for his explanation over his department's decision to give up its appeal against a court order to return 12 billion baht in taxes to Panthongthae and Pinthongtha Shinawatra, children of fugitive former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

The assets were frozen after the two were orginally found to have been guilty of tax evasion in the sales of Shin Crop shares in 2006.

The Shinawatra family later proved that the children did not own the shares, so were not liable for the tax evasion.

Sathit previously pledged to provide the details of the planned tax return and the department's policies after September 2.

The department still has not released an explanation of its decision to the Office of the Auditor General or OAG.

The OAG demanded the department to elaborate on its reason not to petition the court's ruling, and which party must be responsible for the damage resulting from the decision.

**StrontiumDog** · 07-09-2011, 11:59 AM

"The revenue department's chief bolted when the press questioned him on his decision not to appeal the court order for a tax return to the children of ousted Premier Thaksin Shinawatra."

Says it all really.

Thread: Abhisit queries 'no tax' for Thaksin kids

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions