.. Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Ah! So it really comes out. This is really just Gaddies impression of what he thinks will come to pass for farangs and not an authoritative source. Refer to my whingers post for details! Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 suadum said:Ah! So it really comes out. This is really just Gaddies impression of what he thinks will come to pass for farangs and not an authoritative source. Refer to my whingers post for details! Cheers, SD It's Gaddies impression of his lawyers impression. Now all the convention goers are paranoid. Lawyers love to keep people nervous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 No, suadum, I have simply been honest and posted the sources of my information. Pause for a moment and consider this: I have been very transparent with the sources of my information, but no one - including those who disagree - has posted even one reference to their sources. Why aren't they able to do so? Instead, they have posted their impresssions about how these regulations - which no one disputes - really won't really be enforced. Let's be honest and clear: that is where matters stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shygye Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 suadum said:Ah! So it really comes out. This is really just Gaddies impression of what he thinks will come to pass for farangs and not an authoritative source. Refer to my whingers post for details! Cheers, SD SD, Talking on the phone with your customer outside the LOS requires a work permit. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. You better be nice to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Interesting thread....gadfly - you went the extra distance with sourcing your post...very clear, lots to think about, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneSoup Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 If you are going to talk about the situation at the gem market, how about telling the full story: A significant number of vendors of various nationalities established legitimate businesses at a gem market. They paid to incorporate businesses, they paid lease deposits on vendor space, they paid rent, they collected VAT as required on behalf of the government, and they paid taxes due on their earnings. The gem trading marktplace became quite successful. What then happened was that various foreign gem traders starting "hanging out" at the gem market - and then started their own "unofficial" gem trading - with gems displayed beneath their "trenchcoats." Eviently, some of these rougue traders got so obnoxious that they were actually soliciting trades from customers who were in the process of making purchases at the counters of registered businesses. And - guess what? Since the rouge traders weren't paying taxes, or rent, or having any utilities expenses - they could undercut the established businesses by a significant margin. As this pattern continued, more and more rogue traders started showing up - until it started seriously cutting into the viability of the legitimate businsses. Now - if you were a legitimate business - doing things correctly - watching your business (your livelihood) being destroyed by foreign black market traders, what would YOU do? I know what I would do - I would defend my business by screaming bloody murder until the police came and dragged the crooks away. The people who were arrested were NOT "innocent customers" of the registered gem traders - they were illegal competitors - "fingered" by the disgruntled shop owners. I do not see anything whatsoever wrong with how this situation played out. As a matter of fact, it reinforces my feeling of wellbeing - knowing that it is possible to defend the "level-ness" of the playing field, if you are a hard-working businessman, playing by the rules - and you are being undercut by "unburdened" competitors. Situations like this are in NO WAY WHATSOEVER related to legitimate transient business activities uch as attending or displaying at a trade exhibition, as a registered visitor or exhibitor. SS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kojis Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Soup, I'm a bit too drunk to answer this fully but basically it is a load of crap you're writing.... BUYERS were arrested ... not sellers...people in charge succeeded putting off worldwide buyers to come and spend their hundred thousand/millions of dollars in Thailand...perhaps if you hanged out more in Chantaburi you'd have a clue...I have friends at the moment who feel safer conducting business in Myanmar where farting is harldly legal than in Thailand...something really wrong there... I suspect or I actually understood that Chantaburi is VAT free, especially that most deals there are mad in the intend to export...hence VAT should be refunded if it was paid (but you know gemdealers don't dare to claim VAT back because if they do they get a raid from the customs department don't you ? )... so give me a break about VAT... besides...again... BUYERS were arrested... muslims it happened.... exactly the muslim soi was raided... really nobody felt much solidar... might be intended... might be not... Hardly anybody in Chantaburi paid taxes... just some regular bribes to local officials... including the biggest local guys there who had also official positions like judges etc... they lost big time... please give me more details about escaping VAT...please give me more details about unfair competion...especially from foreigners... You might be a cool guy StoneSoup but you're really out of your league(or domain) on that one cheers, and and get back to your senses... Kojis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kojis Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 One more point... when you talk about "rough traders hanging out in the gem market"... big deals in Chantaburi are made in private house (or factories) run 100% by thai people ....not in the market...big buyers didn't dare to come anymore... very weird stuff happened in that period... I was there and felt as unconfortable as if we were buying heroine... really you missed what was going on there... the guys who were arrested didn't mean fuck all... they were arrested to intimidate bigger fish...many locals... or indians already holding a work permit and exporting big time from Bangkok... Open your eyes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Thanks. I have provided sources for what I am saying so that others can make their own judgments. This is why I am bit chagrined when suadum says it?s just ?Gaddies impression of what he thinks will come to pass? while not posting a reference to a single source for his contrary views. Specifically, I have posted references to and quoted from books put out by two law firms and a quote of a third lawyer from the Bangkok Post on these subjects. I have given the names of firms (with links to their sites so that anyone check and come to their own conclusions of their bona fides) and the date of the Bangkok Post article. If anyone doubts what I posted, they can, for example, go to the Asia Books and pay the 500 Baht (or whatever they charge now) for the book I mentioned, get a copy of the Bangkok Post from the date I mentioned, etc. If the 500 Baht is the problem for sudum, I have given page numbers so that he can quickly turn to the page numbers of these sources in the store without actually having to buy this material. :: All of these sources are essentially saying the same thing. Chuckwow tries to discredit this by saying lawyers like to make people nervous. Maybe true; maybe not. But neither he nor anyone else gives a reference to any source saying something different. And what should you believe: (a) quotes from three different law firms with dates and publication information you can check yourself or ( an anonymous poster on this website. This stuff about ?impressions? is a good example here of misdirection and mischaracterization. I have given sources for what I am saying about the state of the law here, other members have confirmed they are hearing the same thing and other members and I have given examples of how it is implemented. In response, I hear post by members saying this would never happen ? in other words, their ?impressions? of what happens here - but I don?t see any references to any sources to back-up what they are saying. I see disputes about the details of some of the examples provided by other members (some of those examples I am not familiar with and therefore can?t comment on ? the jewelry thing), but I don?t see anyone disputing any of this identifying any sources to back up what they are saying. Thanks again, and to suadum and chuckwow, if you have a source saying something different, post it here. I think we are willing to be convinced, but now you need to back up what you?re saying. We?re into what, page 6 now of this thread, and not a single cite to a source to back up the contrary view? With all due respect, time to put up or shut up. I expect your next post to have a source to back up what your saying. Show us what you have. If you can't do so, well I think that says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Basically, for the sake of this thread, all your law books and sources can be boiled down to one sentence....'The definition of work is extremely broad'. In other words it comes down to the same old thing. TIT. If you have money and the right connections you have nothing to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.