Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing, well unfortunately we are discussing remittance tax. To be clear, I am specifically discussing this in the context of American legislation, but as the title suggests, I think this could be a harbinger of things to come across the board. 

I thought of making this video after receiving a number of emails and in some comments, I think I saw this as well, for folks who view the channel and they referred me over to Americans Abroad, americansabroad.org. Latest update on Provisions on the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) that affects US citizens overseas. Just starting it off, "ACA's advocacy pays off. ACA wrote to the tax committees and the Senate about our concerns over these provisions and are pleased to see that some revisions addressing our concerns have been made." I urge those who are watching this you are an American and you are interested in expat concerns, and you want those expat concerns to sort of maybe be at least heard in Washington DC, an organization like Americans Abroad may be helpful to that effect. 

Also while I am talking about this, it's important to point out, I do deep dive analysis into how this stuff impacts Expat Land here in Thailand; how geopolitics and economic concerns may impact Expat Land here in Thailand. You can go to, if you want some long form analysis, Integrity News Service is our paid news service. You can email us, [email protected]. Also, if you are interested in American Diner style food and breakfast anytime including pancakes, please feel free to come check out our restaurant my better half and I have set up here in downtown Bangkok. Links are in the description below for the Pancake Palace so you can check that out. 

That said, under Remittance Tax I thought this was important and again it pertains to Americans, but this to my mind has possible implications across the board for the future. So quoting directly under that same heading. Remittance Tax: "The Senate version was an improvement over the House version as it would not impose the tax on remittance transfers made by Banks or bank cards. The final Senate version imposes the tax at 1%, down from 3.5%, a further improvement. The tax will still impact Americans abroad who will not use bank accounts credit cards a debit cards to move money abroad. Although the tax has been lowered it is now not creditable." So you pay the tax, but you don't get a tax credit on it. Quoting further: "ACA advocacy has paid off as the Remittance Tax was a deep concern to our organization. ACA will continue to advocate on this issue as this taxes individuals simply for accessing their own money." 

So what's going on here? They want to add a Remittance Tax on folks in the United States transferring funds out of the United States. Now apparently, it doesn't directly impact bank wire transfers, ACH transfers, usage of things like PayPal, usage of credit cards and debit cards to move money. It apparently pertains to things like moving it through cheque-cashing places, things of this nature, sort of the more un-banked. The reasoning for that was it stems from the influx of let's just say a lot of illegal aliens but a lot of foreign nationals in the United States - I will be sort of bland in my usage of terminology here, even though I have my own thoughts on all of that - but a lot of folks in the United States remitting money back to their home countries, and the thinking here is by adding this remittance tax, well it will generate funds I am sure, but it may also have an impact on those folks who may or may not, they may decide to not be in America or they may decide that it is not worth it to make these remittances. I don't know exactly what the policy thinking is but obviously, revenue generation is probably one of the biggest things associated with this. 

The point I am trying to make in this video though is this notion of a 1% remittance tax currently doesn't pertain to bank accounts, ACH transfers, bank wire transfers etc. Could it? Look, I don't see how it might not, long-term. These things have a tendency to for lack a better term, metastasize. So it starts off as, 'oh it is just a remittance tax on those, basically those illegal aliens in the United States'. Things like this have a tendency to grow; they have a tendency to later on have implications in other ways. And then on top of it, I remember when Trump Tax came out. The raw law was almost indiscernible in terms of anything you can make hide or hair of, and it took a better part of a year for people to kind of comb through what was being said, and then the regulatory, and this is key, the regulatory structure that will then stem from the underlying law. How exactly this gets implemented remains to be seen. Again, for folks who are not American that are in my audience watching these videos, this doesn't directly pertain to you right now, and again this doesn't pertain to Thailand. What we are talking about here is remittance taxes from the United States, originating in the United States, going outbound. And at least what we are looking at now, according to this information, is not going to pertain to Standard Bank wire transfers etc. But again, as noted in the title is this a harbinger of things to come or a further expansion of this kind of tax? Remains to be seen. As I said earlier, these things have a tendency to grow, in a sense they kind of metastasize.

That said, it is not a foregone conclusion that that will happen, but we will certainly be keeping you updated on this channel as the situation evolves.