How Thailand Compares To the US in Consumer Debt

Consumer debt has become a way of life for many in the United States and other developed countries. Easy access to credit cards, student loans, and mortgages has led to high levels of consumer debt that can be difficult to pay off. In contrast, many developing countries like Thailand have lower rates of consumer debt. Several factors contribute to these differences.

In the US, consumer lending is big business, with credit card companies and banks aggressively marketing their products. The US also has a culture that encourages consumerism and living beyond one’s means.

Student loans are pervasive, saddling young people with tens of thousands in debt. Mortgages and car loans also mean long-term debt is common for American consumers.

In Thailand, there is less emphasis culturally on buying the newest gadgets and keeping up with trends. Credit cards and other lending are not as ubiquitous as in the US.

Most Thai consumer debt comes from mortgages, car loans and personal loans. Student debt is rare. With a less materialistic culture and more conservative approach to borrowing, Thai consumer debt levels are a fraction of what is seen in the United States.

This article will explore the sources and impacts of consumer debt in each country, analyzing the cultural and economic factors that contribute to such different experiences with borrowing and indebtedness.

Thai Consumer Debt: What are the main sources of consumer debt in the USA versus Thailand?

In the United States, the primary sources of consumer debt include credit cards, student loans, auto loans, and mortgages. Americans have easy access to credit and a cultural acceptance of borrowing for consumption.

Credit cards are pervasive in the US, with the average American household carrying $6,194 in credit card debt in 2020. Lenders aggressively market cards, including to those with poor credit. Interest rates can exceed 20%, but consumers often carry balances to fund their lifestyles. Many struggle to pay more than minimums.

Student loans also burden American consumers. Roughly 45 million borrowers owe $1.75 trillion in student loan debt in the US, with an average balance of $38,000. These non-dischargeable loans can follow borrowers for decades. They are issued by both federal and private lenders. Many students lack financial literacy to understand repayment obligations.

Auto loans are the third largest category, with the average loan topping $31,000 as of 2021. Longer loan terms, rising car prices and predatory lending means consumers end up owing substantially on vehicles that lose value over time.

Finally, mortgages represent the largest debt category, with homeowners owing $10.44 trillion in 2020. Loose lending standards in prior decades resulted in many consumers owing more than their home’s value when the housing bubble collapsed in 2008.

In contrast, Thai consumer debt looks quite different. According to the Bank of Thailand, the majority of household debt comes from:

• Mortgages – 56% of total household debt
• Auto loans – 10%
• Credit cards – 8%
• Personal loans – 15%

Mortgages make up the largest segment similar to the US. However, credit card use is far less common.

The average credit card debt per capita is just $700 in Thailand, versus over $5,000 in the US. With less pervasive credit card marketing and lower card acceptance, consumers simply do not carry the same plastic debt burdens.

Student debt is also rare in Thailand. University tuition is much lower compared to the US. Loans and financial aid are limited, and many pay for university through savings or family assistance rather than loans. This means student debt does not follow Thai consumers into adulthood.

Cultural factors that discourage debt also likely play a role. With less social pressure to overspend and tighter borrowing standards, Thai consumers take on less high-interest credit card and installment loan debt than their American counterparts.

How do bankruptcy and debt default laws compare between the two countries?

Bankruptcy and debt default have significantly different consequences in the US and Thailand, given vast differences in each country’s laws.

The US has federal bankruptcy laws that allow consumers to discharge certain debts and obtain a “fresh start.” Both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings are options, depending on income.

Nearly 500,000 Americans file for bankruptcy each year. Discharged, unsecured debts like credit cards and medical bills can be wiped away, providing relief. Mortgages, auto loans and student loans usually cannot be discharged. Bankruptcy stays on US credit reports for 7-10 years.

Thailand has no broad bankruptcy protections for consumers to discharge debt through the courts. Debt collection is governed by Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code and Consumer Case Procedure Act. Lenders can seize assets and garnish wages to repay defaults.

For unsecured debts like credit cards, lenders in Thailand can file civil suits to collect. But with court cases taking several years, most write off small consumer debts. Out-of-court settlements are common, with borrowers negotiating discounts on debts owed.

Secured debts like mortgages and car loans involve lenders repossessing and selling collateral if payments cease. Lenders can pursue additional claims if sale proceeds do not cover the outstanding loan balance.

Mortgage defaulters may face prison time in Thailand, with lenders filing criminal charges punished by up to 1 year imprisonment. Some report harassment and even physical threats from collectors on discharged debts.

US bankruptcy law provides consumers an escape from excessive debts. Thailand’s system provides far less protections for borrowers unable to repay, though unsecured debts may go uncollected. The US system encourages entrepreneurship by wiping slates clean, while the Thai system incentivizes avoiding default from the outset.

Thai Consumer Debt: How do debt consolidation and settlement companies operate differently in each country?

With consumer debt levels drastically higher in America, debt consolidation and settlement companies thrive serving US borrowers drowning in credit card, medical, and payday loan bills. Thai consumers have less need for these services with lower unsecured debt burdens.

US debt settlement firms negotiate with creditors to accept lump sum payments equal to 50% or less of balances owed. They charge hefty upfront fees, collect customer payment funds in escrow accounts, then distribute negotiated payoffs. Tactics can be aggressive like continually withdrawing funds or advising nonpayment.

US debt consolidation loans or balance transfers to new cards with 0% promotional rates provide temporary payment relief by lowering interest costs. Consolidation firms earn affiliate fees for originating new loans or cards. Consumers often end up back in debt when promotions expire and original balances remain.

Many US debt firms exaggerate advertised savings and use questionable practices. Effective 2018 regulations better protect consumers by banning advance fees and requiring timely settlement offers. But fee abuses still occur today.

Thai debt consolidation follows a different model, with legitimate lending from major banks like Bangkok Bank and Siam Commercial Bank. Personal loans that roll in credit card or other high rate balances provide true interest savings.

Debt negotiators and settlement services are far less common in Thailand given lower unsecured debt. Creditors prefer out-of-court settlements or asset seizures vs. sell debt portfolios at deep discounts to third parties. Debt management is done through non-profit counselling services or one-on-one legal advice.

Cultural disdain for unpaid debts also deters formal settlement services. Many Thai borrowers prioritize avoiding default through budgeting, additional jobs, or family assistance. Bankruptcy-like discharge of credit card or medical debts is not an option as in the US.

With an already constrained unsecured credit market and no established system for discharging consumer debts, the debt relief industry has little opportunity to thrive in Thailand like seen in America. Unless borrowing patterns fundamentally shift, fewer Thais will turn to these services.

What are the impacts of US and Thai consumer debt levels on their economies?

High levels of consumer debt have far-reaching impacts on the US economy, influencing everything from economic growth to homeownership rates. With lower borrowing levels, Thailand avoids many of these effects.

In the US, high consumer debt dampens economic growth:

• Debt service erodes disposable income available for spending and investment. From 2000 to 2007, the US personal savings rate dropped below 2% as consumers tapped home equity and credit cards.
• Struggling borrowers reduce spending when lenders tighten credit standards in a weakening economy. Debt exacerbated the severity of the 2008-2009 recession.
• Money diverted to pay debt service is unavailable for more productive uses like business investment.

Consumer debt also results in less sustainable homeownership patterns:

• Aggressive mortgage lending in the early 2000s allowed many unqualified buyers to purchase homes with no downpayment. This fueled housing demand and price bubbles that eventually burst.
• With so much tied up in mortgage payments, highly indebted owners are vulnerable if home values drop or interest rates rise. Nearly 10 million Americans lost homes to foreclosure after the 2008 crisis.
• Downpayment requirements have tightened considerably since 2008, locking many young Americans out of home buying until they save more and/or reduce other debts. The homeownership rate has dropped to 65% from a peak of 69% in 2004.

In Thailand, with household debt at 78% of GDP versus 79% in the US, impacts are less pronounced. Debt growth has closely tracked GDP growth, indicating it largely supports consumption and investment rather than speculative excess. Thai banks practice more prudent underwriting than seen in the US subprime crisis.

This moderate leverage has allowed Thailand to realize the economic benefits of borrowing without excess risk:

• Mortgages, auto loans and personal loans allow middle class Thais to purchase homes and vehicles that improve living standards.
• Consumer spending accounts for half of Thai GDP. Responsible use of installment credit supports economic growth.
• With credit card and student loan debt low, little income is diverted to unproductive debt service.

While the Thai economy lags the US, its more sustainable household balance sheets provide stability and continued growth potential.

What societal impacts arise from excessive consumer borrowing in the US that are not seen in Thai Consumer Debt?

The US culture of hyper-consumerism and entitlement fuels excessive borrowing for lifestyles beyond one’s means. This creates social impacts far different than in Thailand’s more restrained, communal culture.

Psychologically, extreme US consumer debt cultivates:

• Materialism – Self-worth based on possessions and appearance rather than character
• Entitlement – Expectation that one “deserves” a certain lifestyle regardless of income
• Instant gratification – Using debt for impulse purchases versus setting savings goals

Societal impacts include:

• Reduced household formation – Young adults assuming large debts delay financial steps like getting married, having children, or owning a home. The US fertility rate recently hit a record low.
• Income inequality – Wealth concentrates among those who receive interest income from lending as opposed to paying it. Racial wealth gaps are exacerbated.
• Social tension – Political movements arise from those feeling “left behind” and angry over their financial situation. Resentment brews against “the rich.”

None of these dynamics are present in Thailand to the same degree. Buddhist principles of moderation and saving for goals deter rampant materialism. Expectations focus more on family commitments than individual gain. Debt enabling instant gratification flies against Thai cultural values.

With less consumer debt, Thais enjoy greater social harmony and life satisfaction on their own terms – not dictated by competition around material living standards. Wisdom passed down emphasizes hard work, saving and living within one’s means. These traditions buffer against excessive borrowing’s corrosive societal impacts.

How has the growth in US consumer debt shaped the finance and credit industry over the past 25 years?

The US credit industry has vastly expanded over the past 25 years to serve and profit from seemingly unquenchable consumer borrowing demand. This growth has shaped business models, regulation, and even the political influence of the finance sector.

Key effects include:

• Business model innovation – 0% balance transfer offers, deferred interest, reward points, and automated mobile apps develop to maximize card use and interest income on revolving balances.
• Rise of subprime lending – With prime consumers saturated, lenders use sophisticated analytics to target subprime borrowers and charge higher rates. Subprime auto loans exceed $400 billion today.
• Securitization and trading of debt – Consumer debt like mortgages and credit card balances pool into securities purchased by investors globally. This raises capital for further lending.
• Debt buyers and collectors – Unpaid credit card debt sells for pennies on the dollar to aggressive specialty collection firms. A $10.2 billion industry employs over 130,000.
• Lobbying influence – With trillions in consumer debt on books, the finance industry spends billions to push favorable legislation and prevent consumer protections at federal and state levels.
• Financialization of the economy – In 1982, US debt was about 50% of GDP. It surpassed 150% by 2008. This shift where borrowing sustains economic growth becomes hard to reverse.

None of these systemic changes have occurred in Thailand, where traditional lending and savings still dominate. Consumer debt levels have not compelled financial innovation or political might. Thais retain a “real economy” not overly financialized on paper debt creation. Time will tell whether Thailand maintains this restraint as incomes rise.

What cultural and economic factors contribute to such different levels of consumer debt between the two countries?

Several key cultural and economic differences between the US and Thailand explain the divergent consumer debt levels.

Culturally, American consumerism stands in contrast to Thai Buddhist values of moderation:

• Americans view conspicuous consumption as success. Consumer spending accounts for 70% of US GDP.
• Thailand’s culture values family, experiences and charity over materialism. Status comes from deeds not possessions.
• Buddhism’s middle path teaches that desire leads to suffering. Thrift and savings are virtues. Debt is discouraged.

Economically, the US has a sophisticated credit infrastructure while Thailand’s remains developing:

• America has multiple credit bureaus tracking borrower histories and an efficient system to secure and enforce consumer loans.
• Until the late 1990s, Thailand had no credit bureaus. Limited data and weak legal systems still constrain lending today.
• The US tax code favors homeownership through mortgage interest deductions. No similar homebuyer subsidies exist in Thailand.

Labor markets also differ considerably:

• Strong US employment prospects, especially for college grads, encourage borrowing on future income.
• Thailand’s large informal economy and lower wages give lenders less confidence in repayment ability.
• Younger Thais often assist parents financially. In the US, youth take on debt burdens independently.

Finally, government policies promote different lending environments:

• The US fosters free credit markets and consumerism, with limited role for government interventions.
• Thailand restricts risky lending through high reserve requirements and debt service limits. Regulators actively restrain credit bubbles.

Together these dynamics explain why Americans so readily borrow for today’s desires. In contrast, Thais traditionally shun debt, instead saving to reach goals and provide communal support.

How has increased globalization impacted consumer debt levels in each country?

Globalization has facilitated increased consumer borrowing in both the United States and Thailand, though with very different outcomes.

For the US, integration with global capital markets pumped more mortgage funding that helped inflate the 2000s housing bubble. Foreign investors snatched up securities backed by American mortgages, auto loans, and credit card debt – fueling risky lending. Offshoring of manufacturing led to job losses and wage stagnation, increasing economic pressures.

Trade liberalization enabled Asia to grow into an exporting powerhouse while Americans consumed debt-financed imports. Ultra-low cost products from China displaced US industries but expanded purchasing power of American incomes. With a bias toward consumption over production, the US trade deficit swelled as debt at all levels rose.

In Thailand, foreign investment allowed its financial and manufacturing sectors to boom. Bangkok rose as a regional banking hub speeding development. Yet openness also made Thailand vulnerable to 1990s capital flight that precipitated the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. This led to lasting reforms.

Policymakers instituted curbs on capital flows to insulate banking. Stringent qualifying standards and limits on loan-to-value and debt-to-income ratios held consumer borrowing in check. Foreign banks were required to meet domestic lending needs rather than drain capital.

While globalization accelerated US reliance on consumer credit, Thailand’s controls ensured economic openness occurred on a sustainable foundation.

Financial and trade integration were managed to serve balanced, long-term growth. Policymakers ensured hot foreign money did not distort consumer incentives and behaviors as happened in America.

How does social media and globalized consumer culture affect perceptions of money, spending, Thai Consumer Debt, and US Consumer Debt?

Social media further fuels American consumerism and debt by depicting lavish lifestyles and feeding competitive materialism. In Thailand, these influences have far less impact on traditional cultural values.

Platforms like Instagram and TikTok bombard Americans, especially youth, with images of affluent influencers and the perception that everyone else is living their best life through consumption. Academic studies directly link social media usage with overspending and indebtedness. Americans take on debt to mimic what they perceive as societal living standards.

Global consumer brands like Apple, Starbucks, and Louis Vuitton permeate social feeds. Their marketing convinces Americans that buying such status symbols represents success and happiness. Even middle- and low-income Americans feel pressure to overspend to flaunt certain brands.

Among Thai youth, social media usage is equally pervasive. But decades of stability have established strong cultural identity and confidence that provide immunity to debt-fueled social pressures.

While many young urban Thais adopt Western brands and fashion, important Eastern values remain intact. Living harmoniously within family and community ranks above projecting a curated image online. Flashing wealth is seen as crass not impressive.自

This grounding protects Thailand’s next generation from the debt pitfalls that viral consumer culture continually lays for American youth through social media. Thai youth still pursue education, career and family with prudent financial habits passed down from elders.

How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected consumer debt levels differently in the two countries?

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated America’s debt dependence while Thai consumers demonstrated resilient balance sheets that held up to the crisis.

US consumer debt surged in 2020 as stimulus, foreclosure moratoriums, and enhanced unemployment temporarily masked financial troubles. Credit card, auto, and mortgage debt all grew rapidly. Student loans were paused but balances did not shrink.

Delinquencies will likely soar and more borrowers will turn to debt relief services once these temporary protections lift. The Fed’s easy money policies incentivized reckless borrowing at historic low rates.

In Thailand, household debt growth slowed during COVID as consumers spent less during lockdowns. The government provided targeted income relief that averted mass loan defaults.

The Thai banking system entered the crisis well-capitalized after post-1997 crisis reforms strengthened balance sheets. Consumers carried much less high-interest variable rate debt vulnerable to pandemic hardship compared to Americans.

Prudent Thai borrowing behavior provided insulation, while US debt dependence exacerbated vulnerabilities. This continues each country’s pre-pandemic trajectory of sustainable deleveraging versus spiraling excess leverage.

The Final Wrap

The contrasting experiences of the United States and Thailand clearly illustrate the impacts that excessive consumer debt can have on a society. Lured by instant gratification and inflated lifestyles, Americans have embraced borrowing to finance consumption beyond their means.

This has led to slower economic growth, financial crisis, and worrisome social impacts. Meanwhile, Thailand’s more restrained borrowing has allowed it to benefit from credit access while avoiding many downsides of over-leverage.

Though American-style financialization may gradually emerge as incomes rise, Thailand’s economy and social fabric have so far been insulated from negative forces that emerge when frugality is replaced by debt dependence. The Thai people’s commendable adherence to traditional savings and moderation provides lessons the United States would be wise to heed.

SEE ALSO: Law Firm Chastised for Using OpenAI ChatGPT for Legal Research