KhunHeineken

I also noticed this in the post. If someone wanted / needed an Aussie pension, why wouldn't they return a week before turning 65 or 67 to apply for it, then, I thought the member may have had a unique set of circumstances prohibiting him from doing so, thus, I didn't bother asking. Out of curiosity, if one was to live outside Australia for say 20 years, then fly home a week before turning either 65 or 67, depending on their birth year, are you stating they can apply for the pension, receive it shortly after, and fly out to Thailand with a portable pension soon after? If so, I am a little surprised it would be that easy, to simply arrive before your birthday, and you can fly out with a portable pension. I would have though one must at least appear to re-establish residency with some documents and an appearance of staying before applying.

Geez, and home many of them do you think there are???? Ohhhh, yeahhhh, and it's on it's way, and not just in Thailand. It's going global.

No, they just don't want to accept the reality that they very well may have to pay tax. They just want to continue on with the same routine they have had for years, and anything out of that square box they shoot the messenger, and bury their head in the sand. Are you suggesting not 1 baht must be paid by "most" expats for "something" in relation to this policy? I have posted what that "something" may be, and it's not necessarily tax, or a bribe, but tax is possible. Why would the Thai's be handing out free passes to falang, any falang?

I'm giving them a chance this first time around. If they tax me to the point I think they are ripping me off, It's Thailand for 179 days in 2025, and Vietnam for the other 6 months.

Try a different browser and post back if it's still happening.

If that's the case, what is the purpose of you starting this thread?

I wouldn't accept such important information verbally. I would be requesting the relevant information be emailed to me, so I can have a record of the correspondence.

Australia now has working homeless people. These people have full time jobs, but sleep in their cars. Government policy over the last few decades has created the Australian housing market Ponzi scheme, and the social damage is now there for all to see, with the pain being felt by many.

A lot of that Aussie humor from decades ago would be banned from TV now. Just goes to show what direction the country is heading in. Those old British comedies the same. Eg. Benny Hill, Love Thy Neighbor. Sexist, racist etc. Just all PC, Woke, whatever, BS. The only place with freedom of speech and humor now is on the stand-up comedy show stage.

So, what will you post when others apply and are issued a TIN? Is the staff member they saw incorrect for issuing them a TIN, or the staff member you saw incorrect for not issuing you a TIN? TIT, but we will all get to see if a TIN is needed early next year.

Rocket science, isn't it? Roll up and say "I am a pensioner, but I need a TIN." TRD staff say, "No need." "Ok, bye." Then, come on this forum and post how you were told by one TRD staff member, at one TRD office, at one given time, that you don't need a TIN, and declare a TIN is not needed.

If things worked so corruptly, you would be in Thailand.

Yes. It may be just another BS piece of paper that all foreigners will need at extension time, but backed up by laws that they can call in at any time for high net worth individuals, Thai and foreigners, but for most expat retirees, it MAY just be pay some money for the document, and that's your "tax" paid for the year. Like I said, we may end up laughing at it all because TIT.

But no way will they ever link that system to the ATO's for non resident tax purposes.

So, you are on a pension, or part pension. That means I'm feeding you, not the other way around.

Hardly a game changing amount, but a little out of a little can be a lot for some people's circumstances, but I believe the member's point is, doesn't that mean you now have less than 65k baht a month to live on, thus, the hint that the 65k baht may increase in the future. I have always said the 800k and 65k can't stay forever. These figures are already decades old, but this is for another thread.

Firstly, I am not upset. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on this issue. I just give more weight to posts that set out how one reached their opinion, which may include links, quotes, youtube videos etc etc, rather than just throw away lines like, "The Thai's would never do that" or "Not gonna happen." You have probably read me posting that we will all have to pay "something." I have not suggested that the "something" is always going to be tax. I have also not suggested that the "something" will be a bribe, either. In your own post you have said some might have to pay for document translation, or maybe agents. Is that not a new cost for them, thus "something" more to pay next year? All this discussion about assessable income, savings, gifting blah blah blah. As I have said, for most, including pensioners, it could be as simple as paying 500 baht for a document from the TRD at extension time. Yes, we will all laugh at it, because for those who shouldn't be paying anything, they have to pay 500 baht, and for those who should be paying a lot more, they are only paying 500 baht. It's the same for the Certificate of Residence. Time will tell, but when MONEY is involved, you rarely see Thai's walk away from it.

When news of this policy broke, many, including myself, gave a thought to how they would enforce this policy. Many members posted things like, "I can't see them chasing foreigners all over the country." I, and some other members, post that they MAY require a document from the TRD at extension time, thus, no chasing, as it brings the foreigner to them, where "something" may have to be paid. I have also put forward that just like there is an overstay desk at boarders, there may be a TRD desk, where you will have to pay "something" to be able to leave. Once again, no chasing, they can just sit back and wait for the foreigners to come to them. No one knows at this stage, but why chase the sheep when you can make the sheep come to you? It's such an obvious and simple solution for Thai authorities that I would find it hard to believe they haven't considered it and / or will implement it.

Sure, but money in a Thai bank, earning interest, could meet the criteria of being an "investor." So, whilst prohibited from working, the hold of a retirement visa is still earning money in Thailand, no matter how big, or how small. Like I said, go to a different office, at a different time, with a different member of staff, and you may get a different result.

It will be interesting to be updated by members who stayed their 180 days in 2024, and have their extensions due in January 2025. For those that do, I certainly wouldn't be leaving it to the last minute. I would not be surprised if different immigration offices around the country require different documents. If not at immigration, enforcement could be at the boarders. No one knows how this will play out in 2025. I expect there to be chaos, but in the end, the Thai's will turn a baht out of it, one way, or another, even if it's just 500 baht for a certificate of clearance, or some other document. Considering money is involved, I just can't see the Thai's walking away from it.

Apply again next week and you will probably get one. TIT.

I do take your point. I have offered it up as part of an annual tax minimizing strategy. I have never suggested that expats can / should do this and remit zero money to Thailand to live on. I have suggested remitting just the right amount of funds under the threshold for their individual circumstances. Perhaps using their home country's ATM card, and doing a "cash run" which, in my case, will also be the Singapore F1. I have never suggested it as a way to pay ZERO tax in Thailand, forever, only to minimize one's tax liability in relation to remitted funds. Yes, the argument about ATM use, which I put forward when all this came light, has been discussed, like many other tax minimization strategies. Time will tell how hard the Thai authorities go at this in 2025. Why not? What crime has been committed? Once again, you are confusing "tax evasion" with "tax minimization." Completely agree. I have debated with a member that should this tax policy be enforced to the letter of the law, that car / condo will cost more in the future. The particular member disagreed. Fine. I also put forward the unfortunate situation of serious medical intervention. That emergency operation and hospitalization needs to happen immediately, that's remitted funds, ASAP. The tax implications for this MAY be felt the year later. I have said many times, using your "small fry" example, maybe it's all about most expats paying 300, 500, 1000 baht for a document for their extension. Any post even suggesting a TRD document MAY be needed for the annual extension was declared scaremongering and deleted by Mods, yet, now we have a Mod posing that very question. It was obvious then, it is obvious now, I am not sure what has changed. Gifting, savings, earnings, ATM withdraws, gold, cash blah blah blah may be irrelevant for the majority. Maybe they just want to create another simple revenue earner like the Certificate of Residence that is 300 baht, but should be free. For high net worth individuals, they can pull out the law book. Time will tell.

So, if you don't know about the "rules down under" how can you say I am wrong and you are right? For the record, I am specifically talking about "tax evasion" which is a crime, not "tax avoidance" or "tax minimization" which is not a crime. A crime means you are charged, and the burden of proof is upon the government, in this case, being the accuser. That said, I do see the point you are making. A high net worth individual's law / accounting firm may argue it is tax minimization when the government may argue it's tax evasion. Should that be the case, the government has to present their case, which is defended. Quite often, one case is a test case for many others, over the years to follow. You really are blurring the lines between tax evasion and tax minimization. One is illegal, the other legal, and whilst both can end up in Court, one is a crime, the other is not. If you are American, think Al Capone.

You probably brought your house for $100,000. The same house, well, really it's just the land, is now $1.5 million in the burbs. (Sydney) Data shows people's wages haven't kept up with house prices. It's a bubble, made by interested parties, including all three tiers of government. Withhold supply to artificially drive up demand, thus prices. The banks are happy (more money in interest) the council is happy (rates) the state government is happy (stamp duty) the federal government is happy (land tax) the insurance companies are happy (higher premiums) the developers are happy (forced downsizing) the real estate agents are happy (commission) the politicians are happy (they own land set to be rezoned) employers are happy (they have property owners as slaves for employees now) investors are happy (negative gearing) and the list goes on and on. Meanwhile, here's a young Aussie couple just wanting a house in the burbs to start a family. Normal in 1991, now, they need "The Bank of Mum and Dad" to get a look in. Also, a lot of "cash in hand" back then, but not now. Difficult for young people to even save for a deposit these days. You are laughing at an Australian housing crisis that is even effecting Australia's birth rate. Australia actually needs immigration for the economy. There's plenty on the net about it. Here's an interesting historic link i stumbled across that explains my point. It's a lot worse now in 2024. https://www.9news.com.au/finance/rates-1990-versus-2007/8251875f-a878-49a5-bca6-559d2dcdb361#:~:text=Back in March 1990%2C the,up 44.99 percent of income. Maybe you can post how "lucky" these young Aussies are these days, living in "The Lucky County" while you are laughing at them at 6.5% interest rates. Clearly, you are out of touch with what is happening back in Australia to our kids, and grand kids.

I'll never be able to qualify for the aged pension. What's makes you think I would? You, on the other hand, are a freeloader.