KhunHeineken

Tax is just another bill to pay. Depending on eventual compliance / enforcement, some may no longer be able to afford to live in Thailand. Maybe that's another motive for this policy. Getting rid of the low hanging farang.

As I just said in another post, basically, expect the unexpected, because TIT. We should consider and prepare for anything and everything, whether it is likely, or unlikely.

I am posting this to you as a member, and not a moderator, so I am not questioning moderation. The thread is 286 pages long. Many members, including myself, will not / have not read every post on every page. Those entering discussion on the thread at a later stage, or coming and going from the thread, are not trying to reinvent the wheel. Thread focus shifts. New discussions start and evolve. New information in the media comes to light which starts, or restarts new or old discussion. Some latitude is needed on hot topics. Also, the more members that comment, the bigger the pool of collective thinking, which is basically, collaboration. So an old discussion can attract a new idea. I agree certain parts of the current policy are doomed to fail, but where I differ from you is you seem to think because there is a "zero chance of being implemented" therefore the Thai government won't implement it. I disagree. They can, and may / will implement things that have a "zero chance of being implement" and that's because I have little to no confidence in the Thai government to implement a comprehensive tax policy framework which incorporates the remitted funds of foreigners, with transparent legislation in which foreigners can legally navigate. Let's be honest, the Thai government tells foreigners to jump, and we ask how high. They have us by the b*lls, and at the cost of no votes. They can implement whatever shambles they like, when they want, how they want, whether it works, or not. Long queues, different interpretations from office to office, "tea money" and photo copies of the photo copies, agents advertising to "fix" it for a fee etc etc etc all exists now. This policy may just be another layer of bureaucracy and earner for the Thai government from foreigners, with some "tea money" for RD staff. Maybe they are seeking to nothing more than create another industry and revenue stream. You are looking at it from the point it will not work. I am looking at it from the point that they don't care if if doesn't work. They will make it up on the fly, and if it turns only 1 baht, that's 1 baht more than they had before. Like I said in another post, they may have something up their sleeve, whether it works or not, but be prepared for a laugh early 2025, but there very well maybe some frustration, possibly anger, but that has to be discussed when the time comes.

Yes, and this is not allowed to be discussed until then, but they must have something up their sleeve, whether it's well conceived, or not. One thing is for sure, whatever they implement, it will cost them no votes at election time because farang can't vote, so on that basis, anything is possible.

They may use SWIFT or IBAN etc to collect data from the Thai side. Who knows? I'd be surprised if the Thai's left it up to the honesty of people to volunteer the amount of their remitted funds, but you could be right. Even if people under reported their amount of remitted funds in 2025, that's still more money than the Thai government received in 2024. It's just another earner for them.

Like I said, the only way this policy can work is if the Thai banks are involved, and that's just for a start. To date, there's been no information of Thai banks having to record and report the flow of remitted funds.

I agree. As suggested, maybe the policy is designed to do absolutely nothing but raise "tea money." Yes, funny, but is it?

You've dug the hole so deep that you can't admit they will be passed because you've thrown so much mud at me. You have to keep digging now, otherwise you lose face.

I guess we'll see towards the end of the year. Perhaps the current agents offering visa, drivers licenses etc etc "services" will expand into tax reporting in preparation for early 2025, after the tax policy has been in force for one full reporting year. I have no doubt businesses will be offering taxation services to foreigners who have never needed such a service before, it's just how legitimate those services will be. I have a feeling we'll all be getting a laugh out of it in the future.

Why don't you get off the fence and state publicly here that it's YOUR opinion that the proposed change WILL or WILL NOT be eventually passed into legislation?

I'm attempting a little humor here, but it could be possible. Perhaps the whole idea is to set up a new "tax agent" industry, similar to the pretty much illegal, but not enforced, and in fact encouraged, visa agent industry. Maybe the whole idea is the RD wants a cut from "tax agents" that many foreigners will use just to relieve themselves of tax paperwork each year and pay an agent to "fix" everything with the RD for a fee. Sounds funny, but it's been happening for decades with visa agents circumventing the 800k seed money and other visa requirements. It's no secret. The visa shops have signs on their windows and websites. Maybe the real reason for this tax policy is to create another "agent" industry so another government department cashes in as well, and we all know the money flows to the very top. As I said in another post, the only way this tax policy can work is if the Thai banks record and report remitted funds. If they are not required to, than I am looking for another motive for this tax policy, and as funny as it may sound, is it really that funny? It's been happening with visas agents for decades. Why not tax agents in the future?

I said from Day 1 the only way they can make this tax policy work effectively is to have the Thai banks involved, and possibly implement a withholding tax upon deposit, with an amount possibly refunded at the end of the calendar year through a tax return. Or, at the end of the calendar year, the Thai banks report to the RD the total amount of the money that flowed through each account, and then you are taxed accordingly. Most expats transfer money from a bank account in their home country to a Thai bank account. At that point, it's remitted funds. Without the Thai banks reporting these amounts, this tax policy can not be effective. On another note, if the use of ATM's by expats as a tax avoidance strategy becomes wide spread, it effectively cuts out Thai banks, thus, they don't have hard currency cash injections each fortnight / month from expats, so the Thai banks may not be so happy with this tax policy, not to mention, they may have more work to do on behalf of the Thai government by way of reporting, as mentioned above.

I was thinking more about large over the counter cash advances, particularly when ID is asked for, and bank staff can see the person making the withdrawal is an expat. I am aware that the use of ATM's will be difficult to impossible to enforce, that's why I suggested it months ago.

I agree with ignis. Clone your current OS / computer to one of these spare SSD's and keep it as a spare in case you have a major crash / dead SSD. After cloning, do not keep it in the computer or connected to the computer to protect it from any possible power surge. Over time, as Windows updates and any changes to settings you make take place, clone again to a different SSD. Then, some months later, format the first SSD and clone again to it, and keep cycling the two SSD's so you always have a reasonably new clone of your OS or whole computer. Back up photos and music to the third SSD. The fourth SSD you may consider cloning your current OS / computer and leaving it at a different location in case of fire, theft, flood etc. This is keeping in practice with the 3 - 2 - 1 of backing up data. That is, 3 copies, on 2 different devices, with 1 stored at another location.

60Mbps down is fine. More than enough for HD streaming. It appears it's a SurfShark issue to their UK servers. Perhaps too much network congestion. In other words, too many people connecting to their UK servers that it's slowing down everyone's connection. If this is the case, it's something you'll have to take up with SurfShark. I notice SurfShark only have four UK servers. Can you legally bet on WH from Ireland? If so, try the Dublin server. It may have less traffic. I don't own a Chromebook, but your settings may be to obtain network time, rather than you manually set the time. It means the laptop is getting the time from the internet / IP Address you are on. Try changing that setting and manually set your laptop to UK time. Also, try installing a different browser on your Chromebook. Firefox is pretty good. See if you get better results on a different browser. You may also have a DNS leak. You should try one of the extensions on Chrome to fix this. Here's one example. https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/webrtc-leak-shield/bppamachkoflopbagkdoflbgfjflfnfl?hl=en

I agree with you that the legislation is designed more so to qualify people as residents, rather than non residents. Whilst each member reading this forum has different circumstances, your typical Aussie expat retiree hasn't been back to Australia for some years, and when they have, it was most likely for less than 45 days for medical treatment, or a funeral, or similar. These expats have certainly "scaled back to such an extent that they no longer benefit from their connection to Australia enough to justify being taxed as a resident." Wouldn't you agree? Doesn't this part of the document also mean that if it can not be "justified being taxed as a resident" mean they are then "justified being taxed as a non resident." An individual must be classified as one, or the other. You say "As such my 185 day holiday would not make me a non resident." What you are saying is, if your are inside Australia more than 183 days, you are a resident for tax purposes, and if you are outside of Australia for more than 183 days, you are also still a resident of Australia for taxation purposes. What you describe are the current loopholes that I, and many others, enjoy. We have maintained "connections" in Australia and not "scaled back" those connections. How many expat retirees can say the same? Most have sold their property, car, furniture etc. They have ended memberships with clubs. They have no utility bills in their name. They have closed bank accounts and handed back credit cards. These are just to name a few in a long list that would clearly show such an expat retiree has ended residency for tax purposes in Australia. How would you propose such a retired expat can argue with the ATO that they are still a resident of Australia for tax purposes because they are just on a long holiday? You have said this, "Therefore the rules that say that being in Australia for 183 days makes you a resident does not apply in the opposite." The proposed changes are a physical presence and time based model, therefore, the legislation will be based on where geographically the person is, or isn't, and for how long. As mentioned, you are basically saying the 183 days only qualifies residents, and not non residents, and I disagree with you on this point. Reason being, if the 183 days outside of Australia means nothing if you still have "connections" in Australia, then the loopholes still exist, and the proposed changes are designed to do away with the loopholes. Yes, no new information on the progress of the proposed changes. What we do know is they are not dead under Labor, which many thought they would be, and given the previous Liberal government proposed them, and the current Labor government are moving forward with them, in my opinion, it's only a matter of time either party puts them to parliament ,with the opposition party, whichever party that may be, not blocking the legislation. My personal circumstances are I could do the 45 days and easily meet two of the four factor tests. I don't want to do the 45 days, but I could if I had to. After consultation with expats, Labor is looking at increasing the 45 days, probably to 60 or 90 days, and that's bad news for people who could do the 45 days. For your typical Aussie expat retiree who hasn't been back to Australia in years, I can't possibly see how they can argue they are still a resident for tax purposes, even if they maintained some "connections" and given there are no exemptions mentioned in the proposed changes, and no new tax free threshold added to the non resident tax brackets, and the pension is deemed an "income" at law, and now Thailand's new tax, and Australia expanding and updating its DTA's around the world, I see interesting times ahead for Aussie expats living in Thailand.

Well, geez, such a hard question to to answer, but I will make it simple for you. Yet again, outside Australia 183 days, non resident for tax purposes. Immigration records will prove this. Maybe you can explain what your argument to the ATO will be when you have been outside Australia for 183 days, but want to tell them you are still a resident for taxation purposes. Have you not seen the proposed changes that have been posted many times before? The "long holiday" loophole will end. Really? So the residents can say they are non residents, and the non residents can say they are residents. Good Luck with that with the ATO. That one is up there with the famous "Paul Hogan" post. The current laws are 90 years old. The Australian government is modernizing them from a "domicile" based model to a physical presence and time based model. It really is that simple.

Nothing in this budget, which is good news. They will probably just be passed like the changes to the Stage 3 tax cuts. I can't see them being an election issue. They have bipartisan support, because it's the previous Liberal government that proposed them, so when they are put to parliament, there will be no opposition to them and they will sail through. Are you still sticking by the "pensioners will be up in arms" argument as to why they will never be passed into legislation?

No mention in the latest budget that I am aware of. If you are inside Australia for more than 45 days, but less than 183 days, you have to meet two of the four factor tests. They are not difficult to meet. https://oreanafinancial.com/financial-planning/australian-tax-residency-proposed-changes/ The Labor government was considering increasing the 45 days. Probably to either 60 days or 90 days.

Moved from the Thai Tax thread. The 90 year old tax residency laws are modernizing from "domiciled" based law to a physical presence and time based model. If you are outside of Australia for 183 days, you will be automatically deemed to be a non resident for tax purposes. It will not matter if you did 1 month in Fiji, 2 months in France etc etc. All that will matter is you have been outside of Australia for 183 days and will then be a non resident for tax purposes. No reviews. No appeals. The days are proven through immigration records. The first tax bracket in non resident tax is $0 to $120,000 at 32.5%. No tax free threshold, for any, and all of your income. Thailand, and many other countries, have moved to a physical presence and time based tax residency model, and in my opinion, Australia also will in the near future. If you plan on doing the 6 months in Australia and just short of the 6 months in Thailand in order to minimize your taxes, just remember Australia uses the financial year and Thailand uses the calendar year. Immigration records take away the current loopholes and can not be disputed. I agree with you the new laws are designed to deem people as residents, rather than non residents, but it's a double edged sword. Inside Australia 183 days, resident. Outside Australia for 183 day, non resident. It's as simple as that. The loopholes that many expat Australians have been using, including myself, will close in the near future. None of us want to do 6 months back in Australia, but if one was to stay 183 days in Australia, and less then 180 days in Thailand, they will go a long way to minimizing their tax in both countries.

Wireguard is better than that. Slowing from 200Mbps to 3Mbps means something is not right. Can you connect to a server in a different country? Chose any country. Germany, Japan, France, USA. Connect and run a speed test and let me know what you get. Also, change protocols in SurfShark. Change from Wireguard to Open VPN or whatever else they have and connect to the UK and run a speed test. Maybe SurfShark's Wireguard is playing up. Finally, uninstall SurfShark, restart your computer, and reinstall SurfShark and run the UK test. How old is your computer? What processor does it have?

Deleted. Post moved to appropriate thread in Home Country Forum.

I can't see the Thai government allowing it to be that easy to access funds, without paying the tax, but that is the topic of compliance / enforcement and will no doubt be discussed in the future when we will all see how the Thai government ensures the payment of this tax.

The policy was implemented on the 1st January 2024. The initial 180 days to qualify as a Thai resident for tax purposes isn't even up yet. If that's not "new" then what is?

The discussion on the proposed changes to tax residency laws in Australia is best left to the other thread, in the other forum. We will have to agree to disagree. For me, it's not if, just when, those new laws will pass. Until then, I will continue to enjoy the loopholes, as you do, but I would hardly call that planning for the future. As I said, at some future point, and in regards to the rental income, more than 183 days inside Australia for tax residency and the tax free threshold, and less than 180 days inside Thailand to be a non resident for tax purposes and to pay no tax on remitted funds. I know what you want to do. You want to live in Thailand, don't move the rental income to Thailand, and appear to the Australian government you are still a resident of Australia for tax purposes. The very reason the Australian government are changing their tax residency laws is to stop people circumventing them with the many loopholes in the current 90 year old laws.