KhunHeineken

It's not a "right" it's a "permission" and one that can be revoked either individually, or on mass, at any time.

You mean, a "firesale."

Yes. Also interesting for the company that owns the land condo blocks sit on. The extra "x 30 x 30" is not enforceable at Thai law.

That day was always coming, and when it arrives, many will be left holding the can. The "Thailand for Thai People" nationalistic thing, but hey, everyone else is doing it, so it must be fine.

Isn't that how Thailand works though? One law for the lower class, no law for the wealthy? Thailand implements the tax, in one form or another, and appears to be modernizing on the global stage, and similar to western countries, meanwhile, Thaksin repatriates his billions using whole accounting and law firms to ensure he pays no tax, just like billionaires do in the west. Just on this point, why would Thaksin bring back all his money when he could be arrest and charge with anything at any time and his money confiscated. He would be better leaving his money outside Thai jurisdiction, similar to the way wealthy Chinese get their money out of China.

I thought this forum was open to all nationalities.

I understand English is not your first language. Do you understand my question? Why have you paid tax when you didn't have to? I can't make the question any more simple than that?

I agree with you, but when there's money to be made out of foreigners, all political parties here seem to like heading in the same direction, no u-turns. This is an easy earner for them from the small fry, and they can also pay more attention to high net worth individuals to tax some serious money out of them.

Why the need to fly back to one's home country? As I said in another post, people have been doing tourist "visa runs" to neighboring countries for decades. There may be a new industry pop up offering "cash runs." I'm sure the casinos in the boarder towns would be happy to offer such a service, for a commission. Nothing illegal. One would only be bringing in under the declarable amount. I am going to Singapore for the F1 and will be bringing back a wad of cash.

Many have invested heavily both financially, and emotionally in Thailand. They have sold up in their home country and moved to Thailand. They have nothing back in their home country to go back to. This is the demographic I say "can not leave."

Under the current laws tell no government department anything. If ever asked by the ATO or your bank, you tell them you are still "domiciled" in Australia and just on a long holiday. The ATO can't prove otherwise. That's why many, including myself, have never paid a cent of non resident tax. That's it. Simple. So, you may as well ask a Mod to close the thread. Now, should we find out next week the proposed changes start on the 1st July 2025, well, how but we keep this thread open, just for old times sake. Look over in the Property and Finance Forum how many threads there are on Thailand now enforcing remittance tax, and possibly world wide income. Aussies will soon be faced with 183 days, in a similar way to Thailand's 180 days, but hey, let's just live in the here and now.

A Vet's pension is one of the pensions covered under Article 19 in the DTA between Australia and Thailand. It'[s an "occupational pension." You should be fine. The aged pension not so.

True, but if transferring the money to an overseas account in their own name, it doesn't take the bank long to figure out their "customer" could be overseas, thus triggering their contact where the customer has to "declare" their tax resident status, which comes with penalties for making a false declaration. I've had this a few times, from two different banks.

I've heard of "visa runs" to neighboring countries, but not "supplement runs" back to Australia.

Correct, so what does this tell you? Immigration inform Centerlink of Aussies going overseas, and if you are pensioner, 6 weeks later you lose some of the pension. What's stopping the same system for 30% non resident tax after 183 days. Keeping in mind. the pension is deemed an income, and is taxable.

Many don't tell Centerlink they are going to be outside of Australia, and 6 weeks later they receive less money. They ring Centerlink where a staff member tells them "it's because you are overseas" despite the pensioner non volunteering this information. Now how did Centerlink know this? Why couldn't / wouldn't the same be done for 30% non resident tax after 183 days outside of Australia????

No, not scaremongering, just discussing proposed Australia's changes to resident tax enforcement, much the same as many are discussing Thailand's decision to start enforcing remittance tax. That's because currently just about everyone leaving Australia can claim they are still "domiciled" in Australia, and just on a "long holiday" thus still a tax resident. The ATO can pick one out of the herd and put the heat on them, but if they have maintained a "domicile" (property) and a bank account, drivers license, club memberships, utility bilsl, community ties etc, they can argue they have every intention of returning to Australia, therefore, they are still a resident for tax purposes. Assessing such information is complex and labor intensive, and can be appealed, because how can the ATO prove one's state of mind, that is, their "intention" or otherwise, to return, or not return? So, they make the "primary test" or "bright line test" 183 days. No ifs, not buts, no reviews, no appeals. Outside of Australia 183 days, you are a non resident for tax purposes, even if you really do have an intention of returning, and are actually on a genuine "long holiday of 12 months. After the proposed changes are passed, Immigration will send the ATO a list, on a daily basis, of the details of Aussies outside of a Australia for 183 days, and you can expect contact from the ATO, or, a "please explain" at tax time, coupled with a non resident tax bill, and what argument will you be able to mount against paying that bill? Or, many individuals. Computer data bases do all the heavy lifting. That's the way it is now, but in my opinion, that will not be the case after the proposed changes are passed. The physical presence and time based model relies on immigration records. No point immigration collecting such data if they do not hand it on to the ATO. Correct, that's why their supplements are cut off, automatically, after 6 weeks, even though people don't tell Centerlink they are going overseas. Now, why will not / can not the same system be in place to enforce non resident tax, except it's after 183 days, not 6 weeks? It's just a tweak of the computer programing and the pension payment after being outside of Australia for 183 days is 30% less, just in the same way the pension payment after being outside of Australia for 6 weeks is less because the supplements are withheld? Please tell me you have some information / advice other than, "the government would never do that." Remember, non resident tax is a tax thousands of expats all around the world should have been paying for decades, including myself. It's the loopholes in the current 90 year old laws that have seen practically none of us pay it, hence, the proposed changes. As I have said before, when the payer, Centerlink, and the taxer, the ATO, are both government departments, they control, through legislation, how much money you get. I just can't see immigration telling Centerlink that Aussie pensioner John Smith has been outside of Australia for 183 days, thus a non resident for tax purposes, and Centerlink doing nothing, particularly as Centerlink automatically cut off the supplements after 6 weeks. As for those who are self funded, Immigration inform the ATO that Bill Blogs has been outside of Australia for 183 days, and come tax time the ATO contact Bill Blogs that he has been deemed a non resident for tax purposes, thus will be taxed at 30% from $0. If not for the above, what is the purpose of the proposed changes?

I hope it stays at 45 days. I could do the 45 days. I wouldn't be happy about it, but could it. However, it's probably going to go to 60 or 90 days. I could still do it, but 90 days might knock many out of the game.

As I have said on numerous occasions, your typical Aussie expat retiree has not been back to Australia for several years. I would put this demographic in the majority. Would you agree? Many return back to Australia for a few weeks, perhaps for a major family even like a wedding, birth, funeral etc, but how many do you know return home for 6 week (45 days) every year, or even within the last 3 years? Yes, so do you have any advice for them? How can they remain a tax resident of Australia, to avail themselves of the resident tax brackets, particularly the tax free threshold? The current 90 year old laws will be superseded eventually, as they are no longer fit for purpose. They will be replaced by a physical presence and time based model, similar to many other countries, including Thailand, for that matter. Immigration records will know what Aussies are outside of Australia, and for how long. The pension is an income. The pension is taxable. Centerlink, a government department, pays it, therefore can withhold some of it, in a similar way they do the supplements after being outside of Australia for 6 weeks. How could an expat pensioner, who hasn't been back to Australia in several years, claim they are still a resident of Australia for tax purposes, thus still receive their tax free pension, whilst living in Thailand full time? I agree, but as I pointed out, the consultation stage saw expat associations etc lobby the government to make it more than 45 days, possibly 60, but most likely 90 days similar to other countries. How many expats could do 3 months in Australia every 3 years?

Already posted. How much does Local Phone charge for 13, 1300, and 1800 numbers?

Why would she? It's MONEY MONEY MONEY from people who can not vote, and from people who mostly can not leave, so must pay.

Why would they "drop it" when they have farang by the b*lls to pay "something?" When I say "something" I mean it may not necessarily be an individual's correct amount of tax, but "something." The law has been there for years. They have done nothing about it for years. In 2024 they have decided to pull the trigger. Why would they "drop it quietly" in 2025? As I have said, they may just make most of us pay 1000 baht for some BS document or stamp. That's all it may be, but "drop it quietly" I don't think so, particularly as it was announced, would cause a loss of "face" and is an easy earner, legit or otherwise.

If that was the case, why would they seek to wake the sleeping dragon now, unless they wanted MONEY?

OP, when are you actually visiting Thailand again?

Except for the part about the Immigration Department knowing you've been outside Australia for 183 days, and being a government department, they alert other government departments to this fact, like the ATO and Centerlink. Once again, you, and many others, would like to think your pension will be treated the same, in regards to taxation, as if you were living in Australia, even though you are living in Thailand. There are resident tax brackets and non resident tax brackets. I have posted them both, on more than one occasion. You want the resident tax brackets, with its tax free threshold, whilst living in Thailand, and being a non resident for taxation purposes. How do you think you can pull that off, after the proposed changes have been passed???? As I have said before, the payer (Centerlink) is also the taxer (ATO) backed up by records fro Immigration, because they are all Australian government departments. How are you going to get around this?