Dogmatix

PT is following in the fine tradition of the Yingluck government's rice pledging scam. Promised the money and got farmers to pledge all their jasmine rice to get cash they could use to buy sticky rice for their families to eat. Only Yingluck dissolved parliament suddenly without giving her finance minister Kitirat time to set up funding for all of it through BAAC. As a caretaker government they no longer had the power to force BAAC to advance the money which was questionable legally even before. About 20 farmers committed suicide as a result and many more faced grim hardship with no money and nothing to eat. Meanwhile they made out like bandits on the crooked deals they arranged to sell the farmers' rice they didn't pay for to fake Chinese government departments. Just promise good things to poor rural folk and take political credit for it and move on without bothering to follow up to see that they get paid.

Never realised she was a transgender before. You live and learn.

Sounds like an excellent excuse for more online censorship and surveillance resulting no reduction of online fraud..

Other countries tend to tax global income. Wealth taxes do exist, eg 0.5% of total wealth over a threshold but don't often work out very well and have been walked back in some countries like France, where a lot of wealthy people simply left. I take the position of Prof Kitipong that it would make more sense for the economy to avoid doing this so as to be competitive with HK and Singapore, which is what the previous PT government of Yingluck strove to do by reducing corporate income tax from 30% to 20%, a theoretical sacrifice in today's terms of about 300 billion or close to 2% of GDP, whereas this new approach is unlikely to raise anything like that. But, if you have to do it, try to make tax rates more in line with Thai tax rates in order to incentivise repatriation of capital, eg 10% on dividends, 0% on equities capital gains, 15% on interest. Also give more time to investors to adjust before implementation and legislate the change, rather than leave it to the RD to reinterpret the law in a way that is non-binding on taxpayers and subject to legal challenges. Re global income tax of Thai tax residents, the Prachachart Thurakit article said the RD wants to amend the Revenue Code to introduce this. So this may be only a stop gap. Whichever way you look at it, Thailand has a fairly low tax take and will need to increase that to meet the growing expectations of welfare, given that GDP growth is expected to continue to underperform due to lack of competitiveness. That probably means higher personal and corporate tax rates, higher VAT, higher inheritance and gift taxes with lower thresholds, as well as global income tax collection.

You got off topic by making condescending remarks about people you objected to criticising this poorly thought out tax policy and suggesting they shouldn't be in Thailand, since only people who accept chaotic policy making should be here.

An interesting point. Certainly the English translation of Royal Decree 743 appears to give exemption to income generated in the previous tax year only - income generated in tax years prior to that being already exempted under the previous interpretation. Because Thai has no definite or indefinite articles or singulars or plurals the Thai just says "in previous tax year" which is ambivalent and is the reason that it is open to various interpretations in the tax code. Whether in future other tax years after 2024 but the immediately prior tax year are included n 743 probably needs to be ruled on by the Tax Court. If the Revenue Code is amended to legislate the RD's as yet unilateral reinterpretation that is technically not binding on taxpayers, things could either way for 743. Parliament could amend 743 or incorporate it into the Revenue Code clarifying that all prior tax years are exempted, or it could include it in a list of prior legislation that is repealed. The LTR programme was a brainchild of the previous uncle parties government, whereas the Elite card from the first Thaksin government. Since the uncle parties are unlikely to ever regain power, the LTR project will not have any champions in government, unless another party adopts this orphan.

Most of the red shirts have by now been released from jail or acquitted, while MFP supporters are still languishing in jail.

Fake news alert. Reports have been circulating that the economy is in crisis and the government needs to borrow 3% of GDP to fix it. Please ignore this fake news that is designed to instill panic and make people spend less and save more, which will in turn lead to a genuine crisis, if enough people believe the fake news.

Fake news alert. There have been fake news stories reporting that Chinese tourists have been shot dead, blown up at Erawan shrine, abducted and raped by other Chinese, drowned in unseaworthy and unlicensed tour boats. These stories are all untrue. Please delete by order of the PM. Job done.

Many Thais feel the same way as I do. Read Prof Kitipong's article. I am Thai myself and, along with 14 million others I didn't vote for the party that lost the election but is now in power and in charge of the finance ministry, overseeing this utterly shameful and unlawful tax rule change. Suggesting that Thais shouldn't come to or be in their own country because they expect a lawful and structured approach to tax reform that doesn't risk driving foreign investment away and harming the economy is not constructive.

So she had assessable income and paid tax and was in the category of about 4 million tax payers, not in the 6 million who filed tax returns but didn't have to pay tax. The question was whether you have to file a tax return, if you have no assessable income and my response was no. The Thai workforce is estimated at 39 million. So with only 10 million tax returns filed 29 workers didn't file tax returns without getting into those with income who are not working.

Due to your uncivil jibes and foul language I am not going to reply to any more of your posts Cyclist. So please don’t ask any more.

You are not required to file a tax return, if you are sure you have no assessable income. The RD reports that around 4 million pay income tax but they are receiving anout 10 million tax returns. The 6 million tax returns filed by people who didn’t have to pay tax must comprise largely people who had tax withheld by employers but need to reclaim it because with allowances they are under the threshold. Some may just file to be safe or because they got in the tax net and feel they have to keep filing. If you have dividends but no other income you can get back more tax than you actually had withheld from the dividends by filing a tax return. Many Thai investors who don’t work file for this reason. What do you get in return if you are a foreign tax payer in Thailand? Nothing. Social security is based on contributions and you can get those benefits, if you pay the contributions but don’t earn enough to pay tax like the migrant workers.

It’s a good question. Traditionally they rely on taxpayers who are not liable to salary withholding tax to declare themselves. Probably nothing will change for some years and then the RD might start negotiating with Immigration to cooperate on this.

The problem is that there has been no effort made by the RD or the government to think this through to see if it is even net beneficial to Thailand, let alone draft the hundreds of pages of regulations needed to cover the complex situations that will arise or even explain how to claim a tax credit when there is no space for this on the form. So it is not surprising that a great deal of angst, uncertainty and speculation has arisen. Probably many people will decide not to move to Thailand, leave Thailand and/or not invest in Thai property due to the uncertainties created, even though it might not turn out to be disadvantageous to them. That is a result of utter incompetence and idleness of the RD and government.

It is likely to affect all retirees. Definitely those who used the prior years loophole are affected but so are those who had all their income remitted direct to Thailand as soon as it arose without offshore seasoning. Most likely everyone is going to have to file a tax return. Some of those who remitted their income direct may have had a Thai tax liability but didn't file a tax return or pay the tax. However, we still don't know how the RD is going to treat income assessable in the country of origin which has a DTA with Thailand; allow deduction of tax credit but tax any differential is the Thai tax would be more; tax the whole lot and tell the taxpayer to claim a refund or claim a tax credit at home; or maybe even exempt and foreign income that is subject to tax overseas, no matter whether the tax is more or less than the Thai tax. Many decisions remain for the RD to make. So far they have just scrawled a few lines to reinterpret the tax law and left it at that which is unprofessional and irresponsible. But there again the top officials all live in huge mansions and drive fancy cars on their meagre civil service stipends. So it is reasonable to assume their working hours are occupied with something more pressing than drafting tedious tax regulations.

Would you take tax advice about being a Thai tax resident from someone who has a vested interest in persuading you to become a Thai tax resident?

The Prachachart article accurately predicted that the RD would issue an order to amend the first order by amnestying foreign source income generated prior to 2024. It also quoted an unnamed source saying they would amend the Revenue Code to introduce global taxation of all income for tax residents whether it is remitted to Thailand or not, as happens in many other countries. My point is that the Prachachart reporters were well informed. However, amending the Revenue Code is a large undertaking that needs to go through parliament.

Why isn't Srettha using his airmiles to flew to Qatar to negotiate the release of the Thais. It is hard to imagine they are of political value to Hamas but, sadly they are a low priority to Israel and the US which want to get their own citizens out first. I also can't understand why Hamas had to murder Thais who were just trying to earn money to support their families and have no special loyalty to Israel or its apartheid system.

This is also what it sounded like to me. In other words a reversion to the status quo before legalization but without recriminalization. In this case the shops would have to close as they would have no products to sell. Herbal clinics would continue to prescribe oils in extremely low concentrations at high prices and with high prescription costs. The buds market would go underground but would be quite large, if possession is still illegal. Even in the UK you can get buds from private clinics. It seems medical will not thrive without them. Although Anutin and BJP try to distance themselves from recreational use, the party owner's daughter has a big plantation in Buriram and she told the BBC that recreational use was where the real money is and was the real intent of BJP's legalization. So I imagine Anutin is putting pressure on PT not to recriminalize and to allow the buds trade to continue in some shape or form. But right now he is happy drawing up lists of gangsters and writing new history textbooks to make Thai kids into loyal citizens instead of freethinking pot smokers.

It's lucky you have a choice not to use it. I have noticed very little cannabis fumes on the streets I walk on in Thailand.

I have gun permits too but like your relatives permits they are the common or garden Por 4 permits "to have and to use" of which there are around 6 million in Thailand. Under the current law these are lifetime permits but they don't permit the holder to carry loaded guns around. You can keep at home for self protection and take to the range unloaded in a locked box in your car boot for practice or sport. Anutin is not talking about Por 4 permits which are still being issued, although they have been making it hard or impossible to those with 5 more guns to apply since before the Paragon shooting,. He is talking about Por 12 carry permits which allow holders to carry a designated loaded, concealed handgun in public which is clear from the OP article. Holders need a Por 4 permit to apply for a Por 12. The Por is valid for a year at a time. If it is not renewed, the holder is not disarmed but keeps the gun and Por 4 permit.

Everything still up in the air and no one can say where it will land. But the latest from the Public Health Minister was that they are reviewing the last govt's failed Cannabis and Hemp Bill with a view to amending that. He said confusingly that cannabis will NOT be recriminalised and shops will be able to continue but they will not be able to sell dried flower, so it was not very clear how they could make money - selling CBD oil perhaps. Perhaps there will be a system for medical prescriptions of THC oil or even buds and they might decide to recriminalise anyway, while working on the bill which could take a year or two. I think Srettha said recriminalization would happen 6 months after he took office. He seems to be digging himself into deep holes with his digital wallet and alleged bribes for police promotions and his popularity in the toilet that he might not be around to see this through. Since the health minister is trying to amend the law to allow people caught with up to 5 speed pills to face rehab instead of prosecution, a complete reversion to the pre-June 2022 status quo for weed would be inconsistent. Hopefully it with remain decriminalized or at least there will be a similar exemption for personal use below a certain amount. Having encouraged Thais to go their own weed and shops to open to sell weed with hardly any restrictions, there is now a healthy above board distribution system and it would be insane to try to reverse everything and force it all back underground. But this government has already demonstrated that it doesn't have the ability to think things through.

Can you clarify this? Do you mean remit rental payments (and school fees and the like) to the Thai service providers direct from offshore? I am pretty sure, the RD would deem this as as assessable income to your account, if they became aware of it, which seems possible, if they are going to track all foreign remittances over a certain amount. It is already clear in the Revenue Code that company payments of similar benefits direct to service providers on behalf of employees is assessable income for the employees. It doesn't seem much different. I think that gifting is a better loophole if you have a spouse or partner, i.e. gift the money for these payments to a spouse or partner and let them pay.

Simple answer. Yes.