andux

3 hours ago, genericptr said:

Immigration in Mae Sai told me once it was since first entry into Thailand from your home country. He's wrong of course but I probably would have lost the argument.

No way you can lose that argument.

2 hours ago, elviajero said:

"Beating what system" -- In the past people staying long term using Tourist Visas would re-enter via land borders. As part of the crackdown people were 'occasionally' denied entry or given a hard time. So, based on the advice from forums like this, many switched to using airports where historically IO's were not giving people a hard time. 

 

They clearly do care otherwise people wouldn't be denied entry or given a hard time at the border. If you had followed everything immigration have done since 2006 to reduce long term tourism you would be aware that they are not looking to completely stop this practice, but to make it harder for the 'problem' group/s.

 

Explained above, but to add;

• they don't need to, and; 
• because they do not have the capability on their systems to easily count the time spent in the country as a tourist, and;
• embassy/consulates do not have a central database to see someones visa history, and; 
• there is a disconnect between the embassies/consulates that want to issue as many visas as possible to make money and immigration who's job it is to ensure someone is entering for the reason they're being given permission to enter, and;
• It's not a good look for a country to issue visas and then turn people away (en masse).

It's not just about what is happening at the border, you have to look at the bigger picture. Everything they have done since 2006 has been to make it harder to stay long term as a tourist. Since 2006 they have stopped people doing visa runs, pushed those people to using Tourist Visa and then made TR's less available, they did away with the DETV and replaced it with the METV that cannot be obtained in the region for most visa runners. Everything they have done has been to make long term tourism difficult. I think that proves the 'authorities' do care!

Thanks for sharing some really good points.

Are you sure that the system doesn't track the dates of entries and exits of each person, and therefore is able to easily calculate the time spent in the country for each tourist? I seriously doubt this. Makes me wonder why they even computers at all at immigration checkpoints, take pictures of everyone, etc?

4 hours ago, elviajero said:

Where is the published rule that says someone can stay months/years as a tourist?

 

It would be ridiculous to expect IO's to scrutinise documents proving someones financial status at the border. It just becomes another subjective decision. As I have tried to convey several times, the problem at the point of "interrogation" is not so much about having the funds to stay, but that they have stayed to long as a tourist and haven't provided immigration/consular staff evidence of how they make a living in the way someone wanting to stay long term has to do. You seem to want them to take each entry in isolation; whereas immigration are, reasonably, looking at the cumulative stay.

 

Different rules have legitimately been enforced at different border points forever, it's nothing new. In most cases they are reacting to the local issues. Airports are now a target partly because of the increased use by long term tourists thinking they can beat the system by flying in. Ironically they are now being advised to go back to using land borders -- guess what happens next.

Beating what system? I think that you are overthinking this way too much. If they actually cared, there would just be a law stating that tourists cannot stay longer than 6 months per year, like other countries do. Problem solved.

Would you mind explaining me why that law doesn't exist? Some officer now and then giving trouble to random tourists doesn't really count as the country as a whole actually caring about this.

On 9/19/2018 at 10:45 AM, impulse said:

 

I didn't claim that either one was right.  Because of that chaos.  But I have a lot more sympathy for one than for the other.

 

And to answer rkidlad, I worked for 7 years in BKK and never touched a Thai lady, because I was in it for the paycheck.  But that puts me in the tiny minority. 

 

I would contend that Thailand wouldn't have even 1/10 the problem with illegal falang workers if sex were off the table...

Maybe you are overthinking the Thai girls thing...

Feel free to touch the Thai ladies, no one will think you earn less or that you are in Thailand illegally for doing so. Furthermore, if the girl is hot enough and has white skin, people will know for sure you are earning good money.

Most of the illegal falang workers are in Thailand because it's easy to get a job, especially in a school, and because the quality of life is still more than decent with a low wage --at least when compared to the West.

According to KPMG, the Thai Cabinet issued an amendment to the current broad definition of work, so that it reads as following:

An engagement of any occupation, with or without employer, but excluding business operation of a licensee under the foreign business law

Here's the source: https://home.kpmg.com/th/en/home/insights/2018/09/thailand-tax-updates-13september2018.html

If the change legally goes through, operating a foreign business from Thailand would be officially legal, and not considered work. This would finally put an end to this subject, guilty of heated debate for many years.

Any thoughts? 

FarangFB and decca60:

One piece of information that might be helpful: you only need to show the yellow fever certificate if you've been to Brazil/Argentina during the two weeks before entering Thailand. From the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand's website:

As for those nationals of the countries listed below but who have not travelled from/through those countries, such a certificate is not required. 

Source: http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4908/15384-List-of-countries-which-require-International-Heal.html
 

In other words, when you go to health control and they ask you for your yellow fever certificate, just say that you haven't been to Brazil or Argentina recently. The health control form actually allows you to state the countries you've been to in the last two weeks. So, you write down the countries you've been to, and if you haven't been to any of the "infected" countries (full list here: http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4908/15384-List-of-countries-which-require-International-Heal.html) you are good to go.

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

A representative office, if you can get permission for one, is an excellent solution. The trouble is that they are very difficult to get. I know of two international companies using top legal firms that failed in their attempt to get permission for representative offices. You must be able to show clear economic benefits for Thailand from the existence of your representative office within the kingdom.

Do you know why they failed to get permission?

19 minutes ago, jackdd said:

According to the source that you posted

So if these are all activities which you are allowed to do, how are you planning to make money from them if you are running the company alone?

Usually people who work online do things like designer, software developer, affiliate marketing or blogger, but all these things are not allowed to do when you run a representative office.

It seems that those would fall under the category of "Sourcing goods and services in Thailand". Services are sourced in Thailand, but for the head office, which is the one earning the income.

It is my understanding that one could also hire Thai people or companies to help with those services for the head office, but this is not necessary.

I'm opening this thread because there is very little information about this around, and I'd like to have a discussion about what seems to be a valid way (at least on paper) for a foreigner who works remotely to stay long-term in Thailand, for the following reasons:

- Representative offices can be 100% foreign owned

- The representative office can hire a foreigner right away, which eliminates the need to hire 4 Thai employees

- Representative offices are tax-exempt, because they do not produce any income themselves

In other words, suppose that you have a company in your home country, or in a tax-free territory. You open a representative office in Thailand, appoint yourself as the responsible person of it, and you can stay in Thailand legally.

The representative office cannot produce income, but can assist the head office. This means that, in theory, the foreigner can legally work online assisting the head office, which, in other words, means that the foreigner can keep doing his/her remote work legally, because he/she is working for the customers of the head office.

Because representative offices do not produce income themselves, they are exempt from tax. The foreigner in Thailand representing the office needs a taxable salary, but that would be pretty much the only taxes affecting this structure.

There is a requirement of remitting 3M baht for the representative office, but only during the first 5 years. Also, that money can be used to pay the aforementioned foreigner salary in Thailand, so that money is not wasted.

I've seen in this forum that many people went with the company and the 4 Thais structure. Seems like more expensive in the long-term, at least when the 4 Thais are doing nothing productive (I agree that it's a completely different case when those 4 Thais are actually doing work for the company).

Any thoughts? Why is this option never recommended? Am I missing something in my analysis? Is there anyone here who owns a representative office in Thailand? 

You can read more about representative offices here: https://www.siam-legal.com/thailand-law/guide-to-the-representative-office-in-thailand/ or here: https://pugnatorius.com/repoffice/

5 hours ago, Rally123 said:

At the beginning of this year I kept getting requests from my UK bank regarding my paying of tax in Thailand. My wife is named in my joint account also received these notifications. They also wanted something called a 'TIN'. I haven't a clue as to what they were on about as I don't, or my wife, pay tax in Thailand.

Anyway after about 4 requests for this info we received no more. Can someone please explain in simple terms why they need to know how much I pay tax here?

This seems related to the new Automatic Exchange of Information (http://www.oecd.org/tax/transparency/automaticexchangeofinformation.htm). The basic idea is that banks exchange non-resident financial account information with the tax authorities in the account holders’ country of residence.

In your case, you are not a resident of the UK, and so your bank doesn't know what country to share information with. Thailand will start exchanging information in 2020-2021, so in theory you could get a Thai TIN number and give that to your UK bank. They will then start sharing information with Thailand in a couple of years.

As usual in these types of situations, proceed with caution.

7 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

That would mean that all the spending money in tourists pockets is subject to Thai tax, if they earned it this year.

That law only applies to tax residents (i.e., those staying in Thailand for more than 6 months in a calendar year). Most tourists don't stick around that long.

7 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

How can the Thai gov determine which dollar I transfer, the one I earned last week or the one I earned last year, they can only ever look at the source of the money, ie: if it says "monthly salary Mr smith" or transfer from savings account.

I'm guessing that there are specific cases that are easy to prove. For example, an actor who lives in Thailand, goes to Los Angeles to film a movie, earns millions of dollars, and then brings part of that to Thailand in that same year for whatever reason they may have for not waiting longer. That person is in the public spotlight, so he probably won't try anything funny.

For the average person bringing a few hundred thousand baht from unknown sources, the government won't even bother. Furthermore, the tax on 300,000 baht, for example, is like 4,000 baht after allowances. Getting court orders and launching international investigations just for the tiny possibility of collecting 4,000 baht from someone doesn't make much sense.

Thanks to everyone for your answers.

From what I can see, the law clearly states that I should declare the foreign income brought into the country. From a legal perspective, anyone spending more than 180 days here in a given year should get a Tax ID and declare the foreign income brought into the country, as long as it's income from the current year.

There seems to be no real enforcement of this rule, but that doesn't mean the law is not there.

Now, however, I do have my concerns because in this country things sometimes work exactly the opposite of what they should, so doing the right, legal thing might actually raise some flags. Has someone ever declared foreign income brought into the country? If so, were there any questions asked?

I don't mind paying a bit of tax in Thailand; after all I've been here most of 2016, so paying is not a problem at all. My concern is that they could misinterpret what I'm doing.

I used to live in Europe, and even though I always had everything correctly declared, tax departments there always wanted more, and a visit from them was never good news. Not sure if Thailand's Revenue Department is as hungry for money as their counterparts in Europe though.

2 hours ago, overherebc said:

As a student and then a tourist why would you even think about that? Unless you were working illegally you were not earning any money.

Do you think someone on holiday here for a year should pay tax on the money they spend on the holiday?

Well, the law says that anyone who stays for over 183 days in a given year becomes a tax resident, and needs to pay tax on foreign income brought into the country. Here is the source: www.rd.go.th/publish/6044.0.html

Hello,

Last year I was in Thailand for over 183 days, hence became a resident for tax purposes of the Kingdom. I was a student for the first part of the year, and then traveled around Southeast Asia for the rest of the time, going back to Thailand often.

A few weeks ago I went to the Revenue Department to ask how could I declare the income brought into Thailand, and I was given a Tax ID, although I left with more questions than answers, and the person who helped me seemed a bit shocked, as if I was the first person ever to go to them for this (probably :) ). They told me to report this income as  บริการ (borigaan). I'm afraid, however, that this could imply working in Thailand, since there is no way to specify that the money is brought from overseas or that the source is not Thai.

Any thoughts/experiences with this?

Thanks!