MistyBlue

Thanks for posting this. I was astounded to hear it mentioned that income/gains/profits earned before becoming a tax resident potentially *could* be taxed when remitted later as a tax resident, based on the technicality and grey areas of the current laws and orders. I can't see that actually happening due to the massive implications that would entail, but... the lack of clarity is killing. Let's hope something clearer materialises in the not too distant future.

Sadly there is a point where continued discussion with this poster becomes futile, especially when the replies become rude. I think that any reasonable person will see that your contributions have been worthwhile to read. I think it's good that posters can discuss this topic, debate with respect and share information as the situation unfolds. I will be continuing to take part in this topic and will discuss various claims and views made whenever I think I have something to contribute.

No, I haven't realised that at all and I've been consistent in all my posts that I think that is simply incorrect. I quoted the revenue department because I believe it clarifies that Thais and Foreigners are treated no differently from a tax resident perspective and that your claims are incorrect. I think citing the RD was quite appropriate for what we are discussing.

The Thai Revenue department qualifies the status, here's the extract again which treats Thais and foreigners no in different in relation to their tax resident status. 1.Taxable Person Taxpayers are classified into “resident” and “non-resident”. “Resident” means any person residing in Thailand for a period or periods aggregating more than 180 days in any tax (calendar) year. A resident of Thailand is liable to pay tax on income from sources in Thailand as well as on the portion of income from foreign sources that is brought into Thailand. A non-resident is, however, subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand.

No, I don't believe there are different requirements between a Thai person and a foreigner in this regard who hold the same tax residence status. No, I don't wish to change my previous answer.

No, I haven't agreed with you on this point at all.

But you said it did and that's what I responded to? Here's your original post:

Where in "The new tax law" does it single out Thai nationals to be treated different against what would be an identical tax residency status as a foreigner? I don't think it does.

Please can you provide a source for your claim? I think it is incorrect. The Thai tax code states a person is only tax resident if in the country 180 days or more, it is silent on nationality and I can find no evidence in that code that Thais are taxed on worldwide income regardless of their tax residency status. If you believe it be to the contrary, then please provide source and evidence of the information, it would be very useful.

Ok, but we were talking about your claim that Thais and foreigners had different requirements for tax residency, which is not related to your questions. Never-the-less I've answered your questions, your text in italics. 1) Are foreigners who are not tax resident in Thailand, allowed to remit funds here? Yes 2) If the answer to (1) above is no, why? N/A 3) If the answer to (1) above is yes, is that money potentially taxable, even though the foreigner is not resident or tax resident here? If not resident when earned, no. If resident when earned but not resident when remitted then currently not known and further clarity required. 4) If the answer to (3) is yes, why, how and on what basis? N/A

I'm sorry but I respectfully put it to you that you presenting an opinion, not a fact. Your earlier questions bear no relation to tax residency. That is already set out in the Thai RD website and that point seems fairly clear.

I do not agree. A Thai citizen is taxable on income where ever and when ever it remitted, they cannot suddenly decide to avoid that reasonability. A foreigner is different, they can sever their relationship with a foreign country at any time and then reinitiate it later. You seem to be presenting this in your posts as a matter of fact but I think what you have written is incorrect. I decided to check the revenue department's website and can find no distinction between thai citizenship and foreigners in relation to tax residence status. This is what the RD states and it makes no distinction: 1. Taxable Person. Taxpayers are classified into “resident” and “non-resident”. “Resident” means any person residing in Thailand for a period or periods aggregating more than 180 days in any tax (calendar) year. A resident of Thailand is liable to pay tax on income from sources in Thailand as well as on the portion of income from foreign sources that is brought into Thailand. A non-resident is, however, subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand." If you think there is a distinction between Thais and foreigners in relation to tax residence then I'm happy to be corrected, but please provide source and quotes. For the wider question of whether remitting funds in a year when not tax resident in Thailand, that were earned in a year when was a resident I think there are still uncertainties and this point is still not clear (to me anyway). Indeed I think you make strong arguments why they wouldn't be taxed and hope you are right but (in my opinion not fact) there is still conflict and a potential loophole between the revenue code and the recent order on this point which will only be resolved through either further clear clarification from the RD department, or through what happens in practice in 2025, or through tax advice from one of the established tax advisories, or through a test case before a court.

Thanks for sharing this, very insightful. I see that he also a Director/Governor of the Thai stock exchange so certainly one that may be heard in shaping policy. Is there a link to the original source of his statement, please?

Going forwards perhaps we will need to keep records of assessable income earned in a tax year and match that to the year it is brought in. That is not unique to Thailand. Same could be said for any country in which one is a tax resident. This is not correct. Not all savings have been earned. A few examples: compensation payments, inheritance, lottery winnings, state benefits. In any case, the issue is not about how you made your savings, it's about how much income your savings generate in an assessable tax year. Then they will be committing tax fraud if they make that claim and they haven't.

Yeah return on assets could be more problematic. Key is evidencing the value paid before a gain is made. Easy enough if records are kept on purchases or if the gain is realised and capital reset before coming a tax resident. If not then some professional advice might be needed on how to determine the purchase cost of the asset.

I don't think they have said that at all. It is the assessable income brought in. (Interest generated from the savings whilst a tax resident. Not the capital value.)

What if they earn all that before they became a Thai tax resident. Then it isn't assessable income.

Again I think you are confusing the capital value of savings with the income of savings in an assessable year.

Exactly this. There is nothing in the tax code to say they tax capital remittance. Only income/gains during an assessable year is taxable.

I inadvertently phrased my response as a question rather than a statement, apologies I wasn't asking a question. I disagree with your interpretation. Thailand does not have a remittance tax. It has a tax on income that is earned in an assessable year whilst a tax resident, which is then payable when that income is remitted to Thailand (this is not the same as a remittance tax and may not actually end up being payable depending on the tax treaties). This seems consistent to me with the BOI responses being quoted, I just think you're interpreting the responses incorrectly. Time will tell...

Yes but only if you derived/made that money in an assessable year whilst you were a tax resident of Thailand.

But isn't that only if you derive the full 250k (the income/profit etc. that was made excluding initial capital) in the assessable year. You would have to be a tax resident in the assessable year the income was made for it to taxable, it would only be tax on the profit/income made during that assessable year. The tax would then only be paid in the year it is actually remitted.

Isn't this in relation to the filing date? Tax returns submitted Jan-March are for assessable income derived in the previous tax year?

Another discussion point to throw into the conversation... I was interested to read this quote in the media "...chairwoman of the Association of Investment Management, said the proposed tax on global investments does not include investments in mutual funds. Investment in this segment is not affected " I went and read the Thai Revenue Code and Section 42 sub items 24 and 24 does seem to suggest the exemption of income tax but I couldn't pinpoint if this only meant Thai funds or could include global/foreign funds. I hold funds in the UK (both closed ended investment trusts and open ended investment funds) so am wondering if there might be an exemption even in worse case scenario of the new rules. It might also be of interest to some of the Australian posters who I think talked about the impact of funds. Obviously I would take professional tax advice when the time comes, and hopefully some further guidance will materialise, but I wonder if fellow forum members have any comment/further insights/experience in this particular matter, especially if I'm getting this completely wrong.

This is great news for me, I've learnt something new from the discussion which helps massively. Thanks guys.