Mike Teavee

8 hours ago, stat said:

There is a genuine misunderstanding here.

 

You are talking about FIFO for the calculation of the gain in the shares.

 

I am talking about what part of my proceeds are remitted to Thailand. If FIFO for the remittance is used the first monies that are remitted is my principal as it was first existent.

Not a misunderstanding more of a divergence in what the Sherrings statement is saying, to me it is only referring to the way the Gain is calculated & makes no reference to how the proceeds are remitted which I believe is pro-rata.

Time will tell but in the meantime I won't be remitting any Capital Gains to Thailand until the position is crystal clear, same with Rental & Dividend income.

I wonder if Thailand has any idea how much money isn't being remitted because of the lack of clarity around this (I'm only remitting 235K for me & 210K for the GF this year & next, when normally it would be 4X that pa) or how many people are putting of large purchases (which is ironic given the very recent push to increase foreign ownership of condos / leased land).

2 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

See Sherrings/TRD question 9.

That simply means it's up to you to decide whether income you're remitting is assessable or not. 

In the context of the CGT debate you may assess that the money you're bringing over is the original income so is not assessable, I believe you're wrong & part of it is assessable but it would only matter if TRD ever audited you. 

13 minutes ago, stat said:

If you use FIFO in your example the first 20K would be principal i.e. tax exempt in Thailand when remitted. Other countries use all FIFO to my knowledge (US,UK, Germany etc). If that is indication enough for TRD to use Fifo no one knows besides a certain member of this forum.

No it wouldn't, FIFO would mean the oldest assets I own are sold first & then I'm taxed on the gain on those... 

E.g. £20,000 made up of:-

1. 5,000 shares at £1 
2. 2,500 shares at £2
3. 1,250 shares at £4  

Lets say those shares are now worth £5....

1. FIFO means I sell 2,000 of the 1st tranche at £5 = £10,000 for a gain (excluding costs / taper relief etc...) of £8,000
2. LIFO means I sell 1,250 from the 3rd Tranche at £5 (realising £6,250 for a profit of £1,250) & 750 from my 2nd tranche (realising £3,750 for a net profit £2,250) Total profit = £3,500.

Edit: Apologies if any of the maths is off but the GF is nagging to go out for dinner, hopefully people will understand the point I'm trying to make.

1 minute ago, stat said:

ignore the answer provided by TRD themself in the sherrings document.

I’ve replied to that point above, Sherrings/TRD have made no comment about the remittance of Capital Gains. 

Here’s the 2nd video (CGT is around the 16 minute mark) 

13 minutes ago, stat said:

Can you kindly recall who from TRD made the statement that a pro rata method will be used? Thanks!

As mentioned it featured in 2 Expat Tax Video Q&A sessions, Mike L has linked to one of them above. 

18 minutes ago, stat said:

 

 

https://sherrings.com/foreign-source-income-personal-tax-thailand.html

Question 7 answered by TRD themself. However who decides which accounting method is to be used has not been answered so far. This is why it is obvious that the tax document is simply wrong presenting the pro rata method as a fact.

 

Thanks but.... 

... Does not say anything about LIFO/FIFO accounting methods used when remitting the money, it just says "The cost of the Investment is determined in accordance with a generally accepted accounting method that's appropriate for the Investment Type" which only impacts the Capital Gain calculation, not what happens when that money is remitted.

E.g. I buy some stock for a total of £20,000 & using FIFO rules, sell £10,000 of it making £2,500 profit on that tranche so my Investment to Gain ratio is 80:20, I remit £5,000 to Thailand and £4000 is investment, £1,000 is Gain. 

However, if I'm told to use LIFO I might only make £1,000 profit so my Investment to Gain ratio is approx. 90:10, I remit £5,000 to Thailand and £4,500 is Investment, £500 is Gain. 

Neither of those examples lets me remit £5,000 and claim it all came out of the original investments pool.

Just now, stat said:

So you do not have any document to back it up, that is exactly what I thought.  Sherrings states as an answer from TRD that an accepatable accounting method should be used. So I do not understand why you present your opinion "pro rate method will be used" as a fact but based on your history I do understand.

 

I haven't seen a statement from Sherrings saying that so would appreciate a link to it. 

The Expat Tax Video Q&A sessions (freely available on YouTube & posted already on this thread) clearly stated their opinion that any remittances which included a Capital Gains element would be pro-rated based on the ratio of Investment to Gain.

If they are correct then repeating the example from earlier, an investment of £10,000 realising a £2,500 gain, would give a ratio of 80:20 Investment:Gain so remit £5000, £4000 would be Investment & £1,000 would be gain.   

9 minutes ago, stat said:

If you can use Lifo, principal comes first when transmitted. Sherrings states as an answer from TRD in question 7 that a generally accepted accounting method is to be used, that would/could be Lifo!

LIFO = "Last In First Out" which surely means the principle comes out last as the "Last In" would be Gains/Interest 

1 hour ago, JohnnyBD said:

I have a real life test question:

I have a 5-year CD that I bought in 2023 in the US. It pays interest monthly. The interest is transferred to my US checking account when it posts each month for use. I report and pay taxes on the interest each tax year. When the CD matures in 2028, under the current Thai tax rules, if I remit the CD money to Thailand, can I classify it as pre-2024? If you think the CD money becomes assessable income, do you have any TRD guidance to support your opinion?

I take it a "CD" is a "Certificate of Deposit" & not a "Contract for Difference" (Which is what we call CDs, in the finance sense, in the UK), isn't that just a Fixed Term Deposit account & so the original capital invested (and any interest earned) in 2023 is free from Thai Tax whereas any interest earned after 1/1/2024 could be liable to Thai Tax assuming it wasn't covered by a DTA (And in the case of US I'm pretty sure it will be covered, your DTA is much more comprehensive than other countries DTAs).

2 hours ago, JimGant said:

Anyway, TRD's one-time good deal exemption is only interested in a number you can use as your total exemption for post 2023 remittances. This number should be obtained by the balance sheet of the value of all your financial assets on 31 Dec 2023. And this number would include fair market value of your securities, which, of course, would include those unrealized gains.

Can you point to anything (even an unofficial source) that agrees with you when it comes to Capital Gains being re-baselined as at 31/12/2023.

I asked this question more or less when this whole thing started & whilst we've not had a definitive statement from TRD, the view of most people on the board (& the Expat Tax consultants) was that the Gain is calculated based on the original cost of purchasing the asset as it is in the majority of countries/cases.

I also asked the question what would happen if instead of remitting the Capital Gain, you used it to purchase a new asset & sold it soon after which (given dealing costs/spread) would probably result  in a small Capital loss.  Again no definitive answer from TRD but consensus seemed to be you might be pushing your luck with them on large transfers & if they choose to dig deeper into you finances could decide the money used to purchase the last asset included the Capital Gains.  

3 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

Again, I can only go of what I have read/watched online but you use a percentage basis to determine what part of your remittance is original investment & what part is gain. 

 

E.g. I buy some shares for £10,000 and make a £2,500 profit on it making a 25% gain then anything I remit is considered 75% original investment & 25% gain. 

 

Q9 on the Sherrings link refers to you deciding whether you're remitting assessable income (essentially anything that isn't designated as non-assessable in a DTA) it does not say you can choose which part from the sale of assets your remitting is original income / gain.

 

Apologies, got my maths completely messed up when I calculated the remittance percentages (in my defence is was before 6am, 1st coffee & 1st shower). 

The percentage remitted would be 80% (£10,000 of £12,500) Original Investment & 20% (£2,500 of £12,500) Gain so if you were to remit £5,000 £4,000 of it would be Original Investment & £1,000 capital gain.

8 hours ago, JimGant said:

So what if the value on 31/12/2023 includes the unrealized gain from initial purchase. That unrealized gain, I maintain, can be considered "income" -- as can be shown in many scenarios from different countries. Thus, it can be considered part of the "foreign source income" from before 2024 that is given an exemption from remittance taxation. That certainly could result in a spirited discussion with a TRD official -- who, sadly, probably wouldn't have a clue. But, hey, why would you not give yourself every financial advantage, particularly if you've got several examples from the internet to support your position. Plus, you've got probably a 1% chance of being called in for a chat about the validity of remitted pre 2024 income.

Any unrealised gain is only a paper gain until you sell the asset at which point it becomes the actual Gain and that's what counts for Tax (In the UK anyway excluding the re-baselining of Property Values so they can stiff Expats for CGT when we come to sell our homes there). 

I do agree there is very little chance of being caught (but we're trying to discuss the rules not enforcement) & even less chance of them being able to understand capital gains position on stock you've held for many years but they always have the "Well I think you owe this" card to play and tax you accordingly. 

9 hours ago, anrcaccount said:

 

POR 161/162 refer to income. Not remitting original capital / principal.

 

When the investments are sold, only the gains are taxable, if remitted. 

 

Stock investments comprise capital, and gains(if any) ,when sold.  This "savings" terminology is irrelevant. When they are sold is only relevant for the income portion, if remitted, as you reference POR 161/162.  

 

What's not clear?

 

 

Really? So the Sherrings link , question 9, contradicts this completely? 

https://sherrings.com/foreign-source-income-personal-tax-thailand.html

Again, I can only go of what I have read/watched online but you use a percentage basis to determine what part of your remittance is original investment & what part is gain. 

E.g. I buy some shares for £10,000 and make a £2,500 profit on it making a 25% gain then anything I remit is considered 75% original investment & 25% gain. 

Q9 on the Sherrings link refers to you deciding whether you're remitting assessable income (essentially anything that isn't designated as non-assessable in a DTA) it does not say you can choose which part from the sale of assets your remitting is original income / gain.

5 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

"I maintain that financial investments you had on 31 Dec 2023, including unrealized capital gains, are tax exempt under the one-time decree protecting remittances of pre 2024 foreign source income".

 

Even the property portfolio that you own, you know, those financial investments that would incur capital gains when sold but are really only savings in disguise?

 

 

Have to say the examples I've seen from the likes of Expat Tax say very clearly that the Capital Gain is based on the initial costs of the assets & not the value as at 31/12/2023. 

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I think the plan was for the Government‘a hedgefund managers to make off like bandits.

And I think you were absolutely spot on... Can you imagine how much you could have made on that "Bet"!

For me the worst part about Brexit was that Camaronon had no plan if the vote turned out to be leave except to walk (run) away & this is the guy who is probably going to be the next face of the Conservative party. 

How sad is it to be British & an army of Lions ruled by Sheep ...  {Edit I am British, raised on a council estate in Warrington, NW England so no slur against my fellow Brits) 

In my career we presented a plan to management about what we thought was the right way to go but always had to have a "Plan B" for what we would do if they didn't agree... Camaroron's plan was to "Run Away"... 

11 hours ago, stat said:

You explicitly stated : No work permit, no tax number.

 

It was pointed out to you that you were wrong. You write "Wow how clever" Lost for words ...

It would help to agree if you were proven wrong. A multitude of people have gotten a TIN without a work permit.

 

You maybe need a tax number for your offshore bank account now or in the future. In additions several sources claim that you will need a TIN for an extension in the future, but no offical proclamation yet.

 

 

I have a TIN, never worked in Thailand & my only basis of being here is Visa Exempt or Non-IMM O ("Retirement")... So can confirm, you do not need to work in Thailand to have a TIN 

One of my UK Banks asked me for my TIN (Before I had one) & I told them I couldn't be bothered to jump through all the hoops to get one for the paltry <£2 in interest (already declared to UK Tax Authority) they pay me so close

my account if they like (I keep 6 figure UK in there as it's my "Current Account" Mortgage), never got back to me. 

MY other UK Bank accounts have no interest in my TIN but would close down my account if they found out I lived in Thailand Permanently (Which obviously I don't as I'm on a Non-Immigrant Visa - QED I don't live in Thailand). 

Meanwhile Philippines is offering Immigrant (PR) Status to people married to a Filipino/a...    

9 hours ago, OJAS said:

 

If the Thai government were ever minded to unilaterally ditch DTA's, then they had better IMHO brace themselves for swift retaliatory action from our home country governments, in the form of travel bans and the freezing of Thai assets held in our home countries, much like those which were imposed on Putin and various Russian oligarghs in the wake of his Ukrainian "special military operation". Once Thai hiso's with sizeable frozen assets in our home countries start squealing like stuck pigs, we can but hope that this might finally knock some sense into the government on this whole matter.

Seem to recall that the UK DTA has a 6 month notice period in it so if Thailand were to decide to withdraw then as long as it gave the 6 months notice before doing so there would be absolutely no fall out from it, UK just wouldn't care* as on balance there's nothing in that agreement for them. 

*If you want to know how much the UK cares about it's pensioners living in Thailand, read up on "Frozen Pensions"

15 minutes ago, Presnock said:

I agree with your last sentence.  Hope it all works out for you.

Trying/Planning hard to ensure it does & the ultimate plan is to join you lucky sods on the LTR Visa in 2026 😄  

Here's hoping things don't change too much between now & then, TBH the talk of Global Taxation is making me think twice about investing >$250K into a Condo, if it's not been squashed by 2026 I'll probably lean more towards Thai Bonds (or some other asset that can be easily liquidated) than property. 

4 hours ago, Presnock said:

by not changing one's mailing address for a bank account other than the original address, it is my opinion (maybe mine only) that you are avoiding or evading taxes somewhere.  I too lost my bank account of 50 years because after I sold my stateside home, I refused to use a relative's or friend's address in order to maintain that account.  There are always ways to legally use your true address and still have accounts in at least the US.  Like I said my opinion as I have seen some European explain how to legally get a local bank account in some countries without having a mailing address there.

How am I Avoiding/Evading tax when

1. All of my income arises in the UK & I (well my accountant) files a tax return to report it.
2. Any income I've brought into Thailand thus far has been non-assessable for Tax either because I was non-Tax resident (for most of the time I've been bringing money into Thailand to set me up for retirement I was working in SG) or was from previous year's income (E.g. When I left Singapore my final salary payment was in Dec 2019 & I transferred over more of less what was in my Singapore bank accounts in Feb 2020 - None of it Tax Assessable). 

It is only this (well technically next) year when the possibility arises that some income I've earned in the UK might be tax assessable but as I'm only remitting up to my allowance + 150K it doesn't matter as there will be no tax to pay. 

Now if Thailand were to move to a Global Taxation model then I would agree that I could be avoiding/evading Tax by not reporting to Thailand income from my UK Banks, but if that ever happened I'll be Non-Tax Resident so it wouldn't apply to me.

You cannot Avoid or Evade Tax if you do not owe any Tax in the 1st place.

11 hours ago, norbra said:

Please explain,as a retiree I bring around 900,000thb (400,000 assessable) each year,how does My tax  liabilty fit into your scenario?

It all depends on your allowances...

E.g. Not a complete list but of the top of my hear...

• 60K - Everybody get it...  Additional 60K - If you're married & your wife doesn't file a return 
• 30K if you have any children... Additional 30K for any additional children born after 2018 
• 25K if you buy Health Insurance 
• 100K if you have life insurance
• 100K if  you're receiving a pension
• 190K if you're over 65

Then add in the 1st 150K is tax free & take the total away from your 400K that is assessable...

E.g.

• A Single person < 65 with no additional allowances would have 60K + 150K = 210K take this away from the 400K & you would pay tax on 190K (which would work out as 8,000B) - NB This assumes the income isn't covered by a DTA
• A 65 year old with no pension would have 60K + 190K + 150K = 400K - No tax to pay 
• A Married 65 year old with a pension, 2 kids, Health Insurance & Life Insurance would have allowances of 615K, more if they had additional allowances that I didn't list above.  

8 hours ago, schultzlivgthai said:

It’s almost like he’s excited to pay taxes!!

🤣🤣

No, I'm excited to get back >8K in withheld tax... I know I won't owe any tax as I'm managing my remittances to the level of my allowances+150K so there is no possibility of me owing tax 🙂