Mike Teavee

2 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

Of course the LTR is an Non-Immigrant Visa, only PR & Citizenship would be considered "Immigrant" 

 

Seems some people are easily confused or believe that the LTR is not a Non-Immigrant Visa... 

Non-Immigrant Visa

This is normally a single-entry visa into Thailand that’s valid for 90 days. Depending on the type of Non-Immigrant visa you can also get a work permit and open a bank account.

This visa can be extended to a long-term visa, depending on the type of Non-Immigrant Visa you apply for.

Depending on the purpose of stay, there are various types of Non-Immigrant Visas available from Thai embassies and consulates or at the immigration, some including:

1. Non-B Business Visa
2. Non-O Retirement Visa
3. Non-O Marriage Visa
4. Non-B Investment Visa
5. Long-Term Residence Visa

https://www.thaiembassy.com/thailand-visa/thailand-visa-types

27 minutes ago, connda said:

Nothing good.

That's my fear, I would much rather they just left things as they were or at least commit to "Grandfathering In" people who have lived in Thailand for many years. 

It's easy for me to say "I'm all right Jack" as I'm in my 50s & already have Health Insurance but guys who have lived here for 20+ years & are now in their 70s would find it really difficult/expensive/impossible to get it if it became a requirement. 

Unfortunately the last time they did this (To the Non-IMM OA holders) they didn't "Grandfather In" existing holders so the track record isn't looking good.

21 minutes ago, connda said:

Mine too.  The year that they required insurance for Non-OA, the IO at my immigration office was literally rubbing his hands together, "You come on Non-OA so need insurance!" <snicker snicker snicker>  The guy was literally smiling.

I pointed out in the passport that I came in on a Non-Imm B, worked for three years, and then went on extensions based on marriage.  So the underlying visa is still a Non-Imm B.  I've no plans on leaving, and Immigration and the Thai government in general seems much more friendly to those on Non-Imm B visas anyway.  Why change?

Your "Stay" is based on your extension not your original Visa so if you were originally on a Non-IMM B & extended on the grounds of being married to a Thai then you would be considered as staying under a Non-IMM O Marriage.

It's impossible to change to a Non-IMM OA without leaving the country to get that visa & even then, guys who live here on a Non-IMM OA Marriage don't need Health Insurance.

15 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Where is the non-immigrant Long Term Resident visa?

I would guess that it would be included in (5) Category Non-Immigrant Code O (Others) 

Thai Elite visas are classed as "Tourist" visas for the purpose of immigration 

11 hours ago, oldcpu said:

 

The LTR visa is not a non-immigrant visa.

Of course the LTR is an Non-Immigrant Visa, only PR & Citizenship would be considered "Immigrant" 

On 5/26/2024 at 6:41 AM, BusNo8 said:

My monthly rock bottom general spend living in central Bangkok is about 27.5k up from 22.5k due to inflation. Add another ten percent for holiday fund, medical dental. I need two dental implants so that comes out of another bucket.

 

Food is still cheap. Open market for veggies. Breakfast at home. Dishes with fried egg over rice b70. Having said that my wife will bring meals home which we'll both agree still have good value. B10 for a fried egg I'm not happy with and it's rarely fried for me but rather sitting about.

 

It's more expensive but I'm very happy I'm here and not in the US for a dozen reasons

I think the fact inflation has meant your monthly spends have gone up by roughly 20% should be ringing alarm bells for anybody planning on retiring to Thailand on that sort of Budget, especially somebody like a UK Pensioner living on a Frozen pension. 

Once retired, we've made our beds & have to live with it, but I would recommend to anybody considering the move to pick a number, double it & then add in a "Fudge Factor", I ended up working 1 more year in a job I hated so I had the "Fudge Factor" & am so glad I did as I realised that I needed to add an extra 25% to my budget to have the lifestyle that I wanted in retirement.

One question though, if you are living on pretty modest means, why live in Bangkok? Why not live somewhere where your money goes a lot further? 

29 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Does anyone know with any level of certainty:

 

1. If my wife transfers cash from our joint account in the US, to her personal account in Thailand, would the money be taxable? 

 

2. If my wife transfers cash from her personal account in the US, to our joint account in the US, and then to her personal account in Thailand, would the money be taxable? 

 

3. If my wife transfers cash from her personal account in the US, to her personal account in Thailand, would the money be taxable? 

 

 

It depends on whether the cash is assessable income or not, not where she sends it from 

E.g. If the cash in question was savings from before 2024 then No Tax, If the cash in question was from US Social Security no Tax (DTA), if the Cash was from some other source then it's possible that there may be some tax due but highly unlikely as she's probably already paid more Tax in the US than would be due in Thailand (Again, covered by DTA). 

52 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

There is no merger with the O and O-A visa.

Both are separately listed as still being available.

Can you post a link as to where it says this as if it's from an Embassy site then these are unlikely to have been updated yet. 

1 hour ago, OJAS said:

 

The reduction in the mandatory minimum health insurance coverage from 3M to 440k will only apply to long-stay visa applicants between September and December, according to the thread at https://aseannow.com/topic/1328402-big-thailand-visa-changes-from-june-1/

 

What I personally find extremely worrying is that, if we are, indeed, talking about a merger of the non-O and non-OA visas in the case of retirement, the Immigration Bureau might use this as an excuse for extending the health insurance requirement (which will presumably increase back to 3M from 1/1/25) to annual extensions of stay for retirement based on original non-O (as well as non-OA) visas. Not good news for those who have ditched their original non-OA visas so as to avoid the insurance requirement by exiting Thailand, re-entering visa-exempt and then obtaining 90-day non-O conversions at their local offices. And definitely not good news for those who, for whatever reason (age or health issues), are unable to obtain minimum health insurance coverage of 3M.

 

It would be an increase in Health Insurance coverage for me as my policy has 3.5Million inpatients only so I'd need to pay extra to add on the 40K Outpatients 😞 

Some suggestion (around the 3 minute mark) that you might need to have proof of Employment to get it as a "Digital Nomad" which makes a mockery of it being available for "Freelancers"

Article here:https://thepattayanews.com/2024/05/30/thai-government-introduces-destination-thailand-visa-for-digital-nomads-and-long-term-workers/

Has made it into the UK Press... 

Thailand makes sweeping changes for foreign travellers in record tourism bid

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/southeast-asia/thailand-digital-nomad-students-visa-b2552452.html

2 hours ago, george said:

Not yet announced by The Immigration Bureau , the announcement was done by MFA just yesterday after the cabinet meeting. Immigration is normally not fast with policy updates, so watch this space for updates when it happens.

Presumably it would need to be in Friday's Royal Gazette if it's to come in force by 1st June

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

If you took this question to TRD and asked them what their position would be, I can see TRD offering you money just to go away and not come back! 🙂

 

I GUESS, a product like this would require annual settlement to figure out the net effect over the course of the year.

 

Lol... It's actually very straight forward, interest is calculated on daily basis based on how much is owed in the account (i.e. how much you borrowed minus what you've put in there) & then applied to the account monthly. 

The settlement amount is whatever you borrowed + any accrued interest and is due at the end of the mortgage so there is nothing to stop you withdrawing up to the amount agreed at any point up until then as log as you pay it back by the end of the term. 

When they were 1st launched (Virgin One account in the UK quickly followed by Woolwich Open Account) they were nicknamed an "Aussie Rules Mortgage" so I don't know if a similar mortgage is popular in Australia.

Just now, AreYouGerman said:

 

Because it would be a smart move! Young in & old out! 😂

Or maybe, Young in on Non-IMM O, Everybody over 75 gets a free LTR , (Can we make that everybody over 57, I'm only 58) 🙂 

8 hours ago, george said:

- Restructuring and reducing the number of Non-Immigrant visa categories from 17 to 7, starting in September 2024.

Why did I just get a chill down my spine!!! my Non-IMM O extension is due 26th September, think I do it as early as I can.

8 hours ago, george said:

- Adjusting the criteria and conditions for the Long Stay visa for elderly people who wish to spend their retirement in Thailand, starting in September 2024.

And then a hopeful feeling again - Maybe I'll wait to see the new LTR requirements 🙂 

18 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

R) An offshore loan remitted to Thailand is not assessable income.  There are many instances of this. 

 

If a foreigner takes out a loan in their home country and remits those funds to Thailand and says they represent non assessable income, because the funds are borrowed, that might be the end of the matter as far as taxpayer and TRD are concerned, ot it might not.

 

If the foreigner subsequently pays off that loan, in their home country, using income that would have been assessable to tax in Thailand, had it been remitted, there is no requirement for the loan repayment to be reported in Thailand. Yet the status of those funds has now changed, they are no longer borrowed funds and the foreigner has just committed tax evasion......or has he? According to the above, no, my sniff test says yes.

@Dogmatix 

 

Before anyone has a go at me for discussing tax evasion, according to an entirely credible post above, remitting a loan in this manner is not assessable, the purpose of this post is therefore to determine is that is true or not.......I say it is not.

I've been thinking about this a lot as I have a "Current Account" Mortgage which works by taking off anything you have in the account from the Capital owed when calculating Interest (E.g. I have approx. £500 over the amount I borrowed in there & they pay me interest, if I took out £1,000 I would pay them interest on the £500 I would then owe). 

So if I were to take £50K out, would it be savings (I put the money in there to pay off the mortgage 18 years ago) or would it be a Loan (It is a mortgage)? Either way it feels non-assessable.

If I were to remit that £50K then add it back from selling some shares so I was in credit again (incurring 1 day's worth of interest) would that be me remitting savings/a loan or could it be seen as me cycling the share sale proceeds that I used to replenish the account.

No chance of them being able to "Catch Me", just curious as to what people's views are on this, I believe I'm just remitting savings that I've had in a Bank Account since 2004 (only catch is the Balance would only show approx. £500), how I then go on to repay my mortgage is of no concern to Thailand.

11 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

 

I find the advice to get a gift agreement drawn up and notarised overseas strange and I am not sure who suggested it, since it is unattributed.  Certainly there is no basis for it under the RC or the Civil and Commercial Code. There is no public notary law in Thailand and technically there are no public notaries.  Has anyone ever come across a Thai government department asking for a notarised documents?  There are Thai lawyers that call themselves notaries and provide notary services for use overseas but that is based on an internal regulation of the Lawyers Association of Thailand, not national law.  Thai government departments ask for things to be certified by another government, not by a notary.  There is no requirement to get loan documents notarised, even in countries that have notaries and there is far greater likelihood of a dispute over a loan than a gift.  So why for a gift document?  Personally I think it would suffice to draw up a simple gift agreement which could be drawn up retroactively, if needed.

A couple of the Expat Tax firms have recommended that the best way to "Gift" money to your spouse is to do it overseas & draw up a document (in the country where you're making the Gift) that clearly states the gift is to them & you have no vested interest in it.

I don't think it's been mentioned that this needs to be notarised but obviously the more "Formal" the document, the more weight it would carry, as mentioned, this would be done in the country of gifting so not usually a problem to get it notarised if you wanted to.

It's certainly not a Thai regulation, just a "Belt & Braces" approach to adding weight to the fact that the "Gift" is really a "Gift", i.e. if TRD challenged the Gift you'd have something to show them to prove that it was a Gift - No guarantee they'll accept it but the more formal the document the more likely that they would over something written on the back of a fag (cigarette) packet which is better than nothing at all.

2 hours ago, ThiAmo said:

Sorry if the following or something similar has already been discussed.

I am currently in the process of buying a house for my Thai wife here in Thailand with resources from abroad. The land title (chanote) will be entirely in her name. 

In your estimated opinion will this transaction (with fund transfer to her Thai bank account) be regarded and accepted by the TRD as a Gift for the spouse and thus be non taxable income-wise? Or does my co-inhabitation as husband infringe the requirement that the giver of the gift can't benefit in any way of the donation him/herself.

If accepted as a gift, would wife have to pay tax on the gift anyway?

Do I need a tax consultant?

Thanks a lot.

 

If your wife has an account in your home country then it would be safer to make a Gift to her there (drawing up a document that details the Gift) and have her remit the money over. 

If she doesn't then I believe a Gift is a Gift & your wife would not have to pay tax on it if you sent her the money directly to her account in Thailand, however others have made an argument for it being assessable income for you even if you send it directly to your Wife so advisable to seek some help from a qualified tax accountant.

As to whether you living in the house that she is buying with the "Gift" means you're receiving a benefit, I personally don't think it is as you could argue that you pay for all the groceries, utilities etc... but if needs be you could draw up an agreement whereby you pay your wife "Rent" each month (though this might mean she needs to pay tax on the Income) - Again, a decent Tax consultant should be able to advise how best to approach it. 

If the Gift is > 20Million, your wife would need to pay 5% Gift Tax on it unless you split it over different tax/calendar years

10 minutes ago, Pattaya57 said:

I said the guy in black shirt was trying to calm things down. He's the only one of the 3 who didn't get a beating. Guy in grey shirt looked aggressive to me

From the video inside the bar & other commentary it looked like the guy in the black shirt (believe it was actually blue ) who looks like he's trying to calm it all down outside was actually the one who didn't pay his bill (Hence White shirt was adamant he'd already paid his & wouldn't pay again) & he was also the guy who shoved the other Farang outside. 

Just now, bob smith said:

how do you know the brits didn’t accept their culture?

 

by refusing to pay another persons bill??

that deserved a fatal kick to the temple?

 

what an absolute idiot you are!!

 

bob.

Don't get me wrong as they do look like Brits, but has it been confirmed anywhere that they are British or are people just repeating an unconfirmed fact based on their personal bias.  

51 minutes ago, Klonko said:

I am not mixing up anything and I am consistent with your post because, if read thoroughly my statement implies that it is 50% tax assessable income because it it not a gift for 50% though declared as gift.

But it wouldn’t be declared as a Gift as it’s not yours to Gift, you would only declare half of it as a gift. 
 

In my Example of £100K in a joint bank account, the gift is £50K which if remitted is 100% a gift. 
 

if she remits her £50K on top of this, then that has absolutely nothing to do with Gifts. 

1 hour ago, Klonko said:

Gifts made outside of Thailand and remitted to Thailand up to THB 10/20m by the receiver are not safe per se. If the gift comes from conjugal property such as income from personal property under Thai marital status, IMO 50% of the remittance are tax assessable income of the receiver.

 

I have set up a gift scheme for myself, but I will watch closely and decide before year end if my scheme is still viable. If viable, I will remit tax assessable income to my account resulting in a tax netted by the withholding tax on my Thai bank accounts. If not viable, the income tax on the "gifts" will also be netted by the withholding tax. I deliberately forego a refund of the withholding tax. To file or not to file is an open issue. My gift scheme gives me 50% more years I can live off savings before I have to use the 179 day rule.

 

If gifts are used without the required assertions from TRD, I recommend being prepared for taxability as plan B. Hopefully, more TRD guidance will be available before year end.

 

Re f): THB 10/20 mill

I think you might be mixing things up a little, you can't gift something to somebody that they already own so in the case of overseas conjugal property you can only gift your half. 

E.g. I have £100K in a jointly owned bank account with my Wife, I can't gift her £100K as £50K is already hers so I would Gift her £50K which she could then remit into Thailand tax free.

If she chooses to remit £100K then she is remitting the £50K Gift that I gave her (Tax Free) & £50K which has nothing to do with Gifts so would be subject to normal assessable income rules, but again, that is nothing to do with Gifts as that £50K wasn't a gift.