CygnusX1

I’m having a hard time seeing how those two statements by Anutin aren’t self-contradictory.

Perfect location in my opinion, but no fitness room or gym, at least not when I was last there 2 years ago.

Sorry, I thought from reading your full post that you were talking about the current legislation. However, my comment also applies to the proposed changes, in which 183 days is also not to be the sole criterion. In fact, it looks like Australian tax residency for someone spending more than 183 days out of the country each year will be easier to establish under the proposed changes, with a number of secondary tests in addition to the primary 183 day test. see https://www.moore-australia.com.au/news-and-views/september-2021/proposed-changes-to-the-tax-residency-provisions-f?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=LinkedIn-integration

It’s not as simple as that, less than 183 days in Australia per year is just one of a number of criteria used to determine tax residency, although I’d say the OP is certainly not a tax resident of Australia any more, not that I’d advise him to declare it.

In my town I’d say 10-20% are still wearing them inside supermarkets and shopping malls. Curiously, about the same percentage are wearing them outdoors, and I’m talking near deserted footpaths, not crowded street markets. This suggests to me that the mask diehards are either ultra fearful, or maybe making some kind of political statement. Apparently they’re still mandatory on public transport, though I don’t know how many are wearing them there, as I’ve not used public transport for over 2 years, and won’t until the mask mandate applying there is lifted.

Face masks. I can live with the soi dogs and motorbikes, but I’m not returning to a country where you have to wear a piece of cloth over your face, and the only faceless zombies I ever want to see are the ones in computer games. That’s despite the fact that I own a condo in Thailand and have 16 years left on an elite visa. I suspect that they’re never going away, so I’ll just have to cut my losses. My apologies to those on this forum who seem to love the masks.

Technology’s made life so much more interesting. Can’t imagine life now as it was when I was young, with no internet, no computer games, 3 TV channels on a tiny black and white screen, overseas travel only for the rich. Main thing that’s changed for the worse is reduction in freedom due to our obsession with health and safety.

20,001 including mine. Advantage of Thai property is that owning an unoccupied condo is very cheap, with no council tax, amazingly low juristic fee, tiny fixed charges for electricity and water and a negligible (for now) annual property tax. Then again, in the 3 years since I bought it, the value of my lovely Thai condo in a great location must have dropped around 50%, whereas my daggy flat in a poor location in Australia has increased 50%. Did choose the worst possible time to buy the Thai place of course.

On a lighter note, there are reports that a man in Germany received 90 vaccine shots as part of a nefarious scheme to produce fake vaccination certificates, with no apparent ill effects (a web search shows lots of links to story). I’d guess that 90 times the recommended dose of many common drugs would prove fatal.

Can’t believe that so many on this forum seem to love those horrid masks but baulk at being injected with a tiny needle. I’d have zero problems with being vaccinated every 6 months for the rest of my life, lots of elderly people have had annual flu shots for many years. There’s overwhelming evidence for the safety of the vaccines.

This is really starting to tie my brain up in knots of logic! Look at it from the perspective of someone who wants to be a non resident for tax purposes. Has he been in Australia for more than 183 days? Then he can’t be a non-resident, no debate. Has he been in Australia for less than 183 days? Then he might still be a resident if he’s spent more than 45 days in Australia and has family in Australia, or a house or economic interests in Australia. So in my case, because I satisfy the secondary criteria such as having a house and close relatives in Australia, as long as I spend at least 45 days in Oz each year I couldn’t be declared a non resident even if I wanted to be. Spend less than 45 days in Oz for a few years, then I might be at risk of being declared a non resident.

KhunHeineken, look at the following link posted by ozfarang - https://www.moore-australia.com.au/news-and-views/september-2021/proposed-changes-to-the-tax-residency-provisions-f?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=LinkedIn-integration Read the list of secondary tests, then look at their specific example of David, who wants to be a non-resident for tax purposes but can’t be, as last year he spent 50 days in Australia visiting his wife and children.

I was reacting to oznomad’s post - “It's generally harder to become non-resident than resident. The new (incoming) rules prove that point. Less than 45 days in 3 consecutive years to be able, in some circumstances, to become non-resident.” From the link to the Holding Redlich site - ceasing long-term residency: The individual must spend less than 45 days in the current income year in Australia and less than 45 days in Australia in each of the two preceding income years So, this seems to state that even if I wanted to become a non-resident for tax purposes, it’s very hard - the ATO will only let me become a non-resident if I spend less than 45 days in Australia, and then only in some circumstances. That’s why I was thinking, great, I now only have to spend 45 days in Australia, and then I’m a resident for tax purposes. Again, the 183 day rule is only stage 1 - to be declared a non resident you have to satisfy other requirements.

What’s reasonable doesn’t always have much in common with what’s the law!

Sure hope that proves to be the case, then I can spend a lot more time in Thailand.

Your example is the reason why, when I was absent from Australia for 9 months of each year pre virus, I made sure that I spent more time in my apartment in Australia than in my condo in Thailand. Balance of the year was spent in other countries. Easy to do if you have the resources to travel constantly and maintain properties in two countries (very cheap properties in my case!). As usual, it’s the less well-off who are hit the hardest with unconscionable tax laws.

I agree that you can simultaneously be an Australian citizen and a non resident for tax purposes. Surely you have to be a resident for tax purposes of at least one country, or maybe you can be stateless when it comes to tax residency? One for the lawyers.

We should be clear here that we’re talking about two different things - time spent in Australia for Centrelink benefits as against residency tests for taxation. Both of course are a huge concern.

My interpretation is that it would not - to be a non resident, you first have to satisfy stage 1, and then you would also have to satisfy stage 2. However, I’m not a lawyer! The second last paragraph of the holdingredlich site refers to Australian accommodation - concrete links to Australia will still be a factor in the new legislation. I hope I’m right too, as back in the days when we could travel, I was out of Australia for more than 183 days of every year, and intend to do the same if I can ever travel again. How about someone who lives in Australia for 5 months a year, and spends 1 month in each of 7 different countries. If he’s not a resident of Australia, where is he a resident?

Sorry, my post above was duplicated, and don’t know how to delete it.

If you carefully read the link to the holdingredlich site posted by tlcwaterfall on page 28, things may not be that dire. The 183 day test is only stage 1 - you will have to satisfy other proposed criteria in stage 2 to be declared a non resident for tax purposes. Wealthy people can actually save huge amounts of capital gains tax by being non resident, and I think the ATO’s more interested on cracking down on them. Nevertheless, if you live in Thailand it’s a really good idea to spend some time in Australia each year, and if possible, have an Australian address.

I’ve always felt safer wandering at random around Bangkok than in many European cities, where I’ve occasionally been approached by aggressive beggars. Despite spending a lot more time there, it’s never happened to me in Thailand.

Would anyone know how or where to pay an annual property tax bill? I’m going to be stuck in Australia for a long while, but a friend’s returned from a stay at my Jomtien condo, having collected my mail, which includes a statement for tax of 1886 baht (I think - it’s all in Thai). If he returns to Thailand later this year, can he just pay it somewhere like a post office or bank branch, or can he only do it at some obscure government office? Alternatively, could I do it online from my Bangkok Bank account? Thanks

On a population adjusted basis, cases consistently higher than Thailand’s (apparent) numbers, deaths consistently lower. Masks have also largely disappeared from most indoor settings. High vaccination rates, not masks, is the way to go.