Etaoin Shrdlu

Deducted the UK tax amount from what? The original post gave me the impression that the UK tax paid was deducted from the amount of the remittance. It should not be deducted from the amount of the remittance, but from the amount of Thai tax payable. The above does not clarify.

My understanding is that tax paid in a foreign country, if the foreign country has the right to tax the income, is not a deduction from the income remitted into Thailand, but instead a credit towards any taxes payable. In other words, the taxes paid in the UK would be a tax credit, not a deduction from income. In this case, it seems the point is moot, but going forward it may be something to look at closely. I don't think current Thai income tax forms address this, however.

There should not be any difference in the premium if you use an intermediary to help you obtain insurance or if you go direct with an insurer. Also, there is a difference between an agent and an independent insurance broker. An insurance agent is the agent of the insurance company and their primary duty is to the insurance company, not the policyholder. An independent insurance broker is the agent of the policyholder and has certain duties of care that an agent does not have. A broker can also provide advice to the policyholder that the agent cannot. A good insurance broker can be a policyholder's advocate if help is needed with claims or other issues. I would suggest that you find an independent insurance broker who can provide you with different quotes from several insurers and can explain the differences in coverage as well as underwriting and claims-paying philosophies.

I just completed this quiz. My Score 50/100 My Time 76 seconds  

I just completed this quiz. My Score 50/100 My Time 76 seconds  

I'm not sure that a passport issuance office in a shopping mall will know about this. It might be a good idea to call the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' main office on 02 203 5000.

I just completed this quiz. My Score 60/100 My Time 39 seconds  

Here's an excerpt from the trip cancelation/postponement section of a travel policy issued by the local operation of a multinational insurer.

This is also how the IRS now treats the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion. Prior to about ten years ago, this wasn't the case.

My understanding is that the Model 2 FATCA agreement allows for the US to share financial account information with another country at the other country's option. I think it would be up to the other country to negotiate the mechanism and details of the information provided by the US. I believe the FATCA Model 1 does not contain this option. Thailand is a Model 1 FATCA partner, so there is no automatic transfer of US account information to Thailand.

Most Thai insurers only offer proper medical insurance on an annual basis. That may not be practical for someone here only for a few weeks or months. The personal accident section of a motorbike policy won't usually provide much coverage. I don't think you'd save much money by declining this extension, but by itself it might not be enough. A travel insurance policy with higher medical expense limits may be a good option. Check for exclusions for motorcycle risks including restrictions on engine size. You will probably find better travel policies from insurers in the US since most Thai insurers only offer outbound, not inbound, travel insurance. Most insurers require that the policy be taken out prior to start of travel, A good insurance broker could help you find a good fit for your needs and may also help you should you have a claim. Make sure you read and understand any policy before you give the order to bind coverage. Good luck.

I believe you will need the blue book of the new residence in order to update your red police book at your new local police station. I think it is the only document the police examine each time I show up for my 5-year check-in. I don't think you need to have the old blue book to register in a different blue book at a different amphur. Family members registered in a different amphur without removing themselves from our blue book a couple of years ago. I don't know whether hotels have blue books, but I don't know why they wouldn't. If the hotel is managed by a third party management company, it may require some effort to locate and obtain permission from the owner. It certainly wouldn't hurt to look into this, however. You also could ask a lawyer if they have a solution for you.

I don't think the forms will be changed this year, but that's only my opinion and I could be proven wrong at any time. It has always been, and it will probably remain for this year, that the taxpayer is responsible for determining whether income is assessable or non-assessable and then only entering the assessable income on the form.

DTAs have always been important for those who may have income that is exempt from Thai taxation. Being exempt from Thai taxation under a DTA allowed remittance of income in the same year it was earned without it being subject to Thai income tax. This hasn't changed under the new interpretation of the tax regulations. Those with income that was not exempt from Thai taxation due to DTA could in the past wait until the following tax year and remit that income without it being subject to Thai tax. This is no longer the case under the new interpretation for income earned and remittances received after 31 December 2023. Those who relied on this method to legally avoid Thai tax on remittances that would otherwise have been taxable are now well advised to review DTAs to see what relief, if any, they have under these agreements. If you aren't certain about the status of your income/remittances and the DTA isn't clear to you, best get professional advice. I don't think many of the regular staff at the RD are up to speed on any of this.

I think he's threatening the Panamanian government because it is pursuing the Trump Organization for tax evasion.

This is interesting reading: https://www.ifcreview.com/news/2024/december/panama-trump-organization-accused-of-tax-evasion-in-panama/

Many years ago I read that the RD's stated objective was to increase the amount of tax collected. No mention of ensuring compliance with Thai tax laws. Those might pretty much be the same thing in this environment, but it was strange to see it stated that way. It also invited speculation as to the methods that might be employed to increase collections.

I'm not sure that the Thai RD has much interest in ensuring a Thai taxpayer's compliance with foreign tax laws other than its obligations under various information sharing agreements such as FATCA and CRS.

I have no insight into how the LTR and its tax benefits work.

I don't think that the information shared under either FATCA or CRS would drill down to the level of the makeup of remittances. My understanding is that the relevant reports exchange information on account balances and interest/dividend income paid by the financial institution that holds the account. Seeing a large account balance on a FATCA/CRS report may cause a tax authority to take a closer look at the account and the sources of those funds via an audit, however. I don't think these reports drill down into the nature of deposits/withdrawals/remittances, etc, so FATCA/CRS would be of limited use to Thai tax authorities when it comes to remittances. It would be up to the Thai tax authorities to make inquiries based upon information that either the taxpayer or the local bank provides. I admit I may not have the full picture, so anyone with more complete information, please advise.

I'm not sure what you mean by "tax exempt clearly assessable income". If you mean income that is tax exempt in the individual's home country, that home country tax exemption may have no bearing on whether the remittances are tax exempt under Thai tax laws. Or did you mean something else?

Remittances may contain only non-assessable income or savings, in which case there is no place to declare these remittances on the tax forms we have seen so far. Think US Social Security benefits, savings from before 1 January 2024, etc. No need to declare them on Thai tax forms so far. Remittances may consist of only assessable income, in which case the entire amount of the remittance needs to be declared. Remittances may consist of both assessable income and non-assessable items. In this case, it will be up to the individual to declare the assessable portion of the remittance. It is up to the individual to determine what is assessable and what is non-assessable. In order to be able to prove which portion of the remittance is assessable and which is non-assessable, the individual will need to keep records that would stand up to scrutiny if the RD requested an audit. Unless the forms are changed and/or the RD formally gives issues instructions otherwise, there is currently no way to declare non-assessable income on Thai tax forms. In my opinion, anyone suggesting otherwise is mistaken, including individual RD employees.

Exactly! Using US terminology, these "exemptions" are what we would call "deductions". In other words, deductions from assessable income. Unless the RD changes PND90 and PND91 to specifically require declaration of non-assessable income, there is no way to report remittances of savings or income excluded from assessable income by DTA. The only thing that has changed is the new interpretation of how remitted income may be assessable income if the income is both earned and remitted after 31 December 2023. It seems that nothing else has changed.

Even if you decide to obtain private medical insurance, don't give up the social security coverage. Continue to pay the monthly premiums so that you'll have this scheme to fall back on. Private insurers will exclude pre-existing conditions, so that coverage will have holes in it depending upon your medical situation and history. Thai regulations are not as consumer-friendly as in the West and policies here are often not as broad in coverage. You may find better coverage and better underwriting and claims-paying attitudes with offshore insurers. Don't mistake the local operations of multinational insurers for the operations of offshore insurers. They may be part of the same company with the same branding, but operate under different regulations, have different approaches to underwriting and claims, and use different policy forms.

Might look into AXA's online offerings: https://www.axa.co.th/en/motor-insurance-online There may be others.