Briggsy

I think it was use of a foreign credit card which is de facto remitting of funds to Thailand just as withdrawing cash using a foreign debit card would be. It is the remitting of funds which is key to any liability. However, I repeat my point that very few retirees here will have need to file a return let alone pay any tax due as i) most will be remitting funds derived from income paid in previous tax years and ii) the Double Taxation Agreement will credit the Thai tax due down to zero if any was owing in the first place. That is why whenever anyone on here asks the Revenue Dept, they tell them they don't need to file if their income was taxed overseas. They know it is a waste of their time as very few will have untaxed foreign income that they remitted to Thailand in the same tax year as it was paid to them. All a fuss about nothing with the tax lawyers trying to get everybody to panic.

This thread is primarily aimed at those not working in Thailand, chiefly retired and now worrying about their foreign income being taxed. When I was on a work permit, there was no need to file a tax return. However the employer may have had to show tax receipts. That was all done by the employer. But I definitely did not file a tax return and my WP and extension was renewed every year without fail. This must be a new thing that you are referring to.

@Neilly How about that! I never would have thought it. On occasion, it has taken me 5 to 10 seconds to realise and like a plonker I have been going down the road with my hazards on.

It is slightly more complex than that. SA 106 is supplementary to a UK tax return. If you are completing an SA106 you are completing a UK tax return. You need to have foreign income AND tax needs to be owing on that foreign income. This applies both to foreigners and UK nationals who are resident in the UK for tax purposes. It is irrespective of nationality. If no tax is owing, you will probably find HMRC will de-register from self-assessment and the need for a return if this was the only reason. We are getting very off-topic.

There are specific situations laid out by HMRC that mean you have to complete a tax return. Property income is one of those situations. There is even a helpful government app which determines whether you need to complete a tax return. BTW, it is not "any income". That is for property income. For the self-employed, who outnumber landlords many times over, the threshold is annual turnover in excess of £1000.

Okay, civil service pension, that explains it. Thanks.

This is not correct. If you are paid under PAYE, not in receipt of child benefit, not in receipt of investment income of over £10,000 p.a. and not having a total income of over £100,000 p.a. HMRC will actively de-register you from self-assessment and tell you NOT to complete a tax return in future years. I can assure you this is absolutely not tax evasion and HMRC want you to do this. There is no "legal requirement in the uk to report taxable earnings above tax free limits annually". The thresholds for having to complete a tax return (usually £100,000 for PAYE taxpayers) are far higher than the personal allowance (£12,570). I have completed tax returns for many clients in the UK and similarly told many that they should save their money as there is no need for them to complete a tax return.

Where is the tax evasion??? I am referring to pointlessly filling in tax returns when a) there is no legal requirement b) there is no tax owing There is no tax evasion. The answer was in response to @cjinchiangrai 's question about self-assessment in the UK.

You specifically asked what they do in the UK! I provided a detailed and accurate answer! The cheek of you!

In the UK, there is no necessity to complete a tax return unless you yourself have registered for self-assessment. Examples of those who register for self-assessment are the self-employed with a turnover of at least £1000 per year or high earners with a total income in excess of £100,000. Once you have registered for self-assessment, the penalties just pile up if you do not submit a tax return. If you have not registered for self-assessment, nothing happens and you are left alone unless HMRC gain some information that you should have registered for self-assessment or have some untaxed income. Actually more often in the UK, HMRC actively de-register from self-assessment when there is no tax owing and no need for a tax return to reduce administration.

My probability assessment based on i) a change in the law may be required ii) the fact that the vast majority of foreigners remaining in the country for over 180 days would owe no further tax iii) no tangible benefit for the civil servants administering the system iv) a huge administration headache for the civil servants administering the system v) a very long history of non-cooperation / non-interference between different departments of the Thai civil service vi) the departments involved currently lack the basic data over who to assess (the residents and non-residents) and what to assess (the foreign-derived income and the amount remitted). That is my take. It ain't gonna happen any time soon.

With the deceased being a Burmese and the survivor being a Thai teacher, it will be a small payoff, nothing for the drink-driving (unproven) or going through the red light and no loss of licence. She will continue to drive once the car gets fixed. That is the way it works. I wonder if it will play on her mind for the rest of her life. I genuinely would like to ask her in 20 years' time.

I wonder if this restaurant is a front business.

You are absolutely correct. The pavements (sidewalks) are often blocked by vendors, booths, signs, people and it is often necessary to walk with care on the road. However, if you live in Pattaya and I know you don't want to, you will witness Indians taking 'walking in the road' to a-whole-nother level. A complete family will blithely walk across lanes of moving traffic affecting an air of nonchalance never at any point acknowledging the existence of vehicles travelling very close to them. I can only guess it is Indian culture and the way they cross the road there. For them the cars, motorcycles and trucks are invisible.

Totally agree. This one is trotted out regularly usually to blame somebody for being questioned at the border. It makes no difference at all. (unless you look like a homeless dude) When I was denied entry, it was purely based on the fact that I had stayed too long on METV's. I was wearing smarter clothes than 95% of the other people queueing up at Immigration. Your record of staying and the visa and visa exempts you use are what they are interested in.

Simple question. I think I am stupidly missing something. In the UK, I had a Honda ADV 350 (keyless ignition). In Thailand I now have a PCX 160 with very similar keyless ignition. About 25% of the time, when I turn on the PCX, the hazard lights are flashing. I have been told this is because I have touched the hazard lights switch. I don't think I have. This phenomenon never happened with the ADV. Is there some other reason the hazard lights come on?

There seems to be a great deal of confusion about what a Double Taxation Agreement is. It is not a treaty under which you are taxed twice on the same income. It is usually not a treaty under which this particular income is taxable and that particular income is not. That is covered under the normal tax legislation of that country. It is relief to prevent tax being paid twice. Example : You are resident in Thailand for tax purposes but all your income is derived in the UK. UK income £38,000, UK tax paid £5086 Thai assessed income (UK derived) £38000, Thai tax due £5100. Under the Thai - UK DTA you would get relief on the £5086 tax paid to the UK government and you would then pay £5100 - £5086 = £14 (equivalent) to the Thai government. That is what Double Taxation Relief is. As ever, these things are complicated by one's own situation but this gives a broad picture.

3 or 4 months in Thailand per year should be okay but there are no guarantees. You can certainly expect to be quizzed though. In fact, as you state, you were quizzed already. Safe entry service is the best idea for you. Not prohibitively expensive.

Just out of interest, a high street accountant in the UK would generally charge around £200 for a relatively straightforward annual tax return. e.g. a self-employed 360 driver.

A non-imm O visa gives a 90-day permission to stay. It is not long-term. Another alternative is the safe entry service. You will be spoken to politely then. I believe it costs around 4000 Baht per entry. Are you spending over half your time in Thailand? I understand your reluctance to get a visa but when you are in the detention centre at Suwannaphum airport being told to pay a huge "change of date" charge for the return portion of your air ticket so you can be sent back to where you came from, you will wish you had. Think of it as insurance. You cannot keep coming to Thailand for month+ long stays on VE. Immigration do not like it at all.

What would be the incentive to file? Let me give you some completely hypothetical examples. 1. They refuse to extend your permission to stay unless you provide proof you have filed a tax return. 2. They issue an estimated assessment for a year you did not file. 3. They issue a fine for a year you did not file. 4. The Thai bank freezes your bank account unless you provide proof you have filed a tax return. Currently these all seem very unlikely. So I am back to my original question, what would be the incentive to file a Thai tax return.

This is true. Male IO's will definitely deny you entry for excessive stays on VE or TV's. @popabear You are pushing your luck using VE after VE for month+ long stays. As an earlier poster said, I think they would be reluctant to deny entry to an 81-year-old farang but they could. Do yourself a favour. Get a non-imm O or an Elite Visa.

Are you referring to a UK state pension? What mechanism is used to tax at source a UK state pension? I am aware that tax codes are set against company pensions, SIPPS withdrawals and annuities but I know of no way a UK state pension can be taxed at source. Could you elaborate?

Was she suffering from a condition that made her unable to eat and this was conveniently characterised as "refusing to eat"? By doing this, it shifts the responsibility from the prison authorities to the detainee. Typically it takes around 1-2 months to starve oneself to death providing some fluids are ingested. This woman apparently starved herself to death in 48 hours. Miraculous.

That is a different one, not the Buri Ram scammer.