Briggsy

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.

Completed TM47. Copy of DTV e-visa. This was not wanted by Immigration. However, if your visa was stamped in your passport they did require a copy of that page. Copy of entry stamp page of passport. Copy of details page of passport. Copy of TM30. Jomtien. Processing time was quoted as one hour but in reality more like forty minutes. No appointment necessary. No ticket number necessary, just go straight to the 90-day desk = first desk of first building on the right. Do not go to the main information desk where queue numbers are handed out. There is no need for queue tickets for 90-day reports.

This one will escalate rapidly. And then either a negotiated settlement for less than 8 million or stuck in the legal system for years or the bad way (final solution).

You are completely missing the point and continuing in your vein of posting very non-constructive posts. Always picking out something you can contradict. I have repeatedly stated that the blame lies with the Hyundai driver. Please acknowledge this. I have then go on to talk about defensive driving. This is a technique in which despite the dangerous driving of others, you can increase the chance of avoiding an accident. This is particularly important when riding a motorcycle. You continue to ignore this point. Defensive driving is what you can do to minimise the risk to yourself despite the idiocy of others. Please have a good look in the mirror and consider what you are hoping to achieve by posting here. Currently your posts are really not positive, constructive, helpful, balanced or contributing anything worthwhile. Now would be an excellent time to change your ways.

Excellent post. That is a bicycle lane not a hard shoulder, also not a designated motorcycle lane. Whoever made the road sign has acquiesced to the norm of motorcycles using bicycle lanes. However the law states they shouldn't. Bicycle lanes are for bicycles, not for pedestrians, not for motorcycles. I would urge you to register a complaint with Chantaburi Highway Maintenance. This is clearly incorrect and as you point out a "mixed message".

@Patong2021 Completely agree. The accident was caused by the Hyundai driver.

That sign references the law under which motorcycles need to remain in the left hand lane, not the hard shoulder. The sign does not instruct or allow motorcyclists to use the hard shoulder. That is not the law. However, I am well aware it is the cultural norm for road users in Thailand to consider the hard shoulder as the de facto motorcycle lane. This is not the law though.

Yes, I agree. That is why I said "Whilst the foreigner was definitely the major contributor to this accident and deserves to be prosecuted for careless driving" If the motorcyclist had driven more defensively, which he should have been doing as he was going too fast and doing 2 illegal manouevres, he may have avoided the accident. If you read what I wrote I talked about learning from the experience. As a motorcyclist you are very vulnerable and you need to be aware of other people doing unexpected dangerous things as this Hyundai driver did. Undertaking on the hard shoulder at considerable speed is inherently dangerous and is not defensive driving. If the motorcyclist thinks it is fine to blast along in a straight line on the hard shoulder, irrespective of the traffic conditions, he is taking a considerable risk. The lessons he should take away are i. You cannot be seen from the outside lane if you are riding on the hard shoulder. ii. You cannot see the outer lanes well if you are riding on the hard shoulder. iii. Undertaking and riding on the hard shoulder are illegal. If you want to do them, take extreme care. iv. Consider speed differential. i.e. how much faster am I going than the traffic flow. v. Look there is a major turnoff to a petrol station. What is going to happen, cars going in or out? I should slow down. v. Putting all these together he needed to consider that every time he undertook a car, he was effectively popping out from a blind entrance at speed. He could not see and he could not be seen. In summary, the blame for the accident lies with the car driver but to say the motorcyclist did not take significant risk shows a lack of awareness of how to safely ride a bike in heavy traffic. I have ridden bikes daily for almost 40 years and am still here to tell the tale.