Lorry

It would be legal to bring it into Thailand It would be illegal not to pay taxes on it. Taxable is "income...brought into Thailand" (RD order 161/2566). It doesn't matter how you bring it into Thailand, as a bank remittance, as cash or whatever. The amounts you are talking about are quite noticeable upcountry, you would make yourself vulnerable.

I meant a solution for the RD. They certainly don't want to apply DTAs for hundreds of thousands of little pensioners. Too much work

There is a simple solution to the DTA bureaucratic nightmare: 1. Retirees need to show they paid their tax before they can get an extension. 2. Require as much supporting documentation as possible for the DTA, long lists in Thai only with required notarized and authorized and legalized stuff. Then most retirees have no choice, just pay up, because you would never get all these documents in time before the visa renewal. And the cost a DTA would cause you would be more than the tax, anyway. RD staff wouldn't have to learn how to handle DTAs.

Well said. I never got coffee!!! Not fair! Otherwise you are right. Immigration, in my experience, is sometimes malicious. RD has always been helpful.

Israel just warned a million people to leave the target areas in Gaza.

Recommended reading: Gwynne Dyer 's latest opinion peace, it can be found in the opinion section of today's [newspaper that cannot be quoted] And the Economist (3 free articles) https://click.e.economist.com/u/?qs=d42eb7e4f46e6db6b2d73752cbf8f34476251dbb43b799e21c57f6180553207f7aba98b006b376dd894c08bf808f0054c19b02f52eba895550c59c9caed0407a

I don't think any taxman in the world would accept your reasoning. "Show me all you've got!" And then it's THEIR decision what is taxable and what not.

Thank you for all your valuable information. Greatly appreciated

Did he ever question what money do you actually live from? I know it's possible to live on 40k, but did the taxman accept this? (I seem to remember you are married - I maybe wrong - and 2 persons living on 40k? Certainly possible upcountry, but did the taxman accept this?)

No, they couldn't. Read the order 161/2566 sec3: "for assessable income brought into Thailand from 1 January 2024 onwards"

It's just much simpler the way the law is written. Deductions differ for every type of income, the law has long lists. Allowances differ for many different situations of taxpayers, long lists again. The 190,000 can be deducted from any kind of income, and by anybody over 65. So instead of repeating this endlessly for any type of income and any taxpayer, they wrote it once, at the very beginning of the calculation.

I have mentioned this problem a couple of times earlier in the thread. The consequences would be enormous. Tax would be due in the year of remittance even if in that year you haven't been in Thailand at all. What convinced me they don't mean this is https://www.rd.go.th/english/6045.html A non-resident is, however, subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand. but this is not the law, only the RD 's interpretation. The law as quoted by retiree says The important words are "A resident....shall....pay tax" A resident, not a non-resident. The non-resident doesn't pay tax according to this paragraph (i.e. when remitting funds). The non-resident only pays tax as in sec41, first paragraph, i.e. income from activities in Thailand. At this moment in time, the RD agrees with me.

I won't cry if they don't come anymore.

So they feel like me: forget about DTA, too much trouble, too complicated, just ignore it.

My explanations on p91 are simplified for our purposes. If you look at No 6 Income Exemption Entitlement Form to be used with ภ.ง.ด.90 for the year .... (I referred to it on p91) you see that the 190,000 is not treated like allowances and deductions. For example, you can divide the 190,000 and use parts of them for different kinds of assessable income, if you wish. This may have consequences as not all kinds of assessable income are treated equally, see e.g. sec 47bis of the Revenue Code. But this is really too complicated for this board.

In my home country, years ago there was a similar situation. And the RD decided which money was what. You couldn't decide it yourself.

This is how YOU think it would work. Let's say, your balance on 31/12/22 is 100,000 In 2023, you have only 2 transactions: 1/6/2023 income from inside your country 10,000 1/7/2023 remittance to your Thai bank account 5,000 Balance on 31/12/2023 is 105,000 I bet Somchai the RD inspector will say, your remittance to Thailand is obviously from your income (those 10,000) Maybe his colleague Somkid in another province will see it differently, though. Have fun!

They don't need to know your visa status, they need to know you are here more than 179 days in a calendar year. 2 ways: - check with immigration. Implies a lot of work for RD and for immigration, the data banks are not (yet) linked. - check all your transaction, time and amount. If you had withdrawals all over the year, totalling 20000 USD, please show your passport stamps to check how many days you were actually here. Problem: They can check your withdrawals of 2024 in 2030, you leave a nice electronic trail. If they then find you didn't pay due taxes of 2024, late fees and penalties apply.

Krungsri gave me a very different form. Easy to understand. They told me nationally is not important, tax residence is important. If you are only a Thailand tax resident then you can be from whatever nationality, it doesn't matter. So I don't understand what Bangkok Bank means.

Yes, of course

That's the problem, see my latest post. The paperwork. Normal people constantly mix income and savings in the same bank accounts, and there really isn't any way to separate these two again.

Because, if Thailand is serious about this - and they seem to be serious - they would want to see your proof of foreign income (e.g. from your company) and proof of tax paid abroad to apply the DTA. These documents most probably will have to be translated, maybe stamped by the Thai embassy in your country, then stamped by your embassy here and by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bangkok. I don't think you can get this done in less than 3-4 months (and it won't be for free). It will probably be preferable to just pay and forget about the DTA.

Yes

Isn't it amazing, how PwC and Sherrings don't say "instead of" or "in addition to"? Only moneymgmnt gives a clear and simple answer, unfortunately the wrong one. What does the RD say? You quote ภ.ง.ด.91 which is for taxpayers who have only income from employment (the title of the pdf says so), so it's not useful for us. Go to https://www.rd.go.th/english/63902.html Download: No 1 - the form, also called ภ.ง.ด.90 Personal Income Tax Return for taxpayer with income not only from employment (Tax Year 2022) No 2 - the guide Guide to Personal Income Tax Return 2022 (ภ.ง.ด.90) No 6 Income Exemption Entitlement Form to be used with ภ.ง.ด.90 for the year .... This is what we need. On p7 of the guide they talk about those 190000 exemption for over 65 y.o. The 4th bullet point says: If you are qualified for the exemption mentioned above, please fill out the “Income Exemption Entitlement Form” (i.e. No 6) and deduct an income exemption amount from income calculated in that form as your assessable income on ภ.ง.ด.90 (= the form). The headline on top of this same p7 says "Page 2-4 of ภ.ง.ด.90 (= the form) – Assessable Income" and all the following pages of the guide, until p26, explain how to calculate the assessable income. Then on p26 the guide explains "Computation of Net-Income Tax In computing tax liability by using the Net-Income Tax method, a taxpayer has to take into account all assessable income arising in a tax year. The next step is to deduct the deductible expenses from assessable incomes. Allowances are then to be deducted in accordance with the taxpayer’s circumstances. The last step is to subtract any qualified charitable contribution within the limit specified by law. Then, the progressive tax rates will be applied to any income left from all deductions." (Later it explains another method, "Computation of Gross-Income Tax" - that's for people who have so much money that they may not care about 190000. The LTR crowd, maybe.) The "progressive tax rates" are the often-quoted table 3.1 Progressive Tax Rates Personal income tax rates applicable to taxable income are as follows Tax rates of the Personal Income Tax Taxable Income (baht) Tax Rate (%) 0-150,000 Exempt more than 150,000 but less than 300,000 5 more than 300,000 but less than 500,000 10 more than 500,000 but less than 750,000 15 more than 750,000 but less than 1,000,000 20 more than 1,000,000 but less than 2,000,000 25 more than 2,000,000 but less than 4,000,000 30 Over 4,000,000 35 as seen at https://www.rd.go.th/english/6045.html So, after all, those 190000 exemption for taxpayers over 65 are to be deducted at the very beginning of the calculation, when you calculate assessable income. Deductions and allowances are deducted later. If the resulting net income is less than 150000, no tax is due. In effect, the 190000 are "in addition to" the 150000.

I think you are right, but: Where do you get the word "instead" from? I have read both versions, "instead of 150000" and "in addition to 150000", both in reliable sources. I have no idea which one is true.