chiang mai

I look forward to reading more about this, thanks Simon.

Sominar is a first generation antihistamine that is licensed by the US FDA as a sleep aid, it is very effective, inexpensive and not addictive. Highly highly recommended.

I'm cross posting this because it's a first hand report of a conversation with TRD about the need to file. notably it was held in Bangkok.

Thank you for posting this, game set and match to the exact wording of the Revenue Code I believe.

Ignore list, forever, bye

go back and read my post. Failing that, please go find somebody else to insult.

The discussion is not about that, it's about the benefits of using a lawyer, nothing to do with real estate agent fees.

That's because you can't read properly

All you are telling them is that you have a tax registration in another jurisdiction, that's what they want to know and that information satisfies them. That doesn't automatically mean you actually pay tax there because the tax rules vary from country to country. Thailand cannot tax your income unless you remit it to their jurisdiction.

If the money is never remitted to Thailand, the Thai Revenue cannot tax that income.

Who ever thinks my question is funny, perhaps you want to try and exercise your brain and try to answer it!

I will echo @scorecard post above, what exactly do you think you get for your money when you pay 15k or 45k for a lawyer to help you buy a property? In practise, lawyer is just another pointless agent here, just like visa agents and bank account agents, you can do it all yourself because the Land Office does all the work. You don't actually get any extra protection, as far as I can see and I've bought and sold a number of times.

By applying the letter of the law (Tax Code), there is probably no need to change the law in the way you have described. 60k baht per year of assessable income is a very very low threshold.

It's unusual for deposits to be deployed here, if they are then a contract is required, which is far from customary. Liens and borrowings are recorded on the back of the channotte.

Does anyone really think that in a best/worst case scenario that the remittance rule might might revert to what it was? I cannot imagine that scenario.