MangoKorat

It would be interesting to test the legality of the rule that prevents people from receiving pension increases on the basis of 'residence'. The question is, do you actually reside in Thailand?  You have to apply each year to extend your stay and technically that extension can be refused. You can also be told to leave at any time. There are of course written definitions  of what is classed as resident for tax purposes but are there for pensions?

Most expats in Thailand are, in reality, a guest.  I would never really consider myself a resident unless I had PR.

I also wonder about this scenario: Let's say you leave the UK whilst receiving a pension of £200 per week but the pension is due to increase by 10% the following April.  In March of the next year you return to the UK and stay with a relative until May.  Would you be entitled to receive the April increase? At what point would they consider you as resident and what would qualify that?

19 minutes ago, thrilled said:

If you’re a U.S. citizen you need to make sure you don’t have over $10,000 in the bank. You’re talking a business account. The U,S. To stop off shore banking has a FATCA law. And Thailand abides by it. The IRS will fine you heavy going over that amount. If you notify the IRS then I believe your fine. 

I'm not a US citizen.

1 hour ago, scottiejohn said:

Please note that this article is dated 4 Aug 2023 and is talking about intentions and NOT current law as I have discussed above!

I repeat my point about a pending general election!

If it were to become law then I suggest that first you look at the status/legality of the link and secondly take from that link this very important point;

• HMRC cannot issue a third-party notice without the permission of the taxpayer or the tax tribunal. However, HMRC must demonstrate that the information sought is “reasonably required and will help the investigation in one way or another.

  Conclusion

A notice from HMRC will have to be approved by a tax tribunal, an independent body that is responsible for any appeals against HMRC.

In plain English the inspector needs an order to get information!

He cannot just access a bank account without authorisation!

I agree that the article is from August 2023 but where does it say its regarding a pending change to the rules. Seriously, if this company are trying to make it look like a rule when its not in order to obtain more business, I will take it up with them.

My apologies, I had not seen the 'Conclusion' the text of which is completely at odds with what is stated in the other sections which state:

'Financial institution notices will not require taxpayer or tax tribunal permission, although HMRC argues there will be safeguards: the information must be fairly required.'

and:

'However, it appears that HMRC can assess what is reasonably required, as notices must be approved by an ‘authorized officer’ of HMRC)'

An example of what I wrote above from Facebook Marketplace today - complete rubbish.  The translation on Facebook is not too good but note the bit that says if you don't pay 5000 deposit, you won't get to see the truck. 😁  Pay 5000 and you'll never see the truck.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

44 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Please provide a link to the statute which states that what you say is actually in law WITHOUT A COURT ORDER!

In the case of personal individual/joint accounts the UK at this time!

 

 

HMRC can check your bank account

Back in July 2020, HMRC announced the creation of a new ‘financial institution notice’ to speed up the process of obtaining information about a known taxpayer’s tax position from banks and other organizations.

Instead of altering its powers for all third-party notices, HMRC will now create this new notice. Financial institution notices will not require taxpayer or tax tribunal permission, although HMRC argues there will be safeguards: the information must be fairly required.

However, it appears that HMRC can assess what is reasonably required, as notices must be approved by an ‘authorized officer’ of HMRC).

https://sterlinxglobal.com/non-compliant-to-uk-tax-laws/

I've had several letters from Korat Immigration confirming my address in Thailand, I don't think any of them were the official Residence Certificate but they were all in Thai.

1 hour ago, Nickcage49 said:

Well that will really encourage people to come to Thailand. How to kill tourism, by the land of fake smiles.

Sadly, despite the complaints, it will make no difference. People will just moan and pay up.

1 hour ago, scottiejohn said:

Only by court order!

That is the present law!

 

Please remember you are  getting stuck up with a draft bill, last discussed in December 2023 which in it's present form has no chance of getting thru the House of lords and has little or no chance of getting thru all it's stages before the General Election!

As I have said before "cool down" it ain't going to happen this year!

Have you read the link I provided? The ability for an 'authorised officer' of HMRC to issue a third party notice to a bank or other financial institution is already in place and nothing to do with the DWP matter currently going through parliament.  That bill however, will enhance the overall ability of both authorities to look into your bank accounts. 

If the HMRC noticed a potential issue over what look like pension payments going into a foreign account or amounts corresponding with payments in the UK, are you suggesting that they would not pass that information on to the DWP?

Signatory's to AEOI are already required to firstly supply details of a foreigner opening a bank account and if subsequently requested, supply further details regarding that account. No court order required to the best of my knowledge.

The third party notices and AEOI rules are extant and the bill going through parliament will simply serve to complete the circle.

9 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

https://www.expertsforexpats.com/expat-resources/british-expats/finance/barclays-and-other-uk-financial-institutions-are-closing-british-expats-accounts/#:~:text=for British Expats >-,Barclays and other UK financial institutions are closing,accounts%2C what are your options%3F&text=British expats and non-residents,not live in the UK.

Right but keep a UK address and run a few UK transactions through your UK account and you shouldn't have a problem.  Simply making foreign transfers won't cause your account closure.

I don't want to ask Kasikorn directly about this as I don't want to risk my account being closed.  I tried to open a separate account with Kasikorn a while back and even though I already have one account, they refused to open another without a long term visa. I'm divorced so at the moment I no longer hold a long term visa.

Anyway, Kasikorn recently made a few changes to their accounts and I notice that my account is now called a Business Account - previously I'm pretty sure it was a 'Savings Account'.

Has this happened to anyone else?

2 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

That is against the law. 

They must get a court order! 

I admit it is very easy but it MUST be on a case by case basis with some foundation!

The link I posted clearly stated that accounts can be accessed by an 'authorised HMRC officer'.

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

My bank account shows no foreign transfers or payments, as I didn't want the police tracing me.

I don't want my UK bank to cancel my account either.

Whether you make transfers or not, if you claim to be resident of the UK and they suspect you are abroad, they can request details of your Thai bank account through AEOI.  Your Thai bank should have advised HMRC that you hold a Thai account. Whether that only applies to accounts opened after Thailand joined the AEOI system or to all expat accounts, I know not.

Why would making foreign transfers cause your UK bank cancel your account?  I send transfers to my Kasikorn account through Wise every month to cover household running costs etc. and I've never had a problem with my UK accounts.  I suppose if the only transactions going through your UK bank are outbound to a foreign account, your UK bank may suspect that you are in fact living abroad.

8 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Of course they can gain legal access to a private banks account but ONLY after an individual  legal review if a private account!

As you said "having been subject to a tax investigation a few years back, I know that HMRC can look into your bank account" 

They must have had due cause!

IF NOT SUE THEM!

 

 

PS;  Did you sue?

 

As I posted a short while ago, it seems that HMRC can authorise investigations themselves.

1 minute ago, scottiejohn said:

PS;  Did you sue?

No I didn't - the investigation was triggered, I believe, by several large cash payments into my private account whilst I held business accounts.  I believe they suspected I was trying to hide what they thought were actually business transactions in my private account.  I wasn't, the transactions were legitimate and not taxable. As a result of the investigation I actually received a tax refund 😀.

3 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

UK banks cannot legally disclose any personal details to outside authorities unless covered by a legal injunction/requirement. 

 

There are many legal frameworks where a person's transactions are transmitted to outside authorities; e.g. 10,000 Pound overseas TX, FACTA, banned/restricted country  TX's (IRAN/Russia etc) and other sanctions are obvious ones. These are covered in law/acts of Parliament!

 

 BUT no individual or UK authority can get access to a UK personal account without court sanctioned authorisation.  Business accounts are a bit different!

I'm not about to get into an argument with you about this but I don't agree - having been subject to a tax investigation a few years back, I know that HMRC can look into your bank account.  Now, with the AEOI provisions, they can also request details of your bank account in Thailand.

The information below would appear to suggest that you are a little out of date on the law.  HMRC it appears, can give itself permission to access your bank details through a third party notice, in particular the Financial Institution Notice granted by a HMRC 'authorised officer'.

https://sterlinxglobal.com/non-compliant-to-uk-tax-laws/

I am under the impression that under the new proposals currently passing through Parliament, the DWP will be able to access your information through the HMRC.

Those powers are granted to access information of those that claim they are 'non-compliant' with UK tax laws.  Its inconceivable that such powers do not also exist for 'tax compliant' citizens.

However, let's say you are correct and a court order is required, how many times do you think a court would actually refuse access?  Its a given that however they choose to do it, your details will be revealed. 

Just about all countries are joining together these days under the guise of 'Anti Money Laundering'.  Privacy is the realm of the rich but even that's not guaranteed these days.  There's a few very angry Russian Oligarchs out there at the moment who's bank accounts have been frozen.  Swiss bank accounts no longer have the privacy they used to - IT is making life very difficult for both those who simply wish to keep their details private and those who wish to do the same for tax avoidance/criminal purposes.

7 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

They must have just legal cause etc!

And how many times do the authorities follow what just cause means?

A parallel would be the powers that the UK police were given to stop and check any vehicle without reason.  They had that before anyway because in reality they just used to say that you were driving erratically.

55 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

They also don't know where you went, so again even if they know you left, they don't know if you're entitled to the uplift or not.

That is not correct, the UK authorities have access already to exactly where your flight is heading - from the moment the airline enter your passport details on the system at check in.  Granted, you may not always be staying in the final destination point entered but most are.

There are ways of leaving and entering the UK that are not recorded on the UK's systems and would require further investigation to locate your movements but computers/technology are slowly removing your privacy.

I read yesterday that banks in countries that are signed up to the Automatic Exchange of Information System (AEOI) are required to notify the tax authority of an expats home country that the expat has an account with them.  The tax authority can then request further information if they require it. Thailand joined the AEOI system last year:

https://www.mazars.co.th/Home/Insights/Doing-Business-in-Thailand/Tax/Automatic-Exchange-of-Information

Therefore, those transferring money into Thailand can no longer be assured of privacy and the sources of that cash will be revealed to UK authorities if requested. This would for example, show up any convoluted methods such as a family member transfering funds (your pension) into your Thai account.

Under the new rules on pensions and banking discussed in other posts here, HMRC, who will be the recipients of information gleaned under AEOI, will now share information with the DWP.  UK government departments are finally starting to join up.

All I have to say is Cash is KIng - but even that's getting harder.

There's a very good reason why 20+ year old Toyota Sport Cruisers are still fetching 200k+.

However, I would stay away from a 4x4 of any flavour unless you really need it. Less MPG and more parts to fix/replace in the future.

POTENTIAL DEPOSIT SCAM

Not sure if this is the same but there's been a scam going on for a few years on several online car sales sites.  The scam usually involves cars for sale at very low prices.  The seller's state that they've had a lot of interest because of the price but they'll hold it for you on receipt of a small deposit - and that's all they are interested in, a deposit.  This is offered to anyone who enquires and clearly the 'seller' is hoping for several deposits. They state that if the car is not as they described or has faults when you arrive, they will of course refund your deposit so your money is safe - its not. There is no car and they will stop all contact as soon as they receive your deposit.

There's a number of stories used about why the car is so cheap but the most common one given used to be that the owner has now returned to their home country and left the car behind. The photos used are often lifted from other sites where the car may genuinely be up for sale.

This has been going on for quite some time and they have no doubt got better at it but the first time I saw one the car was supposed to be in Thailand but had a UK tax disc in the window (UK tax discs were abolished years ago) and the houses in the background of the photos were clearly not Thai houses.

There will be lots of variations and the scammers will no doubt have upped their game but the main pointers are the extremely cheap price and the request for a holding deposit.

4 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Hamas deliberately rapes and kills civilians, and their manifesto clearly states their aims to kill all Jews.

The IDF tries to to avoid killing civilians in their pursuit of Hamas.

I agree that Hamas do all of that and that their aims are clearly stated.  However, to say that the IDF try to avoid killing civilians is stretching the narrative to say the least.  I would possibly say, the IDF kill civillians that get in their way.  A lot seem to have got in their way though.

They call it 'collateral damage' - well that's the excuse for it but if flattening an entire apartment block to get at one suspected Hamas occupied apartment is 'collateral damage' then I guess the term is correct.

Not long after this conflict began a battle hardened middle ranking British ex soldier was interviewed on UK TV and asked to comment on the methods the IDF were employing - which at the time included attacking a major hospital in Northern Gaza.  He was quite clear that under his terms of engagement, he would not have been allowed to fire on the hospital regardless of the suspicion that the enemy was operating out of it.  A hospital that contained patients under treatment and medical staff was just out of the question under any circumstances.  He added that such an attack was considered a war crime.

I don't doubt that Hamas embed themselves amongst the general population - even in hospitals and schools but in my opinion, rooting them out in such circumstances, abeit that its clearly an extremely difficult task, is just something the IDF has to deal with.  You can't just kill say 50 patients and staff in a hospital to get at 5 terrorists. I would add that 'collective punishment' is also a war crime under international law.

https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/collective-punishments

I sincerely hope that every suspected war crime, committed by either side is fully investigated and that those found guilty are duly punished.  The list of offenders should also include the political and military leaders of both sides - that would be Netanyahu & Herzi Halevi of Israel and Mohammed Deif & Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas.

As each day passes we hear horror stories coming out of Gaza and some of those stories come from trusted Western, non Muslim sources - they cannot be considered as Hamas propaganda.  I fear that when this conflict finally comes to an end, we are very likely to hear many, many more.

The question must be asked - Why does the IDF refuse to allow international observers into Gaza?  I would point out that according to several TV news reports, they have even refused US observers.

I make no apologies for appearing to be anti Israel in this matter - I am actually anti killing but I think Israel has gone way beyond any legitimacy it might have held as a result of the 7 October massacre. It also calls Hamas terrorists, they are but are Israel's military actions any better?

Israel states it wants a once and for all end to attacks from Hamas. What they are actually doing is creating thousands more future terrorists that will continue to seek revenge for years to come.  They are also creating the circumstances where attacks are likely to kill civillians in external countries in the future.  Israeli's travel outside Israel and there are Jews in just about every country.  Islamic groups have had few problems in carrying out several attacks on European soil and let's not forget 9/11.

3 hours ago, rexpotter said:

You don't sound very well traveled or intelligent.

Maybe not but I can at least spell 'travelled'

Yes that was me, laughing at MY LOSS 😁😁🤣🤣

9 minutes ago, Dolf said:

How many climate experts can you name? Give me a list of 10 please. 

Which part of 'I will not debate this with you further' do you not understand?