Mike Lister

That's pretty good although I think the fried rice can be had for less.

My apologies that I posted this earlier in the wrong thread....some food for thought perhaps: The more I think about the possibilities, the more likely it appears that a two tier system will develop. Low(er) income types are likely to be ignored for tax purposes (unless an excuse is needed to catch them out, for whatever reason) whilst evaders and high income people are likely to be actively pursued. That negates the need for any kind of link to visa renewal at Immigration, which would only add another layer of complexity and bureaucracy to an already stressed system. Over time, the number of people filing tax returns, even low income types, will increase as taxpayers attempt to stay on the safe side of the rules and that will increase the tax take somewhat. Dubious or criminal elements of the foreign resident community will be under significantly increased threat that they didn't file a return, the good old, Al Capone gotcha approach. Meanwhile, the tax agent/tax filing agent community will grow, until such time as everyone is required to file a return, at some distant point in the future. Meanwhile, face is saved all round and later next year, the program will be proclaimed a roaring success as wealthier foreigners gravitate towards the expensive long stay visa which is tax exempt. I see a perfect fit with no downside, anywhere.

The more I think about the possibilities, the more likely it appears that a two tier system will develop. Low(er) income types are likely to be ignored for tax purposes (unless an excuse is needed to catch them out, for whatever reason) whilst evaders and high income people are likely to be actively pursued. That negates the need for any kind of link to visa renewal at Immigration, which would only add another layer of complexity and bureaucracy to an already stressed system. Over time, the number of people filing tax returns, even low income types, will increase as taxpayers attempt to stay on the safe side of the rules and that will increase the tax take somewhat. Dubious or criminal elements of the foreign resident community will be under significantly increased threat that they didn't file a return, the good old, Al Capone gotcha approach. Meanwhile, the tax agent/tax filing agent community will grow, until such time as everyone is required to file a return, at some distant point in the future. Meanwhile, face is saved all round and later next year, the program will be proclaimed a roaring success. I see a perfect fit with no downside, anywhere.

Much ado about nothing......we can only hope.

I can easily imagine a scenario where not much happens, except the new rule is enacted, but the TRD does not proactively enforce it, except on a very selective basis, that would make lots of sense to me. There's no traction in chasing smaller fish, it's too labor intensive with almost no reward yet it remains useful to net the bigger fish and the evaders. The downside to that scenario is that everyone will still need to play by the new rules, in case one day a bigger net is cast.

I must admit I am starting to wonder what might happen regarding taxation. I understand where the TRD Director General is coming from and I don't doubt she will get there at some point. But the state of the economy, government finances, low spending on capital goods and lower spending per capita by tourists, all combine to make me wonder if now is the right time to try and implement something like this. The more people who get scared off by the tax picture, the less favorable the short term outcome. Ditto the visa reviews, if that comes down on the wrong side, it will further squeeze an already squeezed economy.

Because that was the latest view that we observed which superseded the Sherrings statements, nothing was ignored, a view was taken based on the ExpatTax video and the Hua Hin interview with the TRD. Sorry if you don't like it but that's what happened, now stop being so argumentative and baiting..

I don't have time to rewatch the video right now, I'll try and look into it later.

Enough! If you want details of the Hua Hin report, go trawl through the thousands of posts and find it for your self, if you don't believe what was said. Your actions now are nothing more than abiting.

No, we also had the Expat Tax video, as MT pointed out to you already.

You may understand that, others may understand that, but there are many here who do not, they are the people I am suggesting who should not come here looking for useful information, given the present lack of rules and structure to the debate.

Not an insult, a statement of fact acknowledged by the poster previously., Report it if it concerns you.

Here's the point in time where I updated the Guide, you may be able to user that date to find the corresponding members report from a meeting with the TRD in Hua Hin where this aspect was confirmed.

I'm not about to go digging for the source every of every quote that was ever made, just to prove to somebody that this or that was said, I know full well from history there's no mileage in that. If you don't want to believe the quote, it's your prerogative.

Jeeze.....! Exposure to 10 years of back audits versus 3 years if past returns filed.

The thing that scares me with these discussions is that they are uncontrolled and whilst people with some experience of tax will be able to wade through it all unscathed, others may not. We were told previously, for months on end, there was no penalty for not filing a tax return, when no tax was due. Eventually we found out that there was. Then we were told repeatedly, as a matter of fact, that there is no downside to not filing a tax return, when no tax is due. Eventually we found out there is a significant downside. Now were being told that capital investments can be considered savings income and that they form a part of Por 161/162, which doesn't pass any test of logic or historic precedence in my book. We’re also being told that we can decide our own accounting method and present it as de facto, to the TRD and they will be sympathetic. Perhaps these things are correct, who knows, the problem is, nobody knows. Maybe some of these things can be done in the US but there is no evidence they can be done here. If anything, there is evidence to the contrary, because we are not native Thai's. Maybe they can be argued back home, but suggesting members can do the same here, is too much of stretch for me. The debate needs some rules we can all live with and everyone needs to understand what they are, if we're going to get to the correct answers. I specifically asked for the disclaimers to be put on the threads because of concern about statements that were being made, I regret that may not be enough. I think that if we can’t establish and agree those rules, the best thing to do is to exit the debate and not be associated with it.

Me too!

It doesn't say that about DTA.

This is where we disagree big time. An unrealised Capital Gain is not savings in any of my books. As others have independently said, it is capital (principle) and gain, not income and not savings. And what's more it's value can't be calculated until it is sold. Would I like to be something other than what I find it is? Of course, but you have to be realistic.

Commingled is various sources of income feeding into a single account. Feeding the income in is one thing, deciding what you used when you too funds funds out and remitted them from the account is something else. Rules such as FIFO, LIFO etc help clarify this, but none are known. We've already explained this. Savings do not change their form, when you put cash into a fixed deposit they remain as cash until maturity when you get it back again. When you buy stock you hand over your savings and receive stock in return, you no longer have your savings, you have something else that you purchased. After listening to everyone on this point, I've not heard anything that makes me believe that investments such as stock purchases are savings, they simply cannot be. The idea that we can pick our own accounting method and/or solution on these things and then impose it on the Thai Revenue, just isn't a starter for me. The idea that we can cross the river and discuss these things with the TRD aren't a starter either, we need to know what their rules are and what is acceptable to them. This is not the US, this is Thailand, it's just not the same.

Percentage wise I imagine. As I recall a member and his lawyer met with TRD officials, some quite senior, and TRD legal staff, in Hua Hin some m onths ago and provided us with effectively minutes of that meeting. It's all set out in Part 1 of the long tax thread, if you want to trawl though it. As I recall, this issue was confirmed also vis expat tax Q&A's.

We still do not know how the TRD will handle commingled accounts such as you've described but I guess it wont be favorably.

From the tax guide: 59) We understand currently that the TRD views any remittance of assessable capital gains to Thailand as comprising both capital and gain. It cannot be claimed that the remittance contains just one or the other, it always contains both and this continues until the total amount is exhausted.

I hope they cannot look inside SIPP's, I wonder if that will change if worldwide taxation is enacted.