Mike Lister

No, you would not be tax resident. The days of residency in Thailand must be within a single tax year.

Call me naive if you wish, but a tax return from the home country might help. 🙂

An interesting article but it clarifies very little and certainly does nothing for the argument that foreigners are going to suffer: "If the Revenue Department were to launch an aggressive campaign to generate additional income, it could see some expats from countries that do not have tax treaties with Thailand impacted or where tax has not been paid on retirement funding or other income remittances from foreign countries". "Mr Kitipong suggests that Section 41, Paragraph 2 of the country’s Revenue Code gives minimal scope to the Thai government to tax any income from abroad by pointing out that the existing provision does not specify that income earned in foreign countries outside the jurisdiction of the Kingdom is subject to tax at all". "the change in direction by the new government will be a retrograde step for the Kingdom, which in recent years has been touting itself as a destination for foreign investors and global business executives because of its tax-friendly regime". "legal experts suggest that the department order issued on September 15 can quickly be challenged with a strong likelihood that it will be overturned". https://www.thaiexaminer.com/thai-news-foreigners/2023/11/04/tax-change-for-expats-living-in-thailand/

Dr Chadatip from Elite Smile has her own clinic behind Big C/HomePro on the ring world, her website is here: https://www.indenteclinic.com/en/

There are generous tax deductions for both life and health insurance premiums, I claim for both. I don't see the logic or connection between paying tax on income and automatic entitlement to enrolment in the 30 baht health scheme. TBH government health care system is cheap enough to where most people should be easily able to pay for treatment at the going rates and not even bother with costly health insurance which as you say, sometimes approves treatment and sometimes doesn't. For me, the cost of health insurance is around 150k per year but only insures 50% of my body. 150k per year will go a long way to paying treatment costs at government hospitals.

Once again, it's an attempt to compound and confuse the issues. Health insurance claims acceptance are not in any way related to the tax issue, ditto dual pricing in national parks. But if you're really saying that the tax issue is the one straw that broke the camels back, wouldn't it be a good idea to wait and see what the real story is regarding taxation, before you go reorganisation your life. Just a thought!

I can only speak for myself of course so here's why: Because I've lived here for the past 25 years, my wife, family and friends are here, I like the climate, I like the people, I like the scenery, I like the low cost of living, I like the easy access to beaches, plus I'm 74 years old and don't feel like I want to up sticks, relocate and start all over again. After all, my agent takes care of my visa and 90 reporting needs for around 6k Baht per year so that's not an issue; I've filed tax returns here for the past three years so that's not a big deal either; I wont have to pay more tax under the suggested worst case new world rules than I do already, in other words, nothing changes for me. TBH, nothing much is likely to change for lots of posters yet here they are, getting all upset, imagining the worst and making all manner of exaggerated claims about what's going to happen. Y'all need to chill, and then some..

That old cliche about Thailand, foreigners and prostitutes is so banal. Do you really think retirees are here just for that or are you just taking the moral high ground because you're not (or at least you imply you're not, perhaps you're here for the temples), goodness me!!

You're absolutely hilarious, but not in a good way

Yep, but very little after half way through and even then, all mostly to refute other peoples nonsense.

Y'all gonna die early deaths from the stress of worrying about this and trying to second guess what might happen, jeeze, sit back and chill and wait and see what's announced.

You guys are amazing, why ever would you link any of those so called benefits to paying tax, there's zero rationale! This is not a case of people needing to be incentivised to pay tax, it's a legal responsibility to pay. Oh wait, he's a tax payer, he can buy beer between 3-5....really!!!

The national parks are financed by government out of tax revenue income. This is not different from any tourism based tax applied to nonresidents/non-tax payers in any country, be it Venice, Cornwall or Nepal. In this case the tax is applied on each attraction rather than each country, city or town. The fact that 150,000 western expats feel aggrieved and left out, overlooks the fact that the other (potentially) 40 million tourists who visit these optional attractions in Thailand are the ones who pay the lions share. If you were government, you'd tax in exactly the same way. Do I like it? No! Is it mostly fair? Yes.

My guess is it will be option number 1, for a few reasons. Firstly, Thailand still wants foreigners to bring foreign currency into the country, not as badly as they used to be they still want that. And I'm pretty sure that they want that money to flow in, more than they want the tax revenue they could potentially get. Secondly, the property market in Thailand is reliant on foreign buyers to a greater degree than not, trying to tax capital from prior sales overseas would decimate that industry. Thirdly, the value of bank account savings is dropping for the first time in over 10 years, the banking system needs cash deposits from foreigners. And in worst case scenario, there is still an effective workaround, which you have spelled out. FWIW, I also have property to sell in the UK but the potential for Thai tax on the proceeds, doesn't concern me at all.

The poster said that he paid more for most things because of dual pricing, he didn't say he paid more to get into national parks! BUT, the subject of this thread is NOT dual pricing, so let's not turn it into a discussion about that or any other personal gripe that posters may have about unrelated topics.

Surely, if you pay capital gains tax on the sale in your home country, sale proceeds from the house will have been taxed already in your home country?

Just because national parks and some tourist attraction have dual pricing, doesn't mean that dual pricing is widespread, it isn't. I live in the North, not in the midst of some farang ghetto in a tourist hot spot, all prices for everything here and everywhere I travel are the same. Hand on heart no, I've never seen dual priced menus and I've never seen dual priced accommodation, I would refuse to eat or stay in any such place and so should everyone else, if you don't, you deserve to pay more. We travel around Thailand about three times a year, Phuket, Bangkok, Pattaya, Huan Hin, last week we were in Sukhothai and Phitsanulok, We booked our hotels on Agoda, we got the same pricing as everyone else, we ate in restaurants we liked, we paid the same as everyone else. On the weekend we went to the mall to eat, prices were the same. We have a dozen or so restaurants we eat at regularly, they all charge the same prices for all their customers. Perhaps you're just lucky that you've managed to find the 0.5% of restaurants in the country that have dual pricing, well done!

Please show us where I said I had never seen dual pricing in Thailand!

Which has what to do with my question?

The guy has no tax or legal qualifications as far as I can see, he's just another youtuber who's trying to make money so he can live here. TBH the guy comes across as a bit of a pot head but maybe that's just me, at least who could have a shave FFS! He's using the same information that everyone else has so what makes his opinion so important and what makes this video different from another video on YouTube?

I really don't care what the average Thai thinks about who should pay for what and nobody else should either. Who pays for what is down to the people involved, there is no national rule that must be followed. Hotel rooms and air plane seat costs are variable, all over the world, there is a rack rate and then there are discounts, there is no fixed price. All anyone has to do is to look on the web site of a hotel to find out what the costs are, if they can then negotiate additional discounts by saying they want the Thai rate or the handsome person rate or any other reason they can think of, good for them, that's the way the game is played here.

No, I am entirely right! This thread is about taxation of foreigners in Thailand, it is not about the things we like and don't like it's about tax. Inventing grievances against the foreigner such as not being able to collect the 10k baht that will be paid out is utter nonsense and has no place in a discussion about tax, it's nothing more than an excuse to create make believe grievances. And not being able to use the same hospital system is more utter carp, the reality is that poster doesn't know and doesn't understand, mostly it has nothing to do with a discussion about tax.

I have never seen evidence of those things, nor have I heard of cases of them from other long standing expats that I know, not in over 25 years here and I wasn't born yesterday. Perhaps in tourist areas and in the case of newbies or clearly guilables, maybe but there again, some people deserve what they get. To try and imply that two tier pricing exists in many or most things here is a the sign of somebody who listens to bar stool stories rather than understands what the realities are of being a foreigner who lives in Thailand.

Banks in the US have a choice between using IACH or SWIFT, the former is used mostly for USD transactions that are smaller whereas SWIFT is used for larger transactions in any currency. All banks use one or the other, there is no third option other than to use an intermediary bank that has a relationship with the destination Thai bank. All IACH transactions go via the Federal Reserve as an extension of the ACH system, SWIFT transactions do not. Any US bank that says it doesn't have overseas funds transfer capabilities, uses the services of a third party, almost certainly IACH, via the ACH system.

I found the answer, here: https://www.sissonsthai.com/products_flooring_highperformance.php Mods please feel free to close the thread, thank you.