Mike Lister

I'm sorry, I made a mistake! The tax guide says this: d) 50% of pension income received, up to 100k (PD) - 100,000 Sorry, I was trying to do three things at the same time and responded too quickly.

There is a link in the document in the OP that will let you download your DTA in English. Also, US SSc is exempt, under DTA rules.

Planning yes, filing tax returns no, not until January.

***Please be aware that no updates are being made to the document in the op and haven't been so since I stopped being a moderator several weeks ago. I will try to post things of relevance here in this thread but as times moves forward, parts of the document will be superseded.

We do similar, I spend around 50/60k a month but bank much more.

There is currently no need to declare non assessable income, although that may change towards the end of this year as the new tax forms are redesigned and released for use (we understand they will be available in November). Typically in the past, Social Security income for example, was simply left off the the tax form and not declared at all (I didn't declare mine and the TRD has been happy with that).

There's no need to hold fire on anything, you are at least 6 months away from needing to file a tax return, if you even have to file one at all. You need to be a little bit patient and watch as answers slowly emerge.

That's pretty much what I had in mind, newbies in particular who might not read the picture accurately at first, or even after quite some time. They see locals regularly being allowed to evade various laws; conflicting and random enforcement of other laws; open violation of certain laws; a permanent blind eye turned to yet other laws. How you give people suitable guidance in those conditions is difficult, there is no one size answer that fits all. Are you risk averse or a chancer, do you value peace and relative certainty in your retirement years, are you loaded or slightly poor, they are all parts of the formulae.

For most people and as a generalisation, I think that is correct. I hesitate slightly because telling some foreigners who have been attracted to Thailand to use common sense and judgement when it comes to abiding by the laws of the land and that adherence to the law is up to you, isn't necessarily going to leave them in a good or safe position.

Impaired recall comes with age and lifestyle, which is why it's necessary to remind some members periodically of the things we've learned previously, this is one such instance. The following is one of many quotations available on the web: 13.4.2. Statute of Limitations The statute of limitations for an audit is generally 2 years from the date the relevant tax return was submitted. For cases of suspected tax avoidance or evasion, it is extended to 5 years. If no tax return is filed, the statute of limitation is 10 years. There is no statute of limitations for tax collection. https://orbitax.com/taxhub/countrychapters/TH/Thailand/e5f4c7d16b644b02bdb68eb4bbc3ab94/Statute-of-Limitations-1483 IF you have filed every year for the past 10 years AND you have all the associated paperwork, the above is not a significant risk for many, the potential downstream problem are however several fold. The first is that accepted practise to excuse non-filers who don't owe tax, could easily become unaccepted practise, at a moment notice and without warning. It could also easily become unaccepted practise on a case by case basis, based on the whim of a TRD employee. The bigger risk, I think, is that the authorities would probably only exercise this as an option of last resort, in the event they wanted to nail you for something but couldn't get you any other way. It's similar in concept to the way in which Al Capone was finally caught for tax evasion, because they couldn't convict him of bootlegging. Nobody should get too excited about this aspect but everyone needs to be aware of it and should factor it into their decision about whether to file a return or not, when there is no tax to pay but the assessable threshold has been breached. For me personally, the potential risk of those audits hanging over my head, far outweighs the 15 minutes of effort required to file a tax return every year, but that's just me, your mileage might vary.

It's not a calzone or even close, it's an attempt to be a pizza burger and succeeds on several fronts.

I'm pretty certain now that some of you guys are not in the least bit serious about finding out the facts of this topic or providing members with a sensible balanced view. It's back again to the old tag team mischief making and disinformation of old that the first long thread became famous for. Readers of the thread have all the more reason now to pay extra attention to the caution in blue at the top of the page.

I am in a similar position to you in that I also can control my inbound cash flow, I suspect many people do. I will be interested to hear the outcome of your meeting. I left the firm a long time ago and whilst I did work closely with them in the 1990's, I suspect anyone I knew there has now retired. It will be interesting to understand how they view the gap between what the tax law states and the practical side of tax operations.

You know full well that those people who fail to file a tax return, even though no tax is due, are exposed to the potential for back audits covering the past ten years, instead of only three. That is stating fact, it is nothing to do with fear mongering whatsoever. It was you who repeated told the forum over many months, that there was no penalty for not filing a tax return when no tax was due. Later we discovered that a fine is capable of being levied, then we found out about the back audits. You guess at answers, base your answers on what you think is common sense abd then offer it up as advice, despite a near total absence of any fact whatsoever.

On the subject we are/were discussing, I have no confirmation bias, only evidence based biased. Goodbye.

Nothing in seven years.

For my part there is no confirmation bias, only evidence based bias.

And expose yourself to 10 years of back audit instead of three! I don't know why anyone would, unless they have filed every year for the past 10 and have all the associated paperwork to hand.

Response received to my email. It seems my statement in the article might have inadvertently included an incorrect deadline of December 31, 2024. I appreciate your diligence in seeking clarification, and I will take steps to correct this information in my future communications and potentially request a correction in the Pattaya Mail to ensure accurate and reliable information is provided to all readers.

Interesting, thanks. I haven't seen the correction but it was reported here that it had been withdrawn. Let me see what I can find out. EDIT: I emailed Victor, the author, let's see if he replies.

A pizza burger, not from Bangkok but from Sukhothai of all places. Surprisingly good quality pizza, they wrap the burger in pizza dough and add cheese and pizza sauce and bake it in the pizza oven. It is very very good.

I agree with what @Klonko wrote, I that the chances of small fish running into difficulty with the TRD is quite small. One problem here however is the random nature of things which can cause collateral damage. Another is the anti-foreigner sentiment in some quarters which may be a catalyst for some random TRD employee to be vindictive. Let me say something finally that really shouldn't need saying: I will be ecstatic if a reliable authoritative source, (Big 4, Sherings, Mazars or similar) was to put in writing that my interpretation is wrong and breaching the assessible income threshold alone, is not sufficient cause to file a return. It would mean we have a reliable answer that almost everyone could hang their hat on with confidence, rather than just piecemeal anecdotes. As things stand, we don't have that reliability and all the written evidence points in the other direction. Break time....blast away.

It's interesting that when somebody allegedly emails an anonymous tax accountant and gets a slightly unique but favorable response, everyone gets instantly excited and finds the information as completely credible and correct. Yet when a Big 4 firm such as PWC, or smaller highly regarded firms such as Mazars or Sherings say nothing to corroborate the above, nobody thinks that's odd or suspicious. Confirmation bias appears rampant today.

We've been round that unproductive and inconclusive loop already. no different from random bank clerks saying you can't open a bank account.