Mike Lister

Not really! Several others keep saying that because that's how we interpret what is written in Thai tax law, what is said by Big 4 and what is said by Thai law firms, all of which have not yet been successfully challenged by anyone, apart from your third hand account from an anonymous Thai accountant.

There is no time limit, the Pattaya Mail subsequently acknowledged their error.

Fair enough. Since you've been filing for 20 years, you don't have the 10 year back audit threat to worry about so that greatly reduces your risk.

I cannot tell you what you should do but I can tell you what I do and that is, to file a tax return, if my assessable income from overseas exceeds 120k baht per year (which it does), for which I would need a TIN. BUT if my income from overseas comprised all savings, earned before 1 January 2024, I wouldn't have any assessable income, ergo, I wouldn't have to file. I hope that helps.

On the one hand we have very recent posters who have argued for over seven months that filing a tax return when there's no tax to pay is insane and unwanted, regardless of what the law says. On the other hand we have me who quotes the law and Big 4 guidance and suggests the best course of action is to follow it. You appear to agree with my view on this. It wont provide the definitive answer but it will helpful to understand what others think is the entrenched arte to be persuaded.

We agree on this, remarkably! The problem is that there are others here who think that common sense and custom take precedent over the law, it's them you need to quote and challenge, not me.

Come to think about it, I think the real risk of not filing a return is that of getting caught up in action against locals, just as foreigners were with the overseas remittances. At some point, somebody in the TRD or government will say they've had enough of locals saying they don't make enough money to file a return when everyone knows they do and they will clamp down and make everyone file, according to the law.

What are the risks of ignoring the law and not filing a tax return, even though no tax was due but the assessable minimum level was breached? I guess the answer must be, somewhere between 0% and 100%, based on the individual, their circumstances and the staff at the local TRD office. For people who want certainty in their lives, that's nightmarish. In one scenario, the (example) person has assessable income of say 200k per year but doesn't file a return, because there was no tax to pay. Fast forward to some years later when a TRD employee decides to maximise the tax haul or even falls out with the taxpayer over something that was said or done. Perhaps the person legitimately remitted a large amount one year, perhaps from the sale of overseas property. Hmm says the TRD man, this person only filed returns for two of the past ten years, we need to take a closer look at those ten years. Oops, mea culpa, no defense possible and the effort involved would be horrendous, the financial cost would not be small. That's what I think the risk is of ignoring the tax rule about who should file.

I decided to look in places other than tax consultancies for the definitive answer to this issue so I turned to law firms, one of which is Tilleke, now Tilleke and Gibbons, arguably the premier law firm in Thailand. Unsurprisingly they sing from the same hymn sheet as PWC hence there is no misinterpretation of the prior PWC quote. Tilleke says: "Every person, except a minor or a person adjudged incompetent or quasi incompetent, must file an income tax return if such person: a. has no spouse and the assessable income of the preceding tax year exceeds Baht 30,000; b. has no spouse and the assessable income of the preceding tax year arises exclusively under Section 40(1) and exceeds Baht 50,000; c. has a spouse and the assessable income of the preceding tax year exceeds Baht 60,000; d. has a spouse and all of the assessable income of the preceding tax year arises exclusively under Section 40(1) and exceeds Baht 100,000". https://www.tilleke.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Thailand-Tax-Guide.pdf The above is quoted in the Introduction to Thai Tax document, albeit the numbers have changed over time. This is not much help in answering the question, except to confirm that Big 4, legal firms and the TRD are all saying the same thing, which is that everyone who exceeds the low threshold, must file a return, even though there is no tax to pay. At this stage, I just need to remind everyone what the question is that we're trying to answer, I think it is whether or not accepted practise differs from tax law and whether we can safely ignore tax law as a result and that there will be no negative consequence, as a result. Frankly, I don't see evidence that anyone in the Government, Tax, Accountancy or Legal professions, here or overseas , stating that is so. In fact, all I see is evidence to the contrary, apart from one anonymous Bangkok tax firm, quoted by third hand, who appears to have gone rogue and broken the code of tax Omerta.

In this part of the evil plot, tax consultancies are complicit in the subterfuge, in order to maximise their revenue? "We won't tell the punters that they don't really need to file, instead, we'll take their 7.5k/10k in fees, because the law says we'd be OK to do so. Later, when they find out they've been shafted, we can claim the moral high ground for being technically correct"? This is all very plausible of course, except it achieves the exact opposite of what the TRD wants. TRD, allegedly, doesn't want lots of nil returns clogging up their systems and lots of enquiring farangs descending on their offices, all jabbering away in foreign tongue's and upsetting TRD's natural equilibrium, because there's nothing in it for them. Hmmm, tricky this! Should TRD come clean and damage tax consultancy revenue income streams and risk losing face with Joe Public, or stay schtum? I think if I was head of TRD, I'd want nirvana to be where I held a tax record on everyone in the country. Perfection would be, everyone telling me once a year, how much money they did or didn't make that was taxable. At that point, TRD is doing the best job possible and is maximising the tax take, under current rules. If that's their mentality, TRD is also following the law, just like the tax consultancies. In fact, the only people who aren't following the law are those who think "it's a stupid idea" to file a nil return! This reminds me of always looking left, right then left again, before crossing the road. Whatever is the point of doing that when there's no traffic coming! Stay tuned for subsequent installments.

A huge amount really, but not everything sadly. It depends which camp you're in and there are at least three. 1) I need to file, I will file 2) I think I don't need to file, according to my interpretation, so I probably wont. 3) Sitting on the fence, waiting for a big announcement and things to be made more clear I'm in camp 1 because that's what my interpretation of the rules suggests. If I need to change to camp 2 later, that's a bonus. Those in camp 2 however, may have a problem switching to camp 1 later, without some explanation and scrutiny. As for camp 3 folks, what can be said, "hope springs eternal".

Just stepping back for a moment.... It doesn't seem to me that any new evidence has been introduced into this argument to sway opinion one way or the other, apart perhaps from a smattering of heated emotion. On the one hand we have the PWC statement that has been interpreted differently by one member but on the other, we don't have any positive confirmation that filing is not required, other than anecdotes. The other things we don't have is any supportive evidence from any of the many tax accountants who have presented videos and Q&A's, stating that filing is not necessary. It seems to me this would be a major piece of news, if it were true. and correct. At least one is charging 7.5k/10k for basic filing assistance, which would be disturbing if the taxpayer found out he didn't actually need to file at all! So, pay your 7.5k/10k baht, receive your package of papers and a message thank you for payment and a second message saying you don't need to file...is that how it goes down! Somehow I kinda doubt it.

Dunno, dunno dunno. it's buried somewhere in the bowels of the first tax thread.

In all fairness, nobody at TRD has ever got in my face and said, "Mr Lister, you MUST file a return", but there again I've never given them cause to do so.

I'm pleased to hear that you've been able to move things forward speedily. All the very best to your wife for Saturday.

I vaguely recall in the early days of thread 1, a poster did say he'd been fined for not filing, this was how the information about ten years back audits came to the surface.

We don't agree, that's fine. At the risk of opening myself up to another personal attack by Jim, I'm tempted to ask why the TRD District Office that I deal with in Chiang Mai, hasn't turned me a way for the reasons you state and in fact have encouraged me to file. But I wont.

No, others have not substantiated that at all. What has been substantiated is that if Joe Farang walks into various TRD offices around the country, they may well be told they do not need to file a return. Just like when they walk into a bank and are told they cannot open a bank account, ask for a residency certificate and are told it costs 1,000 baht, or any of the myriad of other things that people are frequently unable to do successfully.

The issue here is what the law prescribes. In all my time both inside and out of Big 4, I have never known them to contradict tax code law in any country although I accept that Revenue Departments may not always follow their own rules precisely, uniformly all of the time. That aspect not withstanding, what level of advice can be given to the general population on this subject, to follow the law or follow the current practise? I for one would never recommend the latter, but that's just me, I don't like walking on quicksand and much prefer bedrock.

I can't comment on this because I don't know what mechanisms the TRD has for activating or deactivating clauses in the code and I'm not about to read through it all to find out. What I do know is that some classes of people, entertainers and musicians being two, are required to obtain TC Certs. So whilst the clause may not be active for the general population, it is at least active for some parts of it.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be pedantic but the statement didn't end with a period and it seemed incomplete. From the PWC link I quoted earlier: "and in the case of having income from other sources (with or without employment income) of THB 60,000 or less (for single persons) or THB 120,000 or less (for married persons)". Are you suggesting this is wrong?

I'm going to object to your post for a second time, on the basis that you fail to understand that we're all trying to find the correct answer. Except you seem to want to personalise attacks, just because my opinion doesn't agree with yours. The reality is that YOU have failed repeatedly to provide this forum with any credible substantiated facts that support your emotive opinion whereas I have provided you with quotes from both TRD and PWC, explaining why I believe what I do. YOU need to tone it down and reign it in.

Did you intend to quote more?

The mere existence of the penalty, is in itself, overwhelmingly supportive of the notion that returns are required to be filed. Trying to assess anecdotes seems foolhardy

If so, why the 2k fine for not filing a return, even if no tax due? This aspect is like groundhog day, it just keeps being challenged by the same old arguments, by different people