ukrules

You are missing my point entirely - it was never a loophole - that's the point. It was intentional when it was done back in the 1980s, recently they got greedy and now they're paying the price for this greed. It's called Karma.

That's nonsense, it was there quite deliberately since the 80s - they got greedy and thought the people were stupid. Well the people aren't stupid and the remittances stopped flowing, what did they think would happen?

Indeed, this is the emergency procedure and bypasses full parliamentary scrutiny and a vote. So long as the 'Cabinet' agree in their little vote then it can be forwarded to the Kings departments for review, approval and eventual publication in the gazette. If it's not approved then you will never hear anything spoken about this again because that would potentially be illegal. In fact it will never be reported that it's been sent for approval unless it's already been given the nod in advance. So one day out of nowhere it will either be published in the gazette or announced that it's being published - or nothing.

They can forget about getting additional remittances forever if they do that, people would simply leave unless they did the absolute unthinkable and went 'full USA' but I doubt that will ever happen.

Vance is the next one

That's how everything works isn't it? Look at this taxation malarkey - by increasing the tax net they are going to end up collecting far less. Should Srettha Thavisin be made to pay for that out of his pocket? He was PM when the change was made - so it's his fault right? How many billions of Baht did he cost the economy already - it's ongoing too The answer is no of course, a Prime Minister should not have to pay personally for their dumb policies - they should really do a better job.

Right now nothing has changed and a full tax year has passed. Maybe they make this change, maybe they don't but they sure as <deleted> have not done it yet.

Yeah, until it's published in the Gazette it's nothing more than hot air / proposed changes which often never come to fruition. They can draft as many of these as they want but unless the Cabinet vote on it nothing will happen, then it just needs the 'Royal Decree' part completing.

That's better - the original link was broken - and still is - maybe someone can fix it.

It worked for me but that was a few years ago. In fact this lease was drawn up on the spot and my Mrs leased the rented house that she rents to me - they may have attached a copy of her id - she certainly didn't own it and nothing more was required. I believe that for Thailand they know there is no easy proof of address in English for many people so they do things a little differently - like returning your passport to you while it's being processed - that's not normal but they do it in Thailand. I went to a law company who did this, they knew what they were doing - I just signed the documents but yeah a lease in my name showing the address was sufficient. Even though it's just a worthless piece of paper when it comes down to it.

Oh yeah, there's no escaping that if it's earned in the UK then you're taxed there regardless of what it is or how it's earned.

Do you spend a lot of time over in the UK or something? Personally I haven't stepped foot in the place in over a decade and have zero income or liabilities over there. Under the 'Statutory Residence Test' they now use at HMRC they booted me off the tax register many, many years ago. No declarations required these days.

I don't pay any tax in Cambodia.

Me too, a lot of people have filed tax returns already, in fact anyone who hasn't is now a 'late filer' this year for last years taxes if they were resident and remitted more than the paltry allowances. I left Thailand last year for just over 6 months as I sold something which I one day planned to remit as and when required over the next 10 to 20 years, my plan was always to use the 'next year' remittance method, then they cancelled that but the sale of my assets didn't happen until late last year. I was quite disappointed but as this was quite a bit of money, potentially enough to last for life - I left just to make sure I never have to pay anything on that.

Right, if you bought money in last year and were a resident then you owe tax on it - don't make the mistake that you don't because you do. Until they get around to changing it then the announcement back in 2023 stands.

For proof of residency they also accept a copy of a lease. I sent an agent to do it for me as I couldn't be bothered and they drew up a lease especially for this purpose. It's nonsense - however you can also get a bank statement with an English address on it - just pop along to the bank and get them to alter your address into English then tell them to print a statement - they will do it for a small fee - then you have a bank document with your address on it - and that's very useful for lots of other things as well.

I came to live in Thailand for only 1 reason, I could avoid paying any and all tax. I've always said the one thing that will make me leave is if they ever attempt to tax me - hence I am sitting in an apartment in Phnom Penh right now. They're not getting a single Baht from me. I know how to do it 100% legally, it's not evasion if it's avoidance and there's nothing wrong with avoidance. Not yet anyway.

Of course they are.

lol

Lol, take action and ensure the outcome you want. No need to hope.

Also - this is a classic example of the lies used by the anti counterfeit groups. Why would a company, even one producing fakes make sure their products contain some of the most harmful substances around - it's propaganda. A solid counterfeit operation will strive to match the quality of the original in such a way that even the trademark holders can barely tell the difference - this is what they fear the most and it's why they spend massive amounts of money employing private investigation agencies running non stop undercover operations for decades on end fighting it.

These raids were a huge value is touted are hilarious. These goods are worth nothing because they are fake.

Some moron at the RD was mouthing off about that - but that's all they do, they make publicity for themselves.

There's definitely a measure of irony in this accident.

Sure they could remit whatever they wanted while non resident or in fact forever after they earned the money in a previous year - while non resident. Is this attempting to close the 'can remit forever' part of this? I doubt it as it's savings from a non resident year - but it might be, who knows. Also they seem to have extended it to the year after non residency as well as the year of non residency. How about people who've been non resident for many years - are they going to tax them if they return? The whole thing as usual is as clear as mud. Whatever they do it's to raise additional revenue - not less.