On 5/25/2024 at 9:12 PM, K2938 said:

The BOI solely looks at income, not assets.  So if you were a tech billionaire with stock worth billions, but without any current income, you would not make it.  From an economic point of view this is of course not very sensible, but these are the rules.  Period.
 

This is IMHO true - one must have their finances structured in the way BoI want - but for those with the wealth,  I do not believe it says the entire picture.

If one was a tech billionaire worth billions, it stands to reason that some relatively small amount of those billions could be liquidated, and then structured in a way to provide the regular income in a form that met the BoI requirements.  Quite possibly there would be a tax impact for the 'relatively small' (by billionaire standards) liquidation of stock, but still possibly doable.

Sadly I am neither a tech billionaire nor tech millionaire, ... but still I note in my case,  my health insurance from Europe is 'unlimited' but that was not acceptable to BoI ( I did not know that getting a letter from the insurance company with a specific $ number of coverage (exceeding the BoI requirement) could be used) so instead I went the $100k US$ self health insurance route.

I had the prerequisite >$100K US$ equivalent in an account in Thailand (that could be used for self health insurance), but I had plans for that money, so I did not want to use it for self health insurance to satisfy BoI.

So instead I tried pointing to different accounts overseas which had the amount, but because I could trade stocks in those accounts, they each were rejected.  In the end, I came to the conclusion I was being too stubborn, I then used my Thai account for the prerequisite >$100k for self health insurance, and I then restructured the overseas money I had, in order to follow though with I had originally planned to use the money in Thailand for.  OK - not ideal - but doable.

So if one has the money, often a little restructuring will enable one to set up their finances to meet the BoI requirements.

Yes - I would agree it would be nicer if such was not necessary - but likely for those with the money, there is a way forward, and I doubt that tech billionaires would not be able to find a way to do a small amount of restructuring.

47 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

The problem is that it would make the paragraph  of RD743  on the remittance of foreign income irrelevant. Remittance won't be taxed anymore, earning will. Having to rephrase RD 743 may well lead to unpleasant changes.

Does it not thou, still get back to the issue that a tax return for one's income,  is always submitted for income from the previous year.  One does not submit a tax return in the same year for the income being earned.

I don't speak Thai, but the draft translation I saw for RD743 stated (for LTR_WP) :

"the Revenue Code shall be exempted for a foreigner categorised as Wealthy Global Citizen, Wealthy Pensioner, or Work-from-Thailand Professional who is granted a Long-Term Resident Visa under immigration law for assessable income under section 40 of the Revenue Code derived in the previous tax year from an employment, or from business carried on abroad, or from a property situated abroad, and
brought into Thailand."

Note the translation states 'income'.

Nominally, when one is reporting on a tax return, it is for assessable income ... not savings ... and it is always income from the previous year, which, since tax returns are done annually, would be the very earliest in which one could submit a tax return.  It is always the previous year.

So I note your point, but its not so clear to me. 

Also this is just speculation based on a rather, shall I say, shoddy written Bangkok Post article.  My suspicion is there is no issue here for LTR visa holders noted, but one needs to make their own judgement call on this as time goes by and various information is presented.

Deleted - posted to soon in error

29 minutes ago, stat said:

I recommend to google the following term "New overseas income rules" for an article that claims that ALL income (not just remitted!)will be taxed according to the head of TRD pending a law change. How and if that could change anything regarding LTR WP is beyond me.

I read the article, and I can't help but think the author of the article is mixing up business/company taxes and personal taxes.

I note that because the article stated: " Ms Kulaya said the department plans to expand the tax base by requiring platforms with an income of 1 billion baht or more to report their sources of income."  ... Serious ??  1-billion baht income per year?  How many individuals is that applicable to ?  

The remainder of the article may or may not be true - but its a mishmash , jumping back and forth between business requirements for tax and that for individuals, and not making it clear which may be applicable to which.

Very poorly written article. Very poor.

Also, it makes ZERO reference to the LTR visa, so is it even applicable here? 

On 6/1/2024 at 12:03 AM, sandyf said:

I have been paying a company in Canada from Wise UK for several years and it has always taken in excess of 24 hours and sometimes a few days.

I note the same, in excess of 24 hours and sometimes a few days (for Wise transfers from Canada to Europe).  Having typed that, I have also noted that for smaller amounts of money being transferred, Wise is cheaper than the traditional bank transfers and also, despite the time noted for the transfer, in my experience Wise is also faster than the traditional bank transfers.

2 hours ago, SHA 2 BKK said:

Some comments in the Publication that cannot be named today about the LTR.  Government "crowing" about the scheme with over 4000 successful applicants.  

 

Thankyou for noting that publication article. I went and searched and found it.

Of interest to me, is the article states in excess of 4,000 holders of the LTR visa.  Note the word "holders".

Now if one goes to the BoI website for the LTR visa, one will read as of the end of April-2024 there were 7,322 applicants for the LTR visa.   

Basic math (assuming both those websites are accurate), suggest there could be about 3,000 applicants for the LTR visa who either had the application declined, or who are still waiting the LTR visa approval. 

20 minutes ago, JimGant said:

As I applied in July 2023, I only sent Tax Year 2022's Form 1040 and related 1099's.

I wonder if this also may dependent on the BoI 'screening' officer. 

When I applied in Jan-2023, I sent both 2020 and 2021 taxation documents - and they insisted on receiving my 2022 taxation documents (which nominally is not due in Canada until April-2023).  By the time the dust settled to obtain my LTR-WP visa, I ended up sending BoI taxation documents for 3 years. 

I concede thou, it may have just been bad timing on my part.  Applying in January or February of a year may not be the best time when applying for an LTR visa (as BoI will ask for most recent tax documents, even if not yet available).

.

2 hours ago, K2938 said:

Tax advisers said when the LTR visa came out that the remittance tax privilege of the LTR visa was really just clever marketing since at that time it applied to everybody anyway

 

I think, in practice,  that was true for most, but it was not true for all.  It was not true in my case.

One of my pensions is from a multi-national organisation, where I am required to pay tax in accordance with the law of the country in which I am a resident.  Before obtaining the LTR visa, I would always leave my income in Europe (and live in Thailand off of savings) and hence I believe I was in practice not in trouble with Thai authorities (for as you note, the remittance taxation practice applied to everyone before the more recent clarification/change). 

However the multi-organisation which provided that pension, queried me about my taxation, and they were a bit skeptical when I noted I was compliant with Thai law (as I was not bringing my income into Thailand). Before the LTR visa I could not then easily point to any Thai tax document.  They did in the end accept I was legally compliant (based more on faith than me having any revenue document to prove), but it did require a bit of convincing.

The same was true with an investment I made in Canada. They wanted proof of my paying tax on my global incomes, and they were skeptical in regards to the 'remittance taxation practice' of Thailand in regards to my taxation practice for Thailand (the country of my residence) - in particular for some of my European income.  Again, they did in the end accept I was legally compliant, but it did require a bit of convincing.

This was a bit annoying to me to have to convince people I was legally compliant in regards to tax.  I would get strange looks and queries, and I was on the receiving end of inferences that I was avoiding paying tax (which was not the case - I was taxation compliant).

Now with the LTR Visa, and RD 743, I can show them such and its much easier for me.  Its much more clear than before (albeit not perfectly clear, as has been pointed out by the concerns of some in this LTR thread).

As often is the case in life, any given legislation will be helpful for some, and not helpful for others. 

2 hours ago, K2938 said:

Your argument appears to miss that prior to 2024 all income not submitted in the year it was earned was tax-free for anybody and that remittance taxation was mostly not really enforced against foreigners anyway.

True for the 2023 tax year (where tax returns would nominally be filed early in year 2024)

... although I believe your point not true for the 2022 tax year (where tax returns nominally filed early in year 2023), as I believe that recent note about foreign income brought into Thailand had not yet been announced in very early 2023. 

Correct me if I am wrong re: the 2022 tax year.   

Also I note dependent on how much financial information one provided to BoI during their LTR visa application, the BoI may have a good insight into one's finances, and BoI might spot that year 2022 income was brought into Thailand (by a foreigner) was brought into Thailnd in the same year it was earned - and they could 'theoretically' (albeit I don't believe it) have passed such to the Thai Revenue Department. Again, I don't believe this. But in such a case, the Thai RD would then have clear evidence for enforcement of taxation under the previous tax interpretation, if they wanted.   I have heard of no such cases.  I believe that is consistent with the view - no taxation on money brought into Thailand by LTR visa holders.

Also, the Thai RD tax clarification for foreigner tax residents to pay tax (on money brought into Thailand) was after the LTR visa first came out, and as I noted there was a time window where I believe my comment applied. 

So I think the 'comment' of mine (that you quote) was valid for one taxation year (before the recent tax announcements,  that I assume you are noting).

Regardless, as noted multiple times on this thread, BoI have made it clear for LTR visa holders (such as LTR-WP) that foreign money brought into Thailand is not taxed by Thailand. 

Again, when one nominally files an income tax return, the income noted in one's income tax return is for the PREVIOUS year. One does not file a tax return for income still being earned in the current year.   Hence many of us interpret this as confirming no Thai tax on that income for the noted LTR visa holders. This is FULLY CONSISTENT with what BoI have stated.

I also agree, as also noted in this thread, if one is concerned, then simply wait a year (as in the past) after earning the money, before bringing the money into Thailand. 

The tax understanding of the situation should be more clear in a year or two from now.  

A further point I want to make, is that the very same as in the past, its also difficult for Thailand RD to know which year money brought into Thailand was earned (and whether such covered by a DTA), unless one has already passed such information to BoI or to the Thai RD  ,  and if in the case of BoI, ... only if BoI then went and passed such information to the Thai RD there might (?) for some, be a concern?  That all reads to be very unlikely and problematical to me.  

Still, I agree with all that it would be more re-assuring for some, if the Thai RD, in addition to BoI, would simply state (  'no Thai taxation on any foreign money brought into Thailand' ) for LTR visa holders, just like BoI have stated). 

I am not worried about such, but my financial situation is likely very different from others.

9 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

But any money earned before Jan 1, 2024 and remitted this year won't be taxed anyhow, LTR or not. But IMHO transferring anything earned since Jan 1 would be totally unwise.

Indeed, as I typed :  "  I assume its those, who want to bring a large amount of money into Thailand at one time, and do so immediately upon obtaining the LTR Visa, who are mostly concerned about how the taxation law is applied.   " 

How Jim Tripper believes that is a bad assumption to be concerned , and because one is concerned one could be hit with a huge tax bill all at once (for their concern) - makes ZERO sense to me. "Concern" implies one needs to be careful (and act accordingly to manage not paying unnecessary tax).  I can only assume he read my post too quickly and misunderstood the word 'concerned'.

Just now, JimTripper said:

What a dumb assumption. You could be hit with a huge tax bill all at once assuming that.

What assumption are you referring to? DId you read my post correctly?

1 minute ago, Presnock said:

I never said anything to BOI that my wife didn't contribute to the taxes paid - my 1099R were also included so guess they can read.

I mostly thought the same - but it turns out, for the income documents I provided, they misunderstood what they read?  ... < I am unsure >  .  Maybe I summarized things badly in my cover 'PDF' files.

For example, I listed in a simple cover PDF (supported in subsequent pages in the PDF) how I met the $40K US$ equivalent income for a wealthy pensioner (I received income from different sources, from both Canada and Europe).  I clearly listed all my income (including tax documents) and supported this in subsequent pages with copies of official government documents noting the pensions.

In the case of Canada, I listed my "Old Age Security" (and I provided the appropriate Canadian government tax document).  I did not receive a Canadian Pension yet, so I did not obviously list that as part of my income. 

Yet BOI sent me an Information Request, asking to see the taxation document for my Canadian Pension ! 

I first phoned them, and then followed up with a PDF reply to their document request, noting I did not yet receive a Canadian Pension, nor did I need a Canadian Pension to meet the $40K US$ equivalent - where I again listed the exact sources (with supporting documents) as to where my income came from (all passive pensions).

They only then accepted my answer - but I am still puzzled to this day, why did they ask for my taxation proof of a Canadian pension, when I never claimed to have such a pension.  .... I can only assume they read, were puzzled, and wanted more information?

Or maybe the BoI screening officer wanted me to show significantly more income than I was already showing, so they could get my LTR-WP visa approved by their superior?  i don't know.   It was/is a puzzle.

19 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

 

Is this such a big issue? I reckon that most of us had their money transfers organised to remain tax exempt before they got their LTR visa, so they just have to do nothing. 

 

This is what I do anyhow, and I won't even bother to file a tax return in 2025, just as before.

 

That is true.  I think for many of the expats on an LTR visa, we have no desire to bring all of our money into Thailand.   I have been an expat, mostly since 1989, and I have lived in various countries. Ever since becoming an expat, I have adopted a policy of never keeping all my money in any one country.  That approach of mine has complicated my life a bit (in my needing to file tax returns to multiple countries every year), but I massively prefer the diversification that it provides me.

I assume its those, who want to bring a large amount of money into Thailand at one time, and do so immediately upon obtaining the LTR Visa, who are mostly concerned about how the taxation law is applied. 

I note two years have mostly gone by since the LTR visa was announced, and I have not yet heard nor read of any case (not even one case)  where an LTR visa holder had to pay tax on money that that they brought into Thailand since getting the LTR Visa.  .... Hopefully as time goes by, there will be more confidence on this - and the various taxation companies, will update their initial (likely overly conservative) statements/assessments.

12 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

I think you are misunderstanding their legal opinion. Deloitte issued a legal opinion on RD 743 only. They are not saying that any other income that falls outside of RD 743 is not tax exempt. BOI has promoted the LTR visas as tax exempt, so I'm fairly certain that all income is exempt no matter when it was derived and remitted. It's just that RD 743 doesn't address all the different situations. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It would be nice if BOI & TRD would issue some further guidance to clarify and/or add to the RD 743.

I note that the first LTR visas were issued in late 2022, where such income (for the 2022 taxation year) should have had income tax returns filed (if needed) by March/April 2023. 

And further there were many LTR visas issued in 2023, where this being June-2024, taxation submissions for taxation year 2023 (if needed) should have been submitted by March/April-2024.  

If there was an issue with bringing money into Thailand for LTR visa holders, given there have been 2 taxation years since the LTR visa came out, I suspect we would have heard of such by now.   I have read no news where Thai RD went chasing after LTR visa holders for money brought into Thailand.

But that is just my opinion - maybe I missed reading an official RD notice specific to LTR visa holders needing to pay tax in the scenario that concerns you ..  ... and further I note my opinion is no better nor worse than anyone else's.

I assume we may find out more in the coming year or two, either by total silence on this, or by some active news on taxation.

My speculation is that Deloitte will need to update their (June-2022) legal opinion on taxation aspects of RD 743 as the months go by.  But again this is speculation on my part - and I have no more insight than anyone else.

37 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

Frankly, I think Deloitte have this VERY wrong - and they are misleading their customers.

 

Let me 'rephrase that'. 

"Frankly, I think Deloitte, due to an abundance over caution, have this incorrect  - and they are giving their customers a less than fully accurate assessment.".

I think the time to obtain the LTR visa can very drastically, dependent on how one is going about to meet the LTR visa requirements.

In my case I applied in January-2023 and obtained my LTR Visa in June-2023.  I had a total of 11 information requests from BoI. 

As part of a deliberate (maybe mistaken) effort on my part, I was trying to give BoI the minimum necessary (about my finances) to meet the requirements, and further I likely made insufficient effort to explain my PDF uploads in full filling the LTR-WP visa financial requirements.  

Also my timing was bad.  When I applied in January 2023, I gave BOI copy of my 2020 and 2021 tax returns , but they wanted my 2022 tax return which was not due until end-April-2023.  I did not yet have most of my 2022 receipts to enable me to submit a 2022 tax return. So that took me time to submit a 2022 tax return, have it accepted by the Canadian government, and then provide that back to BoI. 

And as part of proof of investment in Thailand, I purchased some Thai government savings bonds, where currently only a Bond Bank Book is nominally provided as proof of one's bond ownership.  I believe BoI were not used to that, and they demanded a Bond Certificate which nominally has a bit extra information (where Bangkok Bank refused to provide a Bond Certificate, after a 5 week or so go-around ) , and overall that took me about 6-weeks to sort (albeit it could have been sorted much quicker, possibly in a week to sort, had I simply picked up the phone and called BoI a few times followed by trips to the Bank).

I also took too much time to prove Self Health Insurance as I kept trying to get BoI to accept different accounts (with the prerequisite cash) where stock trading is possible ( as Self Health Insurance) , and BoI kept saying not acceptable. That also added a few weeks before I 'caved' and provided them more exactly what they wanted.

So if an agent is taking time to sort an issue, one never knows what is slowing down the process. 

At least in my case, I always knew what was taking the extra time.  Hence that is, I believe, a good reason for one to do this all themselves.  I am not convinced an Agent provides any advantage in the case of an LTR visa application.

.

24 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

Who's right, some of the previous posters or Deloitte?

Thai BoI working with Thai immigration grant the LTR visa.  BoI say no tax on any money brought into Thailand for LTR visa holders.

Who is right? Deloitte? or BoI working with immigration?

Do Deloitte dictate terms to BoI ?  I think not.

Frankly, I think Deloitte have this VERY wrong - and they are misleading their customers.

2 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

You're right, it did come out about a year before, and if everyone's previous year's income was already exempt, then RD 743 was not needed.

Hmm ... RD 743 says more than just information about no taxation in previous year - so RD 743 was needed for other aspects - lets not go too far here.

Further when RD 743 was put out, I speculate that maybe it was already 'confidentially' known within government how they were then going to start taxing anyone deemed a tax resident (for the 'tax residents' foreign money brought into Thailand, under certain circumstances (ie not covered by DTA, and not a foreign saving before 1-Jan-2024).  So given the knowledge of taxation efforts (for tax residents) that was to come soon, the RD 743 had information on taxation added to other items in RD 743. 

That is my speculation, but the main point I want to make is RD 743 is about much more than just the taxation concern you have. Much more.

Further - I want to make the point again. When does one pay tax?  If one brings money into the country in year 2025, one does NOT pay tax on such in the same year ( 2025 ) when it was brought into Thailand, unless there is a with holding tax. There has been NO announcements of holding tax. So logically, one submits their tax return in year 2026 (for the 2025 money brought into Thailand), at that point in time, the money brought into the country in year 2025 was the PREVIOUS year.

Further there is NO mention in the RD 743 about taxing current year foreign money brought into Thailand for LTR visa holders. 

I think it falacious to assume that one will be subject to tax on something where there are no legal statements saying one will be taxed. Else one could be taxed on all sorts of aspects where is no law saying one must be taxed on such.  So by that logic to tax money on the same year in which the money is brought into Thailand, there needs to be a Royal Gazette statement (or Thai revenue department statement) stating one is to be taxed on such. There is no such statement for the LTR visa saying taxed on the year it is brought into Thailand.

If the intent was to tax LTR visa holders on money, in the year in which they bring the money into Thailand, then I believe the BoI and the Revenue Department would make announcements of requirements of holding tax for money brought in. There was no such announcement. That means tax accounting for tax residents is the year AFTER the money is brought into to Thailand, and that makes such income the PREVIOUS year.

Again - BoI have been clear for LTR visa holders - no taxation of money brought into Thailand, every time they have been asked.

Other than concerned speculation on the internet, has anyone read an OFFICIAL Royal Gazette post  (or Thai Revenue department, or Boi Statement) stating there would be a withholding tax specifically for LTR visa holders?  I think not.

57 minutes ago, JimTripper said:

It's odd to put a 5 year validity on a visa that is only good for 180 days. Most people don't need a 5 year window to plan a 6 month visit.

Well - this is Thailand ... and things can get lost in translation.

57 minutes ago, JimTripper said:

 

That's why many people are thinking it's good for 180 days each year for 5 years.

 

I think that would be nice for many, but I suspect that assessment may be too optimistic. 

While I am not affected - like many I am curious - and I guess with time we will learn the actual interpretation by immigration.

2 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

The question I have is, why would Thailand create RD 743 which states the previous year's income if their true intention was that all foreign income from any year was exempt? It would have been so easy just to say all foreign income remitted once you obtain your LTR visa, no matter when it was derived? This doesn't make any sense to me, but this is Thailand, right?

I believe that it is simple logic - if one is required to pay tax, then one files their tax return the year after one brings money into the country.  So if one brings money into the country in year 2024, the tax return (if it was required) is only filed in year 2025. Or if one brings money into the country in year 2025, then the tax return, if it was necessary, would only be filed in year 2026.  i.e. its always the following year for filing a tax return ( if a tax return needed to be filed ) , for money brought into the country. 

One does not file a tax return to list income the year in which income is earned.

That then means the previous year's foreign income is tax exempt ( for the relevant LTR categories).

Hence the "statement about the previous year's income".

At least that is my interpretation.  I am also not worried about such.

4 hours ago, Phillip9 said:

I'm guessing you have never been to a private hospital in Thailand.  They are not "seedy places" by any possible definition of that term.

Absolutely true about private hospitals in Thailand being very very good.  One can thou, run up a large bill, and health insurance can be of a big financial assist.

On the other hand, a public hospital in a small Thai city (which has no private hospital) while significantly less expensive, can be crowded and not so pleasant.

I was pleasantly surprised to read the reduction of health insurance for the Type-OA visa, and I thought that good news. I was disappointed that they did not go a step further and allow 'self insurance', like they do for the LTR visa.  

I was also happy to read that they did not merge the Type-O and Type-OA visas (while retaining the Type-OA health insurance requirement), as that was a concern of mine (not for myself, but for friends I have who are on Type-O visas).  Most my friends on Type-O visas have excellent health insurance from abroad, that is superior to the Thai Type-OA visa requirements, but it is not accepted by Thai immigration (if one were on a Type-OA).  For long stay extensions, on a Type-OA visa, one pretty much needs to purchase health insurance from the Thai branch of a health insurance company, which can mean double health insurance required for those foreigners who do not want to dump their superior foreign (branch) health insurance.  So my friends are happy to stay on the Type-O visa where one need not prove health insurance.

4 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Where is the non-immigrant Long Term Resident visa?

The LTR visa is not a non-immigrant visa.

1 hour ago, Paris333 said:

For those over 50 years old is it mandatory to have health insurance in Thailand?

I am going to travel for 3 months in Bangkok. Is it mandatory to pay private health insurance in Thailand or not?

 

If you are doing so on a non-immigrant type-OA visa, then the answer is YES.

Otherwise, on other relatively short duration visas (or visa exempt) I am not aware of such a requirement. 

HOWEVER you really really really should have health insurance covering you when in Thailand.  I could pontificate on a story of a western man (in his early 20s - but for that matter it would have been the same had he been in his 50s ) who got into a motorcycle accident a couple of years ago, when in Thailand, and ran up a MASSIVE medical bill, before he was finally repatriated back to his home country for more treatment (where back in his home country the public medicare covered him - but it did NOT cover him in Thailand).  And the story I know of first hand is only one of many.

10 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

Thanks for your reply. I will submit my original joint tax return with both names and see if there is a note section where I can explain she is a Thai national and does not have any income and is not applying for a LTR visa for herself.

When applying for the LTR visa one has to upload documents. It's easy to create a one page explanation ( or cover) letter to any PDF upload. I did that toward the end of my LTR application ( after different BoI requests ),  and possibly I should have included such PDF upload explanations sooner.