oldcpu

18 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Sure, but I was speaking in general, and not to your specific circumstances. 

 

Many seem to think their country's DTA with Thailand means there is no tax to pay in Thailand. 

 

I posted this clip in another forum a while ago.  I'll post it here also.  He explains it quite well. 

 

He calls it "The double taxation treaty myth."

The video link did not work for me. <<< EDIT - the link works now!!

I do agree - a DTA should likely be checked by each expat in Thailand who brings current year income into Thailand, to see if the DTA between Thailand and the source country of their income, says anything about where one is liable for tax. 

Such a DTA may be helpful - or may not be helpful - dependent on the country and type of income.

12 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

Mmmm, well in my case I have a 3 million ฿ insurance with Pacific Cross.  .... Submitted each year with OA renewal & passed by Immigration without comment each time.

 

 Thanks !

Am I correct in assuming this is from a Thai branch of Pacific Cross?

.

2 hours ago, mfd101 said:

My understanding -  but others may know better than me - is that the requirement for a THAI insurance cover no longer exists.

With regard to the Type-OA visa ...

I was curious, so I checked the "Phuket Immigration Volunteers" web site, where it notes:
- - -

Quote

 

Medical Insurance : (Non-OA Specific)

An medical insurance is required for every retirement extension if it is based on a original Non-OA visa (Issued at the Thai Embassy in your home country)

 

Please use the following link https://longstay.tgia.org/ to get more information about the required health insurance or  here to see the list of the accepted health insurance companies.

 

If you require the health insurance but are not able to obtain it due to age, please discuss this with the immigration officer during application for a possible exemption.

 

If the retirement extension is based on a (single entry) Non-O visa or from a conversion from Non-B or based on marriage etc then the health insurance is NOT required for the extension based retirement application.  

 

- - -

So I went to the noted link https://longstay.tgia.org/ and it still lists the acceptable Thai branch of Health Insurance companies for type-OA visa.  Of course (like me) that web site too could be out of date.

I am curious to learn from current type-OA visa holders on annual retirement extensions.  Did you have to prove health insurance for your last extension?

37 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Didn't they allow foreign insurance policy unless ....

"The applicant must submit a completed, signed, and stamped Foreign Insurance Certificate" 

 

This possible catch 22 if foreign company will not provide same. 

Possibly I am out of date here. 

I recall there was a blank (to be filled in) Thai form for one to certify their foreign health insurance, but it was only for the initial application of one's Type-OA visa.  That form (that I recall) was not acceptable for the 1 year extensions (of the Type-OA) for reason of retirement (or at least it was not accepted in Phuket immigration). 

I actually tried to get European Cigna to fill in the 'Thai form' (which requests the signature of a director of the health insurance company certify they meet the Thai requirements per a Thai document) and European Cigna flatly refused - claiming they did not know and hence would not certify to Thai requirements.   I even attempted to provide them the Thai requirements, but they still refused.      ... That of course is a mute point - as Phuket immigration still would not have accepted such.

I then asked a Thai Cigna branch if they would certify my European Cigna health insurance (for a small nominal fee) for my annual extension (on the type-OA) and Thai Cigna refused. Thai branch of Cigna insisted I go for 100% insurance from their branch before they would certify Thai Health Insurance requirements met.

Foreign Health Insurance requirements for the LTR visa are more easy to prove as acceptable (to BoI), but that is off topic with regards to this thread.

AND as noted - I am possibly out of date ... I think that was 4 years ago when I went through this. 

19 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

My understanding -  but others may know better than me - is that the requirement for a THAI insurance cover no longer exists.

Interesting.  Are you certain you are not thinking of COVID health insurance no longer required?

I believe health insurance from the Thai branch of a Health Insurance company (for annual extensions for reason of retirement) for type-OA visa is still required - and that Health insurance must equal or exceed a certain immigration specified coverage.

On 12/24/2024 at 11:36 AM, mfd101 said:

You always take this line, but fail to consider the rationale - as the OP states - for staying with OA, namely the insurance requirement is fine & accepted. In my case, at age 75 I need decent health insurance anyway so there's no advantage in changing to another visa type.

I believe there IS an advantage to Type-O if your health insurance is NOT from the Thai branch of a health insurance company.

One issue with the type-OA health insurance requirement that I encountered (some years back), was for a one-year extension (for reason of retirement), immigration required that the Health Insurance had to come from the Thai branch of a health insurance company. 

I had (and still have) subsidized Health Insurance from Europe that exceeds the Thai requirements, but it was unacceptable for Phuket immigration (as it was not on their list of acceptable Thai branches of insurance company ).

So for one year 1 actually purchased DOUBLE health insurance (ie kept my far superior European health insurance AND I purchased less capable Thai health insurance).  The next year when I went for an extension (on the type-OA) I went for reason of marriage (and hence I did not need to purchase DOUBLE health insurance via the Thai branch of a health insurance company).

The year after that, I exited Thailand without a re-entry permit, to invalidate my Type-OA and re-entered visa exempt, and applied for and obtained a Type-O visa (which has no requirements for Health Insurance), per the very salient (in my view) observation of DrJack54. ( I did keep my European Health insurance - but that European Health Insurance is irrelevant from a Thai immigration perspective).

It is not relevant to me anymore (my being on an LTR visa now) but I concede I do read these threads with interest. I wonder 'HAS ANYONE' on a Type-OA visa, when applying for a 1-year extension for reason of retirement,  been successful in getting their local Thai immigration office to accept Health Insurance from a NON-THAI branch of a Health Insurance company?

.

Perhaps now is a good time to visit Australia. 

18 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Passing taxation rights to another country doesn't mean the funds are tax exempt though, does it? 

Indeed.  It does not mean funds are tax exempt.

This is where paw.161 (for income prior to 1-Jan-2024) comes in handy, and where currently the LTR visa comes in handy for myself (as I reside in Thailand >180 days/calendar(tax) year).

.

1 hour ago, aldriglikvid said:

In the first nine months of the year, foreigners acquired condominiums in Thailand for a total of 51 billion Thai baht, with an average unit price of approximately 4.6 million baht. Foreign buyers account for 20-25% of the total condominium purchase volume nationwide, making them a significant—arguably essential—group for sustaining the overall market.
 

While discussing these statistics, the minister reiterated that the relaxation of ownership quota rules is under consideration, emphasizing their intention to attract increased foreign investment into the Thai real estate market.
 

As you’re all aware, every condominium purchase requires an international FX transfer document to be presented at the land office. It is estimated that 70-80 billion Thai baht will flow into Thailand through such transactions in 2024 alone.
 

For those who believe in "realpolitik," one might argue that it will not only be administratively cumbersome to audit these buyers, determine whether they are tax residents, and calculate their tax liabilities for these transfers but also counterproductive to the government's goal of encouraging foreign investment. 

51 billion ÷ 4.6 million = 11,087 units bought by foreigners.

I was surprised to read of so many condos being purchased by foreigners. I would have speculated 1/3 that number.

6 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I disagree that 90% of the listings are not actually for sale.  Simple as that. 

I tend to agree that 90% may be an exaggeration.

My experience in 2016 when condo hunting ( researching many dozens of places) was that 1 out of 3 places were not on the market ( and were inappropriately listed) and 2 out of 3 were validly listed on the market.

But that was 2016. This is almost 2025. Have things changed that much since 2016? I don't know. I tend to speculate little has changed.

1 hour ago, Jack1988 said:

Is there a way to not pay tax? I have never paid and declared tax every time I came to Thailand 

I like to use the words "Is there a way to legally minimize my tax obligations"  ... as opposed to "avoid to pay tax" (per the thread title).  Granted I think for most the intent is close to the same - but 'avoiding tax' terminology can get a 'bad rap'.

In addition to considerations in regards to the specific thresholds (of income) for tax filing, and paying tax, as noted aspects such as the Double Tax Agreement (DTA) between Thailand and the foreign country where one's income is sourced, is also a factor, which may mean more money (than the nominal Thailand income tax payment threshold) could be brought into Thailand without being subject to Thai tax.  Every DTA is different, so one needs to examine the DTA relevant to their own country.

Further a recent (Nov-2023) Thailand Revenue Department (RD) document, paw-161, notes, that any foreign income or foreign savings brought into Thailand before 1-Jan-2024, is not taxable.  At least that is my understanding, and IF that is correct, then one can legally bring even more money earned and saved from before 1-Jan-2024 (than the taxation thresholds) into Thailand without having to pay Thailand tax on such.

I find the Taxation filing requirements (given aspects such as paw.161, and LTR visa) a bit less clear, hence I am trying to watch what I see as a developing clarity on this, as best as I can.

Best wishes in managing your tax situation.

4 minutes ago, topt said:

...  is very dependant on an individuals specific circumstances.

Good for you if you can avoid it.

That's also my view. Each individual needs to consider their own circumstances and plan (best they can) accordingly.

The great thing about threads such as this (if we can all do our best to be civil to each other, including myself) is that we exchange knowledge, and we have our misunderstandings corrected, and we can help correct the misunderstandings of others - while sharing, and advancing the knowledge in regards to potential taxation management.

Armed with such knowledge, we can better plan.

Best wishes.

12 hours ago, anrcaccount said:

 

Fair call, but 35% return in 6 years isn't great, you'd have done a lot better parking in an SP500 fund. The point stands, that generally, Thai condos are a poor investment. 

No dispute there from me ...

The post thou was in response to a claim by someone who stated there was "NO RESALE" value from a foreign owned condo.   My view on that is that one may end up with much less money (from their condo) when selling, or they may end up with some more (above purchase price) when selling, but they will have some money.  "NO RESALE VALUE" is inaccurate (if not accompanied by a clarification that they are referring to 'profit').

One point to note re:real estate where I live in Phuket, is when COVID hit, rental prices dropped in the area where I lived by about 50%.  COVID is over now, and rental prices have more than doubled since the COVID days ... even tripled in some cases,

So I believe when assessing the low (or no or loss) return from owning, one also has to consider:

(1) potential for escalating rental costs, and
(2) a bit more (albeit maybe not much more) freedom to modify one's place as an owner, as opposed to just being a tenant.

12 hours ago, anrcaccount said:

 

Having said that, Khao Kad is a nice spot, great views, quiet, isolated...apart from the massive construction noise..... but anyway, each to their own.

 

Yes - there is a LOT of construction going on in KhaoKhad (in far south of Phuket) at present, and I suspect such will continue for next few years.

The places being built are very upmarket, with what I view as insanely high (far far too high) prices for both buyers and renters.  Such new luxury places is IMHO one of the factors for the recent price increases for sales (and rentals) of condo units in the complex where I live.  Of course the CJPM/Committee being committed to improving the condo is also another factor.  I know of another condo complex close to Cape Panwa area where value of condo units has dramatically dropped as the condo complex has fallen a bit into disrepair.

As you note, I do like the Khao Khad views, and relative isolation from the heavy traffic areas of Phuket.

.

1 minute ago, jayboy said:

 

 

It's my understanding that savings ( incurred before 31.12.2023) do not need to be "pre-deposited." In other words such funding can be remitted at any time if they meet the criteria.Agreed?

That's also my understanding from PAW.161.  The money can be outside of Thailand before 01.01.2024, brought in, and not be taxable.

However these Thai RD tax interpretations are relatively new, and given "This Is Thailand" those expats who are very conservative AND who also have the luxury (of money already in Thailand) can wait a few years and see what transpires in practice in regards to the need to not only not pay tax but also any need (or no need) to file a tax return to Thaliand.

13 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

How many expats transferred enough money before 31/12/23 to live on for the rest of their life, given that one's end date is not know? 

 

Sure, some will cruise along on past transfers for a while, but for many, they will end up having to deal with Thai remittance tax in some way, shape or form. 

I think we are in agreement that most expats in Thailand don't plan to live off of savings pre-deposited in Thailand for the remainder of their lives.  That was never the point of my post.

However, the POINT is that for the next few years, those that have the luxury of living off of such savings for just a few years (with savings already pre-positioned in Thailand) can "sit back" and observe how the tax situation in Thailand evolves, before rushing to any decisions in regards to their tax management approach. Since they have no Thai sourced income, and since they are not bringing money into Thailand (for next few years),  they can legally not file a Thai tax return at present time, and do not need to apply for a Thai tax ID at present time.  I state that based on what I was specifically advised by a Phuket based Thai RD official.

Further, I note, with Paw.161, any foreign sourced income prior to 1-Jan-2024 and any foreign savings PRIOR to 1-Jan-2024, can be brought into Thailand tax free.

After a few more years (possibly less), I suspect there should be more agreement as to the income tax filing requirements for each expat's different situation.

So to re-iterate the POINT is those with such luxury of in-Thailand savings can wait, until the situation is more clear.

Sadly, I suspect that the expats who may be the most affected in Thailand by taxation changes could be those who don't qualify for an LTR visa where they mostly live from foreign sourced 'pay check to pay check' (or foreign pension payment to pension payment) if such money exceeds some certain relatively low level TBD amount of money (but less than LTR visa criteria), AND if their foreign income is not already "protected" by a DTA with the specific source country of the foreign 'pension'/'paycheck'/'investments'.  

As previously noted elsewhere by others, those expats in the higher income bracket likely have different ways at their disposal to minimize any tax impact on them.

It likely behooves each expat in Thailand to look at their own financial situation and assess the impact (if any) on themselves.

12 minutes ago, jmd8800 said:

Here we are coming up on tax filing season. Has anyone found a reasonable way to get a Tax ID and then file without having to go through the numerous expat filing agencies charging a premium price?

One way to get a tax-ID is to apply online.  That online application will go to Bangkok, and they will likely forward the application to your local provincial (?) Revenue Department, who might end up calling you.  Likely they will want from you your source of income.  If your income is from outside of Thailand they will likely want to know if you have/are bringing the income into Thailand after 31-Dec-2023, ... AND very important they will want confirmation you spend >180 days per tax (calendar) year in Thailand.

If you don't spend >180 days per tax (calendar) year in Thailand, or if you have no Thai income AND you are not bringing foreign income into Thailand (which is possible if you are living off of income brought into Thailand before 31-Dec-2023 when you were NOT a Thai tax resident) - then in those cases they may initially deny you a Thai tax ID.

That's what happened to me.

However if you insist that you need the tax-ID (say to recover some withholding  tax on Thai bank accounts, or be because you plan to bring money into Thailand soon) then they may give you a Tax-ID.

My having typed that I think your next point very salient:

12 minutes ago, jmd8800 said:

 

I had though about printing every possible paper I can think of they might want and traveling to my local TRD office and say: "Ok I'm ready to file." and see what happens.

 That should work IMHO.  You may end up spending some time thou, at the local TRD, while they try to figure out what to do with you.

Best wishes and luck on this.

8 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Yes, but for some high net worth individuals, they may not see living in Thailand as value for money anymore, due to having to pay this tax. 

 

Some may consider leaving Thailand for 6 months of the year, as it's financially beneficial for them to do so. 

I agree. 

Everyone needs to look at their own financial situation in regards to source income (location/amounts) and also the time they wish to spend in Thailand , and the Thai visa that they have. For some it makes financial sense not to be a Thai resident.  For others it does make financial sense to stay in Thailand and be considered a Thai resident.

On 12/28/2024 at 10:22 PM, KhunHeineken said:

Can you quote some legislation, even a DTA, that states pensions are exempt? 

In the case of German pensions (only) :  German - Thai DTA.  It passes taxation rights for German pensions to Thailand, the country of residency (assuming one is a resident of Thailand).

On 12/28/2024 at 9:50 AM, ronnie50 said:

Maybe it's the word 'tax resident' - I know what you mean though, you must pay taxes at source if it was earned in your country of nationality.  However, I'm not considered a tax resident of my country(ies) for example.. but if I earned money there, regardless of where I am resident, they'd tax it at source.

There are EU countries (Germany for example) where pension is NOT taxed in the source country (Germany) for non-residents of Germany who are residents of Thailand. Read the German-Thailand DTA if you don't believe me.

The German Taxation authorities even sent me a letter stating such, and asked that if my tax situation did not change, that i should stop filing a German tax return for my German pension income.

I don't know about other EU countries,  but the DTA of different EU countries with Thailand is VERY relevant here and blanket statements (that taxes MUST be paid at source for EU) are typically inaccurate - as there are exceptions.

6 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Moving alone mow.

 

Can you put forward any reasons why this tax "may" happen? 

 

We've heard why you think it will not happen. 

No.  I stated why it "could" (ie why it could be the extra work results in nothing happening).   I never stated "will" .  That is your deliberate misconstruing of another's post.

I find it difficult to believe English is your first language given your inability to know the difference between "could" and "will ".

Serious.

Are you  trying to invent someone to debate with by misconstruing their views?   That is how it looks.

Such misconstruing the views of others (when they state "could" as opposed to "will") shows a major effort on your part to deliberately misconstrue someone's elses post - probably to grind your own axe.

As for reasons why such will (or wlll not) happen.  I do NOT have reasons why it "WILL" or "WILL NOT" .  OK?  Lets be clear.

As for reasons why it could happen, I think you stated such. OK?

You really need to learn the difference between "will" and "could".

I see no point in replying further on this, given you deliberately misconstrue what others state (or you simply do not understand differences in word use in the English language).

EDIT: To help you here:

"The main difference between "could" and "will" is that "could" suggests uncertainty or a conditional outcome, while "will" indicates a stronger intention or certainty."

.

7 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

English is my first language. 

 

So, you have contradicted yourself then. 

 

You say it "possibly" could happen in a later post, but in a previous post, list several reasons why you think it will not happen, and zero reasons for why it may happen. 

 

Basically, you have said it will not happen in one post, and in another post have said it "possibly" could happen. 

 

No one knows how this will unfold, and I keep an open mind.

 

I have put forward that when easy tax revenue is involved, governments tend not to walk away from the money. 

No. 

" will " is your words.

" could " is the word I choose.

Read again the relevant posts.

2 minutes ago, Presnock said:

FYI:  3 days later but looks like the information from that ASEAN Briefing article but if anyone is inerested, since it being disseminated by different news, hopefully the TRD or Govt Finance Ministry might give all a heads up too:

https://asianafrican.org/thailand-2025-global-income-tax-key-impacts-for-residents-investors/

Did you mean this link:

https://asianafrican.org/thailands-2025-global-income-tax-key-impacts-for-residents-and-investors/

The one you provided gives a 404 error.

28 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Yes, I have said we will all have to wait and see, but in a previous posts you focused on reasons as to why Thailand will not do it, and totally disregarded any reason for why they will do it, the biggest reason for doing it being MONEY.

I think  I was clear , and you even quoted me on it, where i typed

"Could a Tax Clearance Certificate happen for 1-year annual extensions happen?  Possibly.  And possibly not.  This is Thailand and I have no predictions."

I assume English is your 2nd language?

There is an important distinction between "could" and "would" or "will".

I specifically typed "could".  And I typed "possibly" and "possibly not".  I also typed "I have no predictions".  That is a FAR CRY from "will not" .

What part of that do you not understand?  How can I explain that better for you?

11 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

It is well known that there is a massive oversupply of properties in the tourist areas of Thailand. 

 

...  good luck selling your condo when it is amongst 1135 other properties, and that's just one online real estate agency.  How many more would there be on the market if all the for sale data was collected.

I have no intention to sell. 

Still ...

There is LIMITED land that can offer sea views (the sort of incredible view my condo unit has).  So where there is a limited desirable location, the price goes up.   That is market forces.

Market forces - something I believe you also agree is a key factor - has driven up the price.

So to claim "no resale value" (those are NOT my words - they are your words). 

So "no resale value".  ....   Serious? 

That is so wrong -

I TRIED to be polite in reply but do you really want to go down this road of discussion, saying "NO RESALE" value, when clearly there is some resale value.

Yes - possibly less value for some (although they do get some).  And MORE value for others (who make a profit)  - where as I pointed out, current sellers in the complex where I live are earning 35% on the original purchase value.  That  is VERY VERY VERY far your claim of "NO RESALE  VALUE".

Those (NO RESALE VALUE words) are not my words. 

Often, massive exaggerations do not help one's case in a discussion.