JimGant

Nice to see common sense brought into the equation.

Has anyone successfully done an annual report (TM95) by mail?

Nice. Tamps down the fear mongering that the uninitiated newbie might experience. Maybe you could equally mitigate the chance of this ever happening:

You never handed it to a waiter, who went in the back room to run it? Once they copy all the data on the card, they're good-to-go for online thievery. That's why it's recommended you blank out your CVV number, as it's not needed for "present" card purchases -- only "not present" (online) usage. Obviously, record that number somewhere before you obliterate it (I found permanent ink won't cover up the impression, thus you need to razor blade some plastic off). And, obviously, destroying your card won't stop online thievery, when somebody's already copied your card information. Need to report it immediately to the fraud dept of your bank, who will cancel it -- and any subsequent usage will be denied, and no further liability. Hate the idea of somebody able to empty my bank account, 'cause I have a debit card; credit cards definitely mo' betta.

Was he wearing a green Grab jacket? Hard to break old motorcycle habits of cutting everybody on the road off -- when you switch to four wheels.

Here's a copy of my email to BoI ref visa cancellation. And their reply. This was back in July: Their reply: So, advised to do nothing, I did nothing prior to attending my appointment. I guess, during somewhere leading up to the LTR visa stamp in my passport, some bureaucratic voodoo occurred, which I didn't witness, that made my extension vanish. Anyway, don't worry about having to make two trips to Bangkok. You're covered, I'm sure.

Amen. Now, can we move on.

But if you have no taxable income, and thus owe no tax -- 100% of zero is zero; 200% of zero is zero. Yawn. And that 2000 baht fine for not filing if you have over 120k in assessable income, even tho' you're 380k baht shy of having any taxable income -- is still an unsubstantiated rumor, that really doesn't make any sense when you hold it up to the light. Exposed to back audits for the past decade? How many new agents will be required just to determine which farangs were here for over 180 days, and in which years? ***Moderator Note: personal attack and flame removed***

Use your common sense. How would they do that? Certainly you're not going to fill out a Thai tax return with all your remittance data, most of which would be non assessable -- for them to scrutinize? Probably, with no taxable income, you won't even file a tax return, nor even have a TIN. What are the revenuers going to do -- have the banks report all remittances of all farangs -- then have to parse which farangs are tax residents, and which are tourists? Then, what are they going to do? For tax residents, present you with a tax bill based on all your remittances, including loan money sent to BoI for Foreign Direct Investment? NOT! Thailand has just petitioned to join the OECD Community, the honchos of double tax treaties. Thailand is thus not about to poke any fingers in any eyes. But, tax treaties aren't sacrosanct -- there is something called Tax Treaty Override, whereby a country can change its domestic tax laws, in conflict with treaty language -- as long as the "override" has no significant material effect -- and may actually enhance the substance of the treaty. Here's a discussion on this override: https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/model-tax-convention-on-income-and-on-capital-2014-full-version/r-8-tax-treaty-override_9789264239081-101-en#page1 Thus, Thailand, in the interest of less paperwork at RD, may dictate that, yes, if you pay taxes in your home country on income that the DTA says Thailand has exclusive taxation rights on -- then we'll give you a pass on Thai taxes on this income. Thus, the spirit of the DTA is still adhered to, namely, avoiding double taxation. That Thailand, in this example, would sacrifice tax collection -- is Thailand's problem, not the OECD's. The most famous Tax Treaty Override is the US "saving clause" (sometime seen as "savings clause") whereby US Tax Code overrides treaty language by trumping "exclusivity" language on taxation rights, by saying the US can also tax this income -- but only as secondary tax authority. Example: Private pensions and IRAs remitted to Thailand are, per treaty, "exclusively" taxable only by Thailand. But the US saving clause gives the US secondary taxation rights -- but they have to absorb a credit for Thai taxes paid, while Thailand gets to keep the full collection -- just as they would under "exclusivity." Thus, nothing "material" altered in the tax treaty by the saving clause. In fact, the OECD uses this as an example of where "override" enhances the substance of a tax treaty by allowing the US to be a secondary tax collector, in case the exclusive -- now effectively the primary -- tax collector decides not to collect taxes -- as Thailand has done, up till now, with foreign income remitted in a later year. Why does the OECD like this? Because DTAs, originally to prevent double taxation, have expanded to try and prevent "no no taxation." So, newer OECD Model tax treaties are addressing this. But in the meantime, overrides, like the US saving clause, are already addressing this. So, if Thailand presents an override that doesn't materially affect a DTA -- but maybe just means your total tax bill is just redistributed over both countries, not exactly in accordance with the DTA -- so be it. As it is allowed without being a treaty violation. I have to jump in here with a favorite topic of mine, namely, the tax advisor in Bangkok who advertises (or use to advertise), for US folks, that you'll never have to pay taxes on your IRA distributions, if you're a Thai tax resident, and who doesn't remit said IRA to Thailand in same year paid. I guess now, his charlatan claims that IRA remittances are not subject to the saving clause, as bogus as these claims are, are trumped by the new Thai tax guidance on IRA remittances in later years. Anyway, I wonder if anyone reading this has availed the services of this so-called tax expert? (details in the following link): https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/2/

Seen that on this forum for many years; and it's what I use to justify taking a tax credit for Thai taxes on bank interest -- on my US Tax Form 1040. A single line item for the credit; no further forms, if less than $600 (filing jointly). Sure beats getting a TIN and wasting an afternoon at RD offices, for a measly refund. [If I could get a TIN, I'd be obligated to try and get the refund first from Thailand. But, with multiple reports saying, as a retiree, I can't get a TIN -- an easy peasy response, with supporting notes, to the IRS, in the less than 1% chance I'd get a letter audit.] Certainly not tax evasion or avoidance -- just allowing Thailand to collect the full tax, and the US having to absorb a credit for the same. Seems fair.

I follow the rules the way I interpret it i.e.: no assessable income, no need to file a tax return. If I'm wrong in my assessment I'll comply to the rules when directly required from the official authority. Obviously, the downside is wasting time filing a nil tax return. Certainly, most of us have better things to do with our time than filling out a tax return with blank lines, after maybe having to waste time to get a TIN -- and maybe in both situations, having to go downtown, hunt for a parking place, then dealing with Thai bureaucrats. Is there really a downside, you ask? Rhetorical, of course -- since there's no upside, as there's no percentage penalty on zero taxes owed. And the 2000 baht fine for not filing a return if you have 120k assessable income -- is not a hard-and-fast nailed down law. But I'd pay 2000bt to not have to drive downtown -- twice. Yumthai, did you mean "taxable income," not "assessable income?"

As has been referenced many times on this thread, pensions are considered 'income from employment.' Hard to argue with that.

How much assessable income? More germane, your link begins with: To me, a taxpayer is one who is required to pay taxes, because he has taxable income, meaning his assessable income exceeds deductions, allowances, and the 150k freebie. Not because his assessable income exceeds some minor number -- a number that precludes him from being a "taxpayer." Hanging your hat on translated Thai RD pubs may not serve well the newbie reading your Simple Tax Guide. At least have an asterisk footnote to the effect there is lack of surety; and what some of the filing alternatives are; and what might be the consequences, if any. Here's an interesting alternative input on getting a TIN: Have never heard of Expatica. But they seem to have quite a professional operation ongoing. So, I would not say their discovery is inferior to yours, particularly as limited as your discovery seems to be (Mike, take that as constructive criticism, and not as a slam.) But, I would really not recommend your Simple Tax Guide to a newbie, who's lack of knowledgeable investigation on his own, would lead to these conclusions: 1. He needs to get a TIN within 60 days if he has assessable income of (some unidentified) amount. 2. If he has over 120k (220k married) in assessable income, and if he doesn't file a tax return, he's subject to a 2k fine. Mike, don't let 'pride of authorship' ruin your day.

Can you provide a source for this? Thanx.

If you've plenty of time and patience to handle those buyers interested yourself, and you want max profit due to no commissions or fees -- yeah, the no agent route may work. But, if you're not hanging on the last baht of profit, and would rather be playing golf than playing realtor -- I can recommend a local guy (American), who comes highly recommended to me by a neighbor, who recently used him to sell his 25M baht "bungalow" here in Luang Nuea. Guy's name is Paul. Don't know how his fees stack against competitors.... https://www.doisaketproperties.com/property_category/property-for-sale/page/