JimGant

1 hour ago, Yumthai said:

That statement implies you are tax resident while bringing foreign-sourced income in any tax year (while being tax resident) into Thailand. 

Yeah, they would need to add a rule about having to file a tax return, even tho' not a resident in the year foreign assessable income is remitted. Maybe something along the lines of the US 1040-NR (Non Resident) tax filing.

11 hours ago, MistyBlue said:

Happy to be challenged but now my reading of that section in its fullness with the underlined text is that tax is only required when remitting funds in the same year that one is tax resident, if not resident when the funds are remitted (even if they were previously earned and kept offshore when one was resident) then I'm now leaning towards that no tax is due.

Hmmm. My paraphrased reading of the pwc booklet is: A tax resident of Thailand in year X, who has assessable foreign income earned in year X, will have that income subject to Thai taxes, "in any tax year" brought into Thailand.

Otherwise, a Thai tax resident for many years, with years and years of non remitted foreign income -- could take a year off to Tahiti, and remit all their stored foreign income, into Thailand, tax free.

I doubt the writers of the new guidance, hoping to plug a loophole, would open up an even bigger one..... Of course, maybe there was a secret handshake with the "too rich."

9 hours ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

If the funds were withdrawn from the IRA in 2024 and US Federal taxes were paid on the withdrawal and payment of tax could be proven by virtue of US Federal tax returns filed and 1099 forms, and the funds were remitted in 2025, then I think relief could be claimed under the DTA and any US taxes paid could be credited against Thai tax that might otherwise accrue for the 2025 tax year

Kind of tricky when tax years don't coincide due to the remittance angle (but you can always file an amended return to cover a late occurring event, even from another tax year). And presumably the IRA (which may be a rolled-over 401k) was funded many years ago, when you were working. This makes the scenario moot, since that IRA money was earned pre-2024, thus by decree, is not assessable income when remitted (yes, it's US taxed post 2023, but that makes no never mind, since the decree addresses when earned -- and being tax-deferred doesn't taint that.) Having said that, in all situations where both countries get to tax the IRA, Thailand keeps all their taxation -- and the US has to absorb a tax credit of same.

And since, presumably your IRA has had some earnings in 2024, we're back to the FIFO, LIFO conundrum. But once again, there's no reason to not give yourself full advantage, in the absence of any guidance. Thus, treat the remittance as pre-2024 assets. But even if you treated all your remittance from post-2023 earnings in your IRA -- unless you're really in a high Thai tax bracket, Thai taxes, if any, will probably be less than your US taxes, and with the tax credit, things will thus be a wash. [And, yes, the saving clause in the DTA says you still have to file a US tax return, even tho' Thailand is given exclusive taxation rights on IRAs.]

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

I am only interested in gathering and presenting information on the Thai tax system, a system that neither of us is trained in nor qualified to deliver advice on....which is why I don't!

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

The solution is to find out the answer, preferably from the TRD, not create a work around because we don't know the answer today.

Final question. So, if someone asked you for advice, er information, on how to treat a $15k remittance from an account that had $100k in it in 2023, and since Jan 2024 has had $20k added to it, of monies that the DTA say are the exclusive taxation right of Thailand, like a private pension: Your answer would be:

A. FIFO, i.e., monies from 2023, thus not assessable.

B. LIFO, i.e., monies from 2024, thus assessable

C. Go spend the day at RD, looking for someone who even knows what FIFO and LIFO are. When Somchai says he hasn't a clue, feel free to decide which avenue is best for you, namely, FIFO

D. Log onto AN and the Simple Tax Guide. Find out that Somchai's cousin wrote it. Feel free to barf, er use FIFO, in the absence of any advice.

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

Who knows, I don't and you don't, so why provide a work around, just because you don't know!

Without definitive guidance from RD, you're forced to choose a financial guide for how to treat remittances. You have to pick something -- agreed? So why not pick FIFO -- if there's no guidance to the contrary -- to give you the tax advantage. As I said in a previous post, the only other country (UK) that addresses remittance accounting uses LIFO, whereby income, not principal, is first in the taxable line up. Thailand may adopt that eventually. But so far, as best we can discern, they haven't figured out they have to come to some decision -- since 'til now, remitting in a later year, avoided having to make such a decision.

Quote

I don't recommend anything here, only provide information....but you knew that.

 Take a chance. Recommend FIFO. There are folks out there wishing for guidance, not just information.

2 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

You used what, FIFO, really.....farang heathen accounting devil, Thai no have FIFO".

They don't have LIFO either. So, how do you assess what's principal and what's income on a chunk of fungible remittance? Like back in the first world, your competent tax accountant will recommend -- in a gray area situation -- the option that is most favorable to the client. So, under current "non guidance from RD," the competent recommendation is FIFO.

Hey, we don't know how much money in a bank account(s) attracts RD interest. So, that shouldn't matter. What does matter is having sufficient paperwork to show that remitted monies came from pre 2024 accounts, or from accounts exclusively holding DTA exempt monies. Or (worst case), arguing that you used FIFO to show principal, not income, was remitted. As there's nothing to say, under current guidance, that you can't use that argument, you should prevail. But, going forward, I wouldn't be too sure, if the Thais adopt the UK system of LIFO.

33 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

From the quote you supplied from PWC!

Hmmm. Can't seem to find that.... Can you give me a page number please. Thanx.

Just now, Mike Lister said:

And you didn't file in the previous year....don't forget

 Where in the world did you get that "file in previous year" dictate?

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

On the basis of current evidence I believe it to be true. Yet in my opinion it would not be an unreasonable thing for the RD to request - so it needs to be monitored.

 If you have no remitted income, you have no foreign assessable income. And if your only Thai income is bank interest, that doesn't have to be declared as assessable income on a tax return, as you can opt to just treat it as 'withholding at source final tax.' So you're saying it wouldn't be unreasonable for RD to have you file a tax return where all income lines are blank? And where there are no lines to show non assessable income?

2 hours ago, TigerCat said:

How much is a "too large a bank account"?  

 

 It's up to you....😉

17 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

but I do care that they understand what the rules are so they can make informed decisions based on the law, rather than on your guidance that they shouldn't file because the law is silly and not enforceable.

 

Informed decisions "based on the law," rather than common sense -- and a clear understanding that they're not subject to penalty? Ludicrous, from another angle.

14 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Well, I was kinda hoping somebody might have said, subject to exemption rules of the DTA, eg, government pensions or whatever else is treaty exempt. 

I assumed it was a State pension.

17 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Perhaps, just curious to understand how you know they don't enforce it?

Because it's unenforceable, or at least too ludicrous to enforce. Only if a too large a bank account suggests a tax return should have been filed -- might you get a knock on the door. That's why the expat needs to keep good accounts. How the fat cat rice farmer wiggles out of this -- I don't know. But I certainly can guess...

Why are you so insistent that we should file, even with no taxable income?

Oh, enforce how? There's no fine or penalty for failing to file, if no taxes owed. What are they going to do? (rhetorical question)

25 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Nobody challenged it, come on guys, it's a test.

Looks good to me. Is there a trick there we're supposed to see...?

3 hours ago, HerewardtheWake said:

and if at some point BoI changes the LTR health insurance rules,

If they ever did, as an upstanding outfit, they'd grandfather you.

37 minutes ago, chang50 said:

Thanks Mike I'm just so frustrated at the minute..basically this is a shambles.I probably wouldn't have owed tax as i only bring in 640000 baht p.a. and my allowances and deductions are 560000 plus credits from the uk thai dta.I just stupidly tried to do the right thing..

The right thing, according to who? You obviously have no Thai taxable income. So, as many of us here have said (except Mike), you have no tax obligation, no taxes owed, no fines or penalties for not filing, as no taxes owed -- so why the blazes file a Thai tax return?! Tell me -- are you of the opinion you should have filed because you had an assessable income over 120k bt? If so, does that make any sense to you?

29 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

So in other words, you want me to rewrite it and resubmit it, until you're happy with it! Hmmm!

I could care less if I'm ever happy with it -- as said, I haven't even bothered reading it. Just want the confusion factors eliminated, so the man on the street, wandering in for a look see, sees facts, not word pies.

Quote

I did not even write or remotely suggest or even imply that the man in the street is an idiot, those are your words and your sentiment alone! 

I guess I took too giant a leap in reading between the lines with this:

Quote

Sadly that is not the case, the man in the street and the aged pensioner assume that the word reatxe means that money will be taken away, rather than given back.

15 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

The first question is whether you actually need a TIN, do you/will you have taxable income in excess of the threshold this year?

 Ah, what threshold is that? 120,000baht that PWC says the Code stipulates as when you need to file a return, even if no tax owed?

Quote

The following individuals are required to file income tax returns for income earned in the preceding tax year irrespective of whether there is any tax due:
• A person who has no spouse and earns income of more than
Baht 60,000
• A person who has no spouse and earns income under category
(1) (salaries and wages) of more than Baht 120,000
• A person who has a spouse and earns income of more than Baht
120,000
• A person who has a spouse and earns income under category (1)
(salaries and wages) of more than Baht 220,000.

This completely defies logic. My workers, even the new hire earning min wage (400bt/day), will earn 125000 per year, and thus, under the guidance, will have to file a tax return. Insane. You think I'm going to give him, and the other higher paid workers, the bad news that they now have to file tax returns -- by hiring, and paying, someone who knows how? Yeah, right. And do you think I'd advise an expat, who after subtracting out deductions, allowances, and the 150k freebie from his assessable income -- comes up with a negative number -- that he must file a tax return, just 'cause his assessable income exceeded 120k? Come on, man -- I didn't advise tax clients over all those years to take the stupid road (fortunately, the US Tax Code has few stupid roads - just gray roads, that two reasonable folks can arrive at two reasonable alternatives).

Anyway, Mike, if you don't want to give advice that's in favor of your client, er reader -- even tho' there's no penalty for not filing if no taxable income -- it's up to you.

But, if you meant "threshold" was where assessable income, less TEDA, equaled a positive taxable income -- then I apologize.

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

If you now wish to change the way those things are written, please give me a form of words that make you happy and I'll review them for inclusion

Your implication that Thailand might violate the DTA ( "various tax treaties do not limit the extent...") is nonsensical. And, I don't even know what point you were trying to make. Suggest you just flush it,  unless you finally figure out that there's something germane to be said re the power and limitations of a DTA.

As for the man in the street being an idiot, and not understanding double taxation -- you can't say there will be no taxation in Thailand, then say, if so, you'll get a credit to avoid double taxation. You have to find better words; but as written now, the second sentence contradicts the first sentence. The man in the street may think you're the idiot.

This is the first I've ever read any of your tax guide. Have kept abreast of concerns by just reading the critiques from the gang hanging out on these threads. Actually, a nice sample of expats.

On 4/8/2024 at 11:47 AM, Goat said:

In Australia we make immigrants speak english, we should do it here also.

You're right. English should be mandated for everyone in Thailand.

2 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

For the most part, the various tax treaties do not limit the extent to which pension, dividend, rental and interest income can be taxed by Thailand.

You're saying Thailand may violate treaty provisions?

Quote

 Income that is taxed overseas will not be re-taxed here. Tax paid on income overseas can be credited and used to offset any Thai tax assessment on the same income.

 How are you going to issue a credit if it's not re-taxed?

2 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

I also wonder about any proceeds from stock sales that are remitted. What if I sold 100 shares of XYZ and remitted just my original investment amount and keep the capital gains in the US? Do we get to decide what money we remit, or does RD get to decide what money we are remit?

Yes, there's definitely a lack of information. And, if in fact, there is no definitive guidance in any official Thai documentation -- well, you're clear to follow omnipresent Thai guidance: It's up to you. So, in your example, use FIFO, which prioritizes the original investment over latter gains and earnings. If ever questioned, you certainly haven't violated any rules and regs not yet in evidence (to my knowledge).

But, if there are any adults riding herd on this, we probably will eventually get some guidance. And Thailand has only the UK to emulate, as they are the only other country (that I can find) that taxes remitted income. And here are their rules:

Quote

Once income, capital or gains enters a mixed fund it is usually considered to lose its ‘identity’ within the fund. So rules are needed to determine what any subsequent remittance from that fund represents. The practical effect of these rules is that a taxpayer cannot limit the amount of UK tax that may be due by saying, for example, that a remittance from a mixed fund was made out of a particular amount of capital within the fund (and so not taxable) in preference to income in the same fund.

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/residence-domicile-and-remittance-basis/rdrm35240

And further reading in this UK pub shows that a mixed remittance is, indeed, income first, capital second. Hmmmm.