JimGant

14 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

In what line in the tax form do you plan to enter the exemption, and what is the precise description in the tax form for that line entry?

Hey, don't confuse him. It's already apparent he's fixated on a non sequitor.

10 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

I printed off a list of Wise transfers when I went to my local office.  TRD lady asked salary or pension?  I said prior savings.  She accepted that and said no need to file unless claiming refund of withholding.

I'm curious. Why ask the TRD clerk anything? Can't you just hand in your paper tax return without any discussion? Which begs the question -- if I ever have to file, can I just mail in the paper tax return?

30 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

Some DTA make it clear that only the source country of a pension can tax such pension. In such case, per DTA. Thailand has no secondary tax authority for the specified pension.

Well, Thailand could override their DTAs, as long as the spirit of no double taxation isn't violated. A perfect example is the "saving clause" in all US DTAs, which gives the US secondary taxation rights on most income. For example, the US-Thai DTA gives "exclusive" taxation rights to Thailand on my private pension remittances. However, the "saving clause" override allows the US secondary taxation rights on this income.

Not saying Thailand would claim secondary taxation rights on those incomes the DTA says are only taxable by the home country -- if the home country decides not to tax them. This statement can have various interpretations, IMO:

Quote

"Also exempt will be those who have been taxed in a foreign country that has a standing Double Tax Agreement with Thailand."

 Maybe they're saying, "We're not interested in foreign pensions taxed in the home country. But if they're not, we'll revert back to the language of the specific DTA." Which would exclude secondary taxation rights in some cases, like govt pensions.

Anyway, who knows. Just sounds like a workaround to ease matters on taxing foreign pensions. Would be nice if they reiterated this position.

Here's some language on treaty overrides:

Quote

The ability of some countries to unilaterally change, or "override;' their tax treaties through domestic legislation has frequently been identified as a serious threat to the bilateral tax treaty network. In most countries, treaties (including tax treaties) have a status superior to that of ordinary domestic laws (see, e.g. France, Germany, the Netherlands). However, in some countries (primarily the US, but also to some extent the UK and Australia) treaties can be changed unilaterally by subsequent domestic legislation.

https://repository.law.umich.edu/book_chapters/330/

52 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

DTA's do not change the fact that according to Revenue Code, Section 40, Part ( 1 ) Pensions are assessable income.

You ARE smoking something....!

32 minutes ago, MartinL said:

All these reports of TIN refusal because of already-taxed pensions means I'm leaning towards the belief that the RD has told local tax offices that such pensions are not to be taxed further but that bit of info. hasn't been publicly announced for some reason

I think you've nailed it. Remember at the beginning of this goat rope, back in Sept 2023, where this was the prominent headline:

Quote

"Also exempt will be those who have been taxed in a foreign country that has a standing Double Tax Agreement with Thailand."

https://www.thaienquirer.com/50744/thai-government-to-tax-all-income-from-abroad-for-tax-residents-starting-2024/

What could be a better solution to simplifying DTA language? Just declare that home countries always have primary taxation authority on home country pensions -- and Thailand has secondary taxation authority, when the home country doesn't exercise its primary taxation authority. This doesn't in any way compromise the spirit of a DTA, since the principal of no double taxation is still adhered to. It would, of course, have to rely on self-assessment, as any enforcement would only come from random compliance audits (which may not even exist). But, now, if your home country doesn't tax your pension, Thailand has a hook for you. Easy to ignore, if integrity is not your thing.

Anyway, it really does seem that this early guidance by TRD became mantra with all (or many) of the sub TRD offices. Would be nice if the head daddy rabbit at TRD could reiterate this policy to the rest of us....

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

And if some pensions are taxable, and some pensions are not taxable, ( Due to DTA's  and not the Revenue Code ) then they would need to be declared on a tax filing to ensure that people were not lying about the source of their pension, and engaging in tax evasion.

My god, man -- what are you smoking? As you've been repeatedly reminded, under today's self assessment system, you only declare on your tax return assessable pensions (and other assessable income). They're not interested in non taxable pension monies. Possibly your first clue is that there is no place on the tax return to indicate non assessable pensions. Duh.

That in the future they might want to see all your pension income -- is a possibility. But we ain't there yet.

34 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

What about remitting foreign funds into a joint account with one's wife?

What about remitting foreign funds into an account of your gardener/maid?

Or, what about remitting funds into your condo developer, funds you obtained in a loan from a home country bank. Non income, of course. Other remitted funds, like to your gardener or joint account, may or not be assessable income -- that's for you to assess. Where it's remitted to -- is irrelevant. Thus, come tax time, have good records of the sources of your remitted income, figure out what's assessable, and should go on a Thai tax return, then figure if, after TEDA, whether or not this is taxable. If so, pay the taxes. Not too complicated.

5 hours ago, samtam said:

It seems fairly obvious that the tax forms need to be amended to take account the many variations of how remitted money is brought in,

Why? It's up to you to break out assessable remitted income from non assessable income. Then, only plug the assessable income into the tax return -- 'cause there aren't any lines for non assessable income. Subtract out TEDA a the 150k zero bracket -- and if you owe taxes, file. If not, consider ignoring those 60/120k thresholds -- and do this again next year.

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

We've talked about your creative theory before. I'm not buying it yet, but who knows for sure?

And, if US taxes on your IRA are higher than Thai taxes, creative theory becomes a non player.

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I think a lot of DTAs do work similar to how I described,

The country with exclusive taxation authority (language often says, "may ONLY be taxed") never has to absorb a tax credit -- they get to keep the whole enchilada. Your example of Thailand absorbing a tax credit for taxes paid to the US on an IRA -- is not how it works.

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

If transferred to Thailand my reading is the amount remitted to Thailand is fully taxed as accessable income. If you paid tax for that in the U.S. -- if U.S. tax is higher, no Thai tax while if the U.S. tax is lower, you get a credit on your Thai tax for the U.S. tax paid. Thus, at least you avoid DOUBLE taxation.

Nope. DTA gives Thailand "exclusive" taxation rights on remitted IRAs, meaning only Thailand can tax it. However, the US has this "saving clause" in all its DTAs, meaning, it always has secondary taxation rights on taxation (except for a few items, like child care and alimony). Thus, Thailand taxes your remitted IRA -- and as exclusive taxation authority in the DTA -- gets to keep ALL TAXES COLLECTED, and doesn't have to absorb a tax credit from the US. The US, on the other hand, does have to absorb a tax credit for Thai taxes paid. If these are less than the US tax on your IRA, your total out-of-pocket tax bill, to both countries, would equal the tax bill if only the US taxed your IRA. If Thai taxes higher than US taxes, well, your total tax bill, both countries, equals your Thai tax bill ('cause Thai tax credit wipes out your total US tax bill).

As a note for discussion, here's the Por 162 language, meant to exclude pre 2024 income from Thai taxes:

Quote

The guidance in DI No. 162/2566 was issued to clarify that the interpretation provided in Clause 1 of DI No. 161/2566 should not apply to foreign-sourced income derived before 1 January 2024.3

For my traditional IRA, all the original funding occurred by 1990. This was with, of course, pre 2024 income -- albeit tax deferred income (which makes no never mind here, for Por 162 purposes). Since then - because the IRA holds stock mutual funds -- every year capital gains are "realized," and this pre-2024 income is then reinvested. So, except for the 2024 reinvested cap gains, my IRA adheres -- as far as I can see -- to the Por 162 exemption on "foreign sourced income derived before 1 Jan 2024."

Now, one expat advisor out there -- Expatthaitax -- says, nope, only remitted money from pre 2024 bank accounts (no IRAs, brokerage accounts, investments apply) is covered by Por 162. I don't agree -- but would change my mind with something definitive from TRD.

But, what all this means is that, if I follow my own counsel and believe my IRA remittances are exempt per Por 162 -- then, I'm just not required to declare my IRA remittance in a Thai tax return. But, I still have to declare my IRA distribution on my US tax return -- without, of course, any Thai tax credit, since I don't declare this IRA distribution on a Thai tax return. Bottom line: US taxes are probably greater than what I would have paid Thailand. So, Por 162 probably gives me no advantage.

7 hours ago, Thailandbuckeye said:

I have had two Expat Tax companies tell me I need to have the Tax ID and file basically a blank tax return with the LTR Visa attached.

And, of course, their minimum rate starts at 7500bt (the figure we've seen most advertised), which, I guess, is what they'd charge for a blank tax return. But, then, you'd need to pay another 8000bt to get a TIN.

There's no way TRD is interested in monies that aren't taxable. How do I know? Because there aren't any lines on the tax form to list such monies. No way do you have to file a tax return -- by law -- if you have no assessable income. And, per Royal Decree, you have none courtesy of your LTR visa [however, jury still out on whether or not such exempt income must not be from current tax year...].

Would it be possible to provide the names of these two Expat tax companies, so that they can be included on the shyster list.....? Thanx.

34 minutes ago, MarkT63 said:

To try and get a TIN I showed her proof of two lump sums brought from offshore investment in to Thailand in the second half of 2024 and it looks like she just applied tax to those amounts despite the fact that I showed her only 20% of the total was 2024 income (investment profit).

I hope she was just daft, and not up-to-speed on TRD guidance on Por 162 pre 2024 income.....I say this because Expatthaitax (a tax advisory firm) has put the word out that Por 162 exemption only applies to pre 2024 bank accounts. Period. Thus, money in investments, brokerages, Individual Retirement Accounts, etc are NOT covered. Where Expatthaitax got their readout of Por 162 from, I dunno. But maybe this TRD lady got the same briefing......

9 hours ago, cliveshep said:

As for the World Wide income I'll keep my money in the UK and transfer to my daughter who will send it via Wise to the same recipients as my "cunning plan" so nothing for the Thai taxman as my daughter is living in the UK.

Makes no difference what "filtering" system you use, since the remittance aspect to taxation will have disappeared.

4 hours ago, Kerryd said:

And don't bother trying to argue that your [non assessable] pension income shouldn't be included in determining your tax rate, especially as they are just going to deduct that amount anyways.

Currently, only assessable income is included on your tax return. Income non assessable, because of DTA or because it was pre 2024 income (Por 162), is NOT shown anywhere on your return. And, then, of course it doesn't affect your tax bracket -- and wouldn't be shown as a tax deduction, since there's no equivalent non assessble income to deduct it from.

Much discussion on other threads about TRD eventually getting around to asking you to declare ALL remitted income -- assessable and non assessable. This is a Canadian model, where non taxable (non assessable) income is factored in with taxable income, to potentially drive up the tax bracket, and thus collect more taxes on taxable income. Thailand would be smart to emulate this, as its potential to raise tax brackets, and thus taxes collected on assessable income.

And, if they asked you to label each element of your non assessable income, potential there to discover inappropriately labelled, and thus taxable, income. But, since they'll have to bang this off of 61 separate DTAs for most non assessable income, this would most likely not be a cost effective.

3 hours ago, Pib said:

While BOI likes to see tax returns they are not the only income documents they will gladly accept as proof especially if you explain why you can not provide a tax like maybe  you do not need to file in your country. 

Or, like for me, and probably many Yanks, our tax returns are joint. Thus, the return, by itself, doesn't parse my income from my wife's. So it's worthless. So, in my case, I did submit the first two pages of my joint 1040 -- but also the 1099s that defined my specific taxable income for the year. With an explanatory note. No problem.

Oh, and the tax return/1099s were for only the past year. Some forms of LTR, but not WP, require the past two years. I had to get BoI to clarify this for me.

45 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

I report my UK Government Pension monthly remttances for Thai Tax year 2024. How muchof a tax payment do you think I will need to pay to the RD.

Well, they may think that, since you report it, that it's assessable income, and thus potentially taxable. Because, there are no lines to report non assessable foreign remitted income.

That you end up paying tax on this, because you're stupid enough to report non assessable income -- because you're on some kind of crusade -- is fine with me. Maybe pays for those needed road repairs in my neighborhood.