JimGant

.... and not from some bumpkin in a dusty roadside RD office.

When Thailand switches to worldwide income taxation, and the remittance nature of income goes bye bye -- what in the world will change in the way Thailand reports CRS and FATCA related data? Nothing, 'cause what they're reporting are existing financial accounts and their related annual income. That these accounts were established and nourished with remitted funds (income or otherwise), makes no never mind -- they may have been established from sale money from a house, gambling proceeds, whatever. The remittance aspect just never comes into view. I guess he just couldn't process it properly.

Yeah, for sure you've gotten weird, when you say a SWIFT or Wise transfer won't do -- only a direct deposit of non assessable incomes. What about a SWIFT transfer from an account holding only govt pensions.......... Nevermind.

You're starting to get weird. You're saying, short of a direct deposit of a DTA exempt income amount, that self assessment of a Wise deposit won't work, and that you have to go for a face-to-face at your local TRD office for verification? Maybe in the remote chance of an audit -- but not up front with an ordinary tax filing with, of course, self assessment. You've said this before in many posts, that you need to have your local TRD agent verify all your assumptions about assessable vs non assessable income. This is just nonsense. Then, when I mention electronic filing, pointing out that TRD will be out of the loop for any verification -- I get this: Don't your really understand that even Thai TRD is trying to become more efficient, and that agents will only become involved in an audit situation? I guess it will be kinda sad that you will no longer to be able to drop in to your local TRD to get reassurance on your tax filings.

How do you do that when you electronically file?

How's that going to identify tax evasion? The money I remit to Thailand has already gone through the tax assessment process in my home country -- no evasion here. Then, if such money is remitted to Thailand, some, maybe none, is subject to Thai taxation, per DTA and/or Por 162. This, per self assessment, will be included on a tax return, if required. But certainly not all remitted income need reporting, since most (all?) will be non taxable per DTA/Por 162. Anyway, we get back to the key observation: FATCA and CRS are not in the business of identifying cash flows, but in identifying people with foreign accounts and what those accounts contain, and the income those accounts generate. Then, when this information is reported to home country, has subject income been subjected to required taxation?

Sorry. Sometimes its hard to attribute a quote to the right source when I cut and paste.

These "tax exemptions" are deductions against assessable income. To add non-assessable income in section B, you'd have to add non-assessable income to line A1 -- salary. Which would be bonkers.

Hey, FATCA isn't interested in any remittances I make to Thailand -- they're either from my savings account (already taxed money) or from my current account (already labelled for US taxation). Why would they care if it remained in account, or if I Wised it to Thailand -- since US taxes are already a done deal? But, they are interested in my existing financial accounts in Thailand -- and they, along with their income, will be reported if exceeding the $50/75k thresholds I previously discussed. Remittances -- and any Thai taxation -- are of no consideration.

Cm, you surprise me. Full disclosure of all remittances? If source of remittances is not instantly verifiable? Last year I remitted 215000 baht -- all from a savings account fully funded with pre 2024 income. TRD doesn't have the resources to verify this -- they'll just, realistically, have to rely on my self-assessment. Red flags, maybe -- but with no realistic way for TRD to audit each and every one of such remittances. What, pray tell, do you propose that TRD does? Certainly, putting a line item on your tax return with non assessable income won't change matters. (But it could give TRD a better picture of who to audit.)

That's the biggest piece of horse sh** I've ever heard. Declarable, how? The tax returns are only interested in assessable income, not income exempt per DTA or Por 162. (Sorry, guess I'm beating a dead horse.)

Oh, geez -- you think TRD is going to wander thru all of your reported assessable income, then thru non assessable income now required to be reported? There's a reason the term "self-assessment" was invented.

FATCA, and its son, CRS, aren't interested in the movement of money. It's a "balance sheet" approach, vs a "cash flow" approach, meaning: For FATCA, if the aggregate of my Thai bank accounts exceed $50,000 at end of year (or $75,000 anytime during the year) my bank reports it, along with income earned on that money, to a Thai govt agency (TRD probably). They, then, are responsible for forwarding this info to the US. That I remitted one zillion baht during the year -- but it left my account the next day for a condo, and thus didn't earn any money -- would be reportable only because I exceeded $75,000 at one time during the year. But, no income associated. And certainly nothing that could be reportable on a Thai tax return, assuming a non assessable nature. I can only assume CRS reporting is similar, i.e., interest only in financial account balances and related income. Neither FATCA nor CRS reporting could have any interest in an odd duck like remittance income, applicable only to Thailand and Malta (and UK non residents who are tax residents, or some such thing, which I won't try and understand). So, for FATCA, to say banks need to report all remittances is rubbish. Reporting is only for those accounts that exceed those $50k/75k markers, whether by remittances or reinvested income.

And ignore how the PND91 form defines "exempt income?" Certainly the designers of that form have a better grasp on matters than the befuddled TRD clerk you've been dealing with....whose definitions are at odds with the central office. But, hey, knock yourself out. You seem to like the quest you're onto. By the way, the CRS gurus could care less about remittances, just as the FATCA gurus could care less. What your worldwide financial positions are, and their related annual incomes -- is what's of concern. How monies were remitted to those financial accounts has no relevance.

Box 2 is NOT for non assessable remitted income. Here is what it is for:

Well, one exception: You're self employed and have net income over $600. But, of course, the most obvious one for no taxes owed: Your standard deduction/itemized deductions exceeds your Adjusted Gross Income. Thus, no "taxable income." (Kinda like TEDA exceeds assessable income -- except "no filing required" must be a first world concept, i.e., one with no arbitrary filing thresholds.) Another is if you over withhold, or file excessive estimated taxes. Thus, Uncle Sam owes you a refund -- if you file to get it. Otherwise, don't file, let Uncle Sam keep the amount, and establish it to be about what you'd pay a tax return service. Result: A wash. This is what I've set up for the wife, for when I croak -- with an overwithholding amount approximating the cost of a tax accountant in Thailand.

Right now it's not. But, they could, in the future, modify the tax filing forms, and provide a line for non assessable income. This would not violate any DTAs, as it's not affecting the purpose of the DTA, namely, preventing double taxation. It's only providing a new reporting set of data (for whatever reason?). Why? To see if new tax forms have been issued with line items for non assessable income? Don't you have any hobbies?

Best input yet on this thread.

Let's not get hysterical. Failure to file 'cause you owe no taxes, but exceed those 120/220k thresholds -- is --max -- a 2000 bt fine. Doubtful such a fine has ever been assessed, 'cause if you don't owe taxes, and don't file a return, and don't have a TIN -- you're completely off the radar.

How do you figure out "expensive" with nothing to compare to...? Ok, you've been here 20 years, and now your only conception of prices is solely based on Thailand -- and what Somchai pays. I guess my conception is a little more worldly.

What a load of BS. Pay 8000 bt to file a null tax return, 'cause your assessable income exceeds those 120/220k thresholds -- but your TEDA prevents any taxes due. What they don't say is, pay another 7500 bt to get a TIN (my assumption). And, waste half a day plus, if you live in Bangkok, dotting the i's and crossing the t's -- and fighting traffic. Live up country? Not sure how you interface in that situation.... So, 8000 bt -- maybe 15,500 bt -- 100% guaranteed cost -- plus, of course, your time. Do nothing, sit back and have a beer, or a round of golf -- and have a 1% chance that TRD will even hear of you, let alone serve you with a 2000 bt fine. No brainer. Yeah, that Integrity guy sure has it right about these illegal charlatans.

Your Canadian DTA exempted income doesn't exist for Thai taxation purposes. Thus, no where, no need to list on a Thai tax return.

More interested in the bottom line, rather than the discrimination aspect. That Thailand, even with price discrimination, is a lot cheaper than comparable services in the US -- is all I care about. I guess I'm not an overly sensitive individual....

Right. Half the foreign prostitutes arrested recently in Thailand were African. Hey, after a few beers, "bad features" disappear -- it's only in the morning that you realize the errors of your ways.

You're over thinking this. This just means, as "tax exempt" per Royal Decree -- just don't enter it on your tax return (which, by Royal Decree probably means no tax return filing required, unless you have in-Thailand income).