JimGant

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).

You don't, of course. So, you'll have to get it at your local TRD -- the same place you said you're going to file a PND 91 -- which, of course, also requires a TIN. Not sure what point you're trying to make.....?

What difference would that make, if you file electronically? Only if your local tax office is in compliance with the algorithms at the central TRD office -- would you be well served. But, good chance they don't have a solid grasp of all that's in those algorithms -- and could give you bad advice. No, best keep your own counsel on what's needed for filing -- or if you feel incompetent, hire an agent.

Perhaps "leave well-enough alone" comes to mind?

Exactly what questions did you have for TRD that you couldn't answer for yourself? Certainly, nothing to do with your DTA, or your remitted income subject to Por 162? Maybe whether or not you had to include non assessable income on your return? A clever fellow would assume -- if there are no lines for including non assessable income, maybe it's not required.... Duh.

Not if you're single, whose filing threshold requirement is 120k -- well below the 180k average annual wage. And, if your married, and your wife makes 3.4k annually -- you now meet the 220k threshold requiring filing a tax return. Sounds like a lot of folks are ignoring (more likely, unaware) of the filing requirement. Understandable, since it's a dumb requirement, as there's no revenue gained by requiring null tax filings.

Yeah, that worked really well for you, didn't it. I'm 100% certain you can better interpret your DTA -- and how Por 162 applies to you -- than Somchai at TRD. But, as we all know about Thais -- if you ask Somchai a question, he'll be forced to answer with something, as "I don't know" doesn't exist in the Thai vocabulary. And his answer will most likely be wrong. So, avoid the hassle of asking TRD for advice; most of us can figure out what our non-assessable income is; and, if we break those 120/220k thresholds with assessable income, whether or not to file a tax return (of course, we're also smart enough to know what TEDAs to plug in -- and if we owe taxes, of course we need to file a tax return). But to visit TRD for advice? Naaa. Only plan to talk to Somchai in the unlikely event you're called in for a chat. And, as it's understood you'll prepare your tax return -- if required -- with due dilligence -- what worry could you possibly have?

Out of curiosity, does your spreadsheet show you don't owe any Thai taxes (but you're supposed to file 'cause your assessable income exceeded 120/220k)? And, when the lady implied you needed to fill in line items with non assessable income -- when no such lines exist -- did you realize this was a certifiable goat **ck? And, then, did you ever consider walking away, knowing that, by not owing any taxes, you were not subject to any injurious penalties -- and you were totally wasting an otherwise good day? Just curious.