JimGant

Because he disagrees with everything you post -- makes him a joke!?. I say it makes him astute, in most cases. Get rid of the thin skin -- and build in a little flexibility, when other's ideas don't match yours.

You're right. In the US, if you owe taxes, but don't pay, or under pay, you're subject to fines. If, however, you've overwithheld on your income, or over paid estimated taxes -- and thus don't owe any taxes -- you're free not to file a tax return (unless some of your income is from self-employment). This is why I've got it set up, that when I die, the withholding on the income going to my wife will have a sufficient overwithholding pad to mean she owes no taxes. Thus, dear, you don't need to file anything. And that lost $400 in overwithholding is about what you'd have to pay to hire a US tax guy here in Thailand -- a nice wash, with no effort. The IRS will know, by her 1099s, what was withheld, and what was thus not owed. And the pad I've built in will cover any interest earned here in Thailand, which, of course, wouldn't have a 1099. For Thai taxes? Right now, her retirement income would be assessable, if remitted. But it's not remitted -- it's reinvested in the US. But, if we go to worldwide taxation, it would become taxable by Thailand -- and it exceeds 60,000 (the magic number for supposedly needing to file). But, after TEDA, it would be 400,000 short of being taxable income, i.e., no taxes owed, no tax evasion occurring. So, dear -- don't worry about filing a Thai tax return either. So, yeah, "tax enforcement is a significant risk" -- if you OWE taxes. If not, don't bother to file, unless you want the overwithholding refunded. Another case of "common sense." But, just to be safe -- I'll have my ashes scattered on the TRD parking lot. But, flippancy aside -- I really believe my tax plan for my wife -- who would be completely lost, even in gathering forms to give to a tax accountant -- is sound -- because if you don't owe any taxes, you haven't evaded taxation. Thus, no law infringement. And -- at least in the US -- there are absolutely no penalties for not filing, if no taxes owed (except self-employed). Thailand? Maybe an unlikely 2000 baht fine. Ho hum.

----- and a couple of holier-than-thou contributors on this forum.

Using common sense seems to be our only defense against all these disparate answers to tax questions. The most common refrain seems to be: "You're a foreign expat so you owe no taxes here. So, don't bother me with getting a TIN, and filing a Thai tax return." Then, I determine I, somehow, have 60,000 baht in remitted assessable income -- which the rules say I'm supposed to file a tax return. But my TEDA is 560,000 baht -- meaning, there's a 500,000 baht gap before I even HAVE any taxable income. Common sense, for me at least -- and probably for most of the working class clerks at TRD -- says: Don't bother to file. They, like us, can see through shoddy tax rules -- as evidenced by all the "go home" for folks showing up to file nil tax returns. What a waste of TRD resources and trees. So, if no taxable income, common sense says don't file. Yes, there's report that says you might be susceptible to a 2000 baht fine for not filing. No evidence that's ever happened -- but if it did, big deal. Other fear mongering had: They'll go back ten years and look at all your tax positions. Nonsense. Only if they found, in the current situation, that you didn't pay taxes owed, or under paid -- would they go back several years. In this case, they'll only find that you didn't file -- but didn't have any taxable income. Naughty, naughty, naughty. No, common sense dictates -- use common sense in navigating all this Thai tax mumbo jumbo.

Why not? Get it in writing. Is there a need of some kind to have a filed Thai tax return in your possession? Yes, Norwegians need such to get a Norwegian tax exemption. But, what about you? Just curious, as there maybe really is a need to have a return in your possession....

'Cause it makes no sense. What reasonable person would take an armful of ATM slips to TRD and ask: "Do I have to file a return based on these?' Come on, folks. Let's use a little common sense in this discussion. Ok, if you have a bunch of other assessable income entries, besides ATM slips, to ask questions about -- then, ok, unload the 36 atm slips on the clerk's desk -- if they may be a tie breaker for filing , or not. Otherwise, no isolated ATM slip presentation to TRD -- as you'll get funny looks.

How do you say in Thai: "Get the hook, Charlie."

Money sucked out of your bank account by an ATM transaction in Thailand -- is identical to a Wise transfer from this same bank account to Thailand. If that bank account had $50,000 in it on Dec 31, 2023 -- then that's the source of your ATM and Wise transfers -- until it runs out (FIFO applies here, as the non identity of specific monies allows FIFO, confirmed by a 2012 Bangkok Post article). After it runs out, however, you need to go to relativity -- if 78% of your post 2023 direct deposits to this home country bank account are govt pensions (which are non assessable); 18% private pensions; and 4% reinvested interest -- then any subsequent Wise or ATM remittance activity consists of 22% assessable income. And, this amount would go on the assessable foreign income line - or whatever it's called -- on the Thai tax return. Of course, you could just say you remitted from the "govt pension pile." Not too sure that would stand up under cross examination at TRD..... But, it might be an interesting conversation.... As for credit card purchases -- this is certainly not the same as Wise or ATM remittances. In fact, it's a non remittance, as it's a loan from your bank -- and the subsequent payback of that loan doesn't make it a remittance. Anyway, this point has been discussed ad nauseum; but until a more definitive guidance comes forward, I'd just say: Don't declare CC purchases, but remember the loan angle, in case you're called in for a chat by TRD (but why would they -- they'll have no knowledge of those purchases...). No, always use a grey area to your advantage.

And what difference do you expect to see? There will still be the lines for your remitted assessable income, divided up by category (pensions, rents, cap gains, etc). And lines for TEDA subtractions. Highly unlikely there will be lines for remitted NON assessable income -- to what realistic meaningful point? Possibly a line for foreign tax credits, which would be needed for remitted rental income (most DTAs), where, since Thailand is secondary taxation authority, they have to absorb a tax credit for the taxes paid to the primary taxation country, i.e., situs country. BUT, rental income is the only example I can come up with -- other remittances to Thailand fall in the categories of "exclusive or primary" taxation authority. No credit lines needed for these. Anyway, hard for me to see what changes might occur in any new, modified Thai tax forms. Anybody see something I don't? (I'm sure there's something.)

CM, you never gave me a reference for that -- only a Bangkok Post article that didn't say anything about 24% of workforce. Please clarify. Thanx.

You're confused. Taxation begins when your assessable income exceeds all your allowances, deductions, and the 150k freebie -- so called TEDA. The 120 and 220 figures for assesable income were arbitrary numbers picked by some bureaucrat to establish when you're supposed to file a tax return. Absolutely no bearing on what your taxable income is -- if any -- and thus what income taxes you might owe. Somchai at TRD isn't going to be conversant in 61 DTAs, specifically yours. That's why you have to self-assess based on your knowledge of your country's DTA; and whether or not any income remitted -- and not exempt per DTA -- was from pre- 2024 sources. Again, you should be able to do this -- but if nervous, go see an agent. Bottom line: You either arrive at the conclusion you owe taxes, and thus file a tax return. Or not. Somchai's involvement would be an unnecessary distraction.

So all the self-employed in Thailand are supposed to register with TRD? And many do? All those street vendors? I guess I'll just have to take your word for it, 'cause I only have a two-sample situation -- the rice farmer husbands of my domestic workers. And they've never heard of TRD. And, as far as the domestic workers -- they've never filed a tax return, tho' their assessable income exceeds the markers. And, maybe I have some obligation, as their employer, to file/withhold.... However, I don't think so, as I don't employ the minimum number required. Anyway, this numbers game is suspect -- to include numbers of expats who file. But, obviously, our opinions differ. And you have a newspaper article to back you up -- I only have my logic -- which says, once again, the press is way off. Oh well.

You're saying all those self-employed rice farmers I drive by every day are filing tax returns, not just once a year but twice a year -- and most not owing any tax? I would employ a term you don't like -- common sense. So, incorporating that term -- wouldn't you surmise that most are not filing a return -- assuming most don't even know they're supposed to? I say they're not.

Said by whom?

Well, Carden did a convincing sales job -- you give a speech with confusing treaty language, interspersed with US Tax Code confusing lingo -- and with a "just pay me $500, and save $5000 on taxes" -- what's not to like? And he even sold the 'file 3 years of amended returns' to get back all those taxes on previous IRA distributions. Christ, why not? What could go wrong? You either didn't get the IRS on-board ('cause the average IRS agent wasn't versed in treaty language) -- or if they saw it was a sham, you'd only be out the tax you rightfully owed, plus interest. Thomas Carden would face other charges -- but, I'm sure, he could tap dance a, "gee, this is how the treaty language appeared to me, blah blah." Anyway, many Yanks have saved on taxes on their IRAs, per Carden's ploy -- and have probably gotten away with it. Not surprisingly, none would share their Form 8833 with me -- the form Carden has to provide the IRS, in support of his treaty argument. Looks like your game is over, Thomas. So solly.

Yep. He "interpreted" (misrepresented for profit is a better descriptor) the Thai-US DTA's "saving clause" as NOT being applicable to remitted IRA proceeds -- making Thailand the only country where US persons, being tax residents of Thailand, did not have to declare their IRA income on their US tax return -- because the DTA gave Thailand "exclusive taxation rights" on IRAs. And not having to pay Thai taxes, 'cause of the "not remitted in year earned" rule. Result: Pay no one any taxes on your annual IRA RMD cashout, if you spend 180 days in Thailand, and don't remit that RMD cashout until the next year. Too good to be true? Duh. And, yes, the DTA does say Thailand has "exclusive taxation rights" on private pensions and IRAs. But, the US inserts a "saving clause" into every one of its DTAs, allowing in all but a few situations (e.g, alimony, child support) US taxation authority override of DTA language. Sounds arrogant, right? But in actuality it doesn't override any of the spirit of a DTA, namely prevention of double taxation. What it does do, however, is prevent double No taxation. For example, in this case, where Thailand doesn't take advantage of its exclusive taxation right of IRAs -- the "saving clause" allows the US to tax this IRA -- and keep all the proceeds. No double taxation violation here. But if Thailand did tax the IRA, then the US would have to absorb a tax credit for this Thai taxation -- again, no double taxation. The OECD loves the concept of the saving clause, as it prevents a no no taxation situation, which is at the heart of the OECD's new Model Tax Treaty language. I won't belabor the point -- this IRA "saving clause" situation was settled in similar situation involving Switzerland -- and can be found at the below link. But Thomas Carden has successfully sold the IRA tax avoidance scheme to, apparently, many Yanks here in Thailand -- and the scheme is, apparently, too complex for the GS-11 at the IRS to see through (the Swiss example was solved by the senior lawyer on the IRS staff). https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/2/ But now with all remittances, regardless of year remitted, being taxable -- Carden's snake oil bubble regarding IRAs has burst. Good. He's a licensed Enrolled Agent for the IRS -- and like with CPAs, he takes a fiduciary oath to protect his clients, and the US. Some of us take that oath seriously -- others apparently don't. So, beware of anything Carden is selling.

Naaaaa. That would really be retarded.

Nothing emotional about stating that most expats are familiar with the "last year's money" concept. And thus haven't filed a Thai tax return. Going forward, however, will probably be a different situation.

I thought it was a fair question, considering most normal expats don't file Thai tax returns. Over.

But we're not yet considering the new rules for this drill -- we're talking history. And historically every farang was probably aware about the "last year's money" concept of no Thai taxation. So, they were probably smart enough not to have any direct deposits of foreign payments, unless it was exempt from Thai taxation via DTA. Otherwise, remittances that could be taxable were filtered through a financial institution -- preferably one that had been open the previous tax year, and fully funded. But if not -- just pretend it had been, knowing TRD would assume, unless you're retarded, that you had used the "last year's money" concept. And thus wouldn't call you in for a chat. So, yeah, it is reasonable to assume very few expats have ever filed a Thai tax return. By the way, all those farangs you saw at TRD when you filed your taxes -- did they look like they worked in Thailand? Or did they look retarded? Just curious.

Why, for goodness sakes?

Ok, I won't call them idiots. So, what shall we call them? Misinformed?

And your proof of these things is where? In human nature. Only an idiot would file a tax return, when he didn't have to. Any other reason, particularly when no taxes were owed, would, I guess, be maybe because of an obscure, nonsensical requirement to file if having greater than 60/120/220, whatever, assessable income. Easily ignored -- with no reportable consequences -- due, I guess, to TRD common sense. Common sense, too, with your actions.

Has merit -- why? Why put yourself in TRD files as a tax filer -- when no taxes are owed? Probably (I hope) such a filing would go in the trash bin, as generating no interest, and no revenue. But, worst case -- you're now in the data base, and as such, they'll now expect an annual tax filing (even it it's another brain-dead nil filing) -- and if they don't get one, they'll investigate. No, only an idiot would file a nil tax return -- and put themselves on the radar screen for future tax filings.

If you have a smidgin of remitted assessable income well below being taxable -- after TEDA -- why subject yourself to filing, and for subjecting yourself to getting a TIN? Just stay off the radar. And, remember -- only if Thailand has secondary taxation rights per DTA, like on rental incomes, will a Thai tax return have to absorb a tax credit. But if the DTA says Thailand has exclusionary/primary taxation rights -- then the whole enchilada is taxable, and keepable, by Thailand (and no need for a tax credit line for foreign taxes). But, so what? If that kind of remitted income is well short of being taxable in whole by Thailand, after TEDA -- in my "smidgin" example -- again, save yourself the hassle of getting a TIN, and filing a tax return. Yeah, we hear about having to file if your "smidgin" assessable income exceeds 60/120/220/whatever. And if you don't -- a 2000 baht fine. Never happened, and never will. But if it did, well worth the cost for not wasting time with TINs, filings -- and putting yourself on TRd's radar screen.