JimGant

Says who? Expattax alludes to this. So does Chiang Mai, on this forum. I can't find any TRD backup for this. If I could, I'd withdraw all my arguments. But to say, all that pre 2024 income must be held in a savings account, in order to be non assessable from Thai taxes, is ludicrous. Look at Por 162 again: How does that translate into: To comply, that income must be held in a bank account. Maybe logic would say it must be held in a financial account, allowing for liquidity or near liquidity (for whatever that's worth). But certainly, if liquidity was a requirement, I'd be allowed -- to realize greater interest -- to move that income from a savings account, to a brokerage, or to buy CDs -- or to an IRA account, to have US taxes deferred. Certainly TRD isn't putting out restrictions on what I can earn from where I park that pre 2024 income..... Somebody's certainly misinterpreting what they thought TRD said about: Must be kept in a bank or savings account. Or TRD is bonkers..... (rhetorical). Anyway, I have an LTR visa, so this discussion is moot. But for Jingthing -- it won't likely make a hill of beans whether or not your IRA remittance is covered by Por 162, or not. If it is, then Thailand can't tax it -- but the US taxes it in full, without any Thai tax credit deductions. But, if Por 162 isn't a player, then the DTA takes full affect -- and Thailand has primary taxation authority on your IRA remittance -- but because of the saving clause in the DTA -- the US has secondary taxation rights, but has to absorb a tax credit for the Thai taxes. Bottom line: Only in the latter example, if Thai taxes exceed US taxes, will your total tax bill exceed US taxation only.

Amen

But Por 162 says pre 2024 income, which is what IRA consists of, is exempt from assessable income. That its payout is categorized as a "pension" is neither here nor there. Now, without Por 162, yes, that IRA payout would be subject to primary taxation authority by Thai taxation. But, Por 162 overrides this.

So what? "POR 162 says that the assessability of foreign income earned before 31/12/2023 shall not be enforced." The value of your IRA/401k on 12/31/2023 consists of foreign income earned before 12/31/2023 -- irregardless of what shape or form that income now exists (stocks, bonds, whatever). That this income is not in a bank account is totally irrelevant.

Haven't seen that question -- please resend. Thanx.

I don't follow... What's so hard to understand about the value of my IRA, brokerage account, whatever on 12/31/2023? This is the baseline for how much I can subsequently remit to Thailand as non assessable income. What happens to these accounts post 2023 -- co-mingled funds, or whatever -- is of no consequence -- the 12/31/2023 baseline number remains intact. What am I missing?

Says who?

But it asks, "is it taxed when it is brought into Thailand." Certainly sounds like "when remitted" to me. But, Sherrings is even more clearer when it says: "no tax is owed, because accumulated money is savings from earnings in years you were not a resident of Thailand." Certainly sounds like a case for the argument that prior year's income becomes "savings" after a certain time element, or more specifically, after being subjected to home country taxation. So, based on Sherrings, don't worry about prior year's foreign income, when remitted to Thailand in a subsequent year, being considered income at all, but savings. Ergo, not an assessable income moment.

Yeah. I'm getting my threads mixed up, but I recently posted something akin to the above, namely, income after a certain amount of time on the vine, and after being subject to home country taxation, is no longer considered income, but savings. As such, it should no longer be considered as income for Thai taxation purposes. TRD, I guess, could disagree. However, I think with Sherring's input, you should be comfortable not declaring as assessable income monies from past years, now comfortably labelled as savings. And could make a logical argument, in the 1% case you're called in to TRD for an audit.

Well, maybe not recent. But the latest accounting advice I could find that allowed FIFO for non specific (fungible) assets. https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/general/299691/when-the-revenue-department-changes-its-mind-the-taxpayer-gets-the-headache

When does income no longer remain income? Joe Blow fully retires in 2025; moves to Thailand; is there for over 180 days, thus a Thai tax resident. All the money he subsequently remits is from income he earned in 2024. And which has already been subject to home income taxes. Wouldn't such income now be considered savings, which to me perfectly describes income after being subjected to home country taxes? And what if Joe Blow didn't become a Thai tax resident until 2030 -- would those 2024 monies still be considered income when remitted? Hmmmm. Maybe not, based on what we've heard supposedly coming from the TRD, namely: "Income taxed in your home country is exempt from Thai taxes." Sounds like an appreciation that after tax income -- or at least income that had been subjected to taxation -- is now savings. Anyway, without any further guidance coming from the TRD, I know what advice I'd give to Joe Blow.

Not sure I follow.... I certainly know the value of my IRA on Dec 31 2024. Yes, I converted the income I had contributed to the IRA into mutual funds, but it's their value on 12/31/2024 that becomes my baseline figure for what I can remit to Thailand non assessable per Por 162. Already in 2024 I had to sell some of the mutual funds in my IRA to meet the required minimum distribution. And this sale, now cash, has been remitted already to Thailand -- and per Por 162, it certainly would not show up on a Thai tax return.

What country are you from? Many DTAs, following the OECD Model tax treaty example, have your home country -- where your rental property is located -- as the primary taxation authority. BUT -- the treaties also give your country of residence secondary taxation authority. In this situation, you file with your residence country (Thailand, in this discussion) -- but they have to absorb a tax credit for those taxes you pay to your home country. Two examples of this DTA language is with the UK and US DTAs with Thailand. So, if the above applies, you'll be off the hook for double taxation. But, if Thailand's taxation on this rental income is higher than your home country's -- being an expat in Thailand means a bigger overall tax bill on your rental income.

Yes. And per the DTA, Thailand has primary taxation authority to tax these remittances. UNLESS this new TRD rule is used as an exception: So, what's in your IRA? Pre 2024 income; thus not assessable by TRD decree. Yes, tax deferred, in the case of Traditionl IRAs -- or after tax income, in the case of a Roth (or tx exempt, for subsequent earnings). But, in both cases, the assets in your IRA began as pre 2024 income -- what they look like on 12/31/2023 is irrelevant, i.e., cash, stocks, whatever. So, it looks clear -- at least to me -- that the TRD decree means your IRA distributions, albeit labelled self directed pensions, are not taxable -- except for income accumulated post 2023 -- and recent info says you can use FIFO, thus these earnings would represent the last element of any monies remitted. Without that Nov 2023 decree, the whole remittance scenario would be different. The Traditional IRA would be taxable by Thailand. As for Roth IRAs -- look at the US-UK DTA for the protocol that dictates a tax exempt Roth by the US must be tax exempt by the UK. If we ever get to this point with Thailand, with worldwide taxation, then probably such a protocol would be needed for the US-Thai DTA to exempt Roth IRAs. But, a story for another day.

Actually, the value of your investments on 12/31/2023, when converted to cash and remitted to Thailand, would not be assessable. So, too, IRA required minimum distributions -- plus anything additional -- would not be assessable income -- up to the IRA's value on 12/31/2023.

Well, it's long past September -- and today (12/17/2024) I could still log into my SSA account with the old system (no Login.gov or ID.me required). I wonder how much longer this will exist, 'cause setting up the new options is a PITA?)

Ok, good point. My interest is, why would -- or could -- they even address DTA items, or other non assessable incomes -- since there is no "one DTA fits all." But, yeah, sure there will be some changes -- "happy" will be changed to "glad." I just can't imagine any really substantive changes being made. But, we'll see.

Why? What's wrong with the old/current tax forms? What new info is imperative, otherwise "nobody can file?"

In your opinion, just what changes could we expect? Current tax forms only have income line items for assessable income. Would the new forms have line items for remitted non assessable income (per DTA, or per being pre 2024 income items) -- so that TRD could see what's not being taxed? I guess this could be some interesting information for the green eye shade folks -- but to me, it seems it would be an unnecessary clutter. What else? A new edict accompanying the forms, saying: If bottom line says, "No taxes owed," no need to file? Highly doubtful, I guess -- but I can only hold out hope that TRD has some element of sanity. Anyway, just curious on what changes, if any, you expect. For me, the current forms are fairly straightforward, and capture all that is needed for a relatively stress-free tax filing adventure. And, of course, if after you figure out on the back of an envelope, that you owe no taxes -- then just don't file. (NO, NO -- let's not go there again. The readers on this forum have more than enough input to decide their individual action.)

Yes, for most OECD countries, civil/military pensions are taxable EXCLUSIVELY by the paying country. This includes Ireland, per their DTA with Thailand. This means, if your home (paying) country decides not to tax your civil/military pension -- you're home free from any taxes, as the EXCLUSIVE clause prevents Thailand from taxing this income, if remitted. This falls under the "exemption" phase of double tax prevention. Other categories of income, found in DTAs, however, do allow both countries to tax same income, with one being designated primary taxation authority, while the other one is the secondary taxation authority -- but has to absorb a tax credit for the taxes paid to the primary country. Rental income is a good example in many OECD treaties. Here, the situs country of the rental income has primary taxation authority; but your country of residence has secondary taxation authority. Here, if your home (situs) country decides not to tax your rental income, then your country of residence can tax all of it, without having to absorb any tax credits (since there aren't any such credits from the primary country). Thus, in this example, you ain't home free 'from any taxes', because this is avoidance of double taxation by tax credit -- not by exemption. So, without exemption, you end up paying someone. No freebies here.

That's good news; will, next year, save me two trips (delivery, pickup) to Thai Visa for agency service, plus a few baht. Was your receipt still using the 90 day report boilerplate? No big deal -- just a curiosity....

Not true.

Lemme see. 60k per mia noi, times 20, equals...nevermind.

With allowances and deductions and freebie (60k personal, 60k married, 190k over age 65, 100k pension -- plus 150k freebie rate = 560k) -- the effective tax rate on 5 million baht of assessable income would be: 25.2027%. If you had assessable income of 4,560,001 -- meaning after deductions, allowances, and freebie -- you were in the 35% tax bracket by only 1 baht -- then your effective tax rate would be: 21.1624%. This would be the lowest possible effective tax rate for someone in the 35% tax bracket. Obviously the person who arrived at an effective tax rate of 10%, for a person in the 35% tax bracket, included a lot more allowances and deductions than I did in my above example.

Any good recommendations for out in the Doi Saket area?