JimGant

I have to agree with Mike on this one, but mainly as it impacts Thai citizens/fat cats, rather than we expats. Heretofore, the fat cat could just wait until a later year to bring in his foreign earnings to escape taxation. But that loophole appears to be closed. Certainly the powers-that-be aren't now going to allow fat cats to take extended vacations that negate their tax residency -- to use that year to remit all their overseas income..... But, wait -- maybe there's some interpretation that says, if no tax return is required to be filed for a year in which you weren't a tax resident, then no taxes on remittances received in that tax year. Yeah, doesn't pass the sniff test -- but maybe a deliberate "out" to accommodate the fat cats, who certainly would of had a say in all of this. But, who cares -- no extended vacations on my horizon. Plus, Yanks aren't affected by any of this (yes, I know -- you Old World folks get tired of hearing this).

No. You've already met any tax obligations. Money gifted to your wife in the US is exempt from gift taxation. Gift to wife in Thailand is below the 20m threshold.

I don't see any of your scenarios that would require you to file a Thai tax return and pay Thai taxes: If income is not remitted, it's not assessable. If monies from pre 2024 are remitted, they're not assessable. If income remitted, otherwise assessable but remitted in a year when you're not a tax resident -- not assessable. Thus, no situations where you're paying Thai taxes, and thus no situations requiring a tax credit of Thai taxes against US taxes. But, your question is a good one for future use, i.e., when you pay Thai taxes on US income because the DTA says that's the way it is. Normally, under US Tax Code, tax credits against your US tax return are for taxes paid only on foreign income. But, there's an exception for taxes paid under treaty (DTA) situations, such as paying taxes to Thailand on US income that they have primary taxation rights on. As such, you DO get a tax credit against your US tax return, requiring you to file a Form 8833. But, all the scenarios you indicate aren't yet in that situation. Bottom line, as a Yank -- all this gobbly gook about the new tax situation doesn't really affect us, as our total tax bill, between the two countries, will, in most scenarios, be the same, with maybe Thailand finally getting more taxes, and the US less, as Thailand finally employs the language of the US-Thai DTA to their benefit.

Just quoting a couple of Thai legal sites that -- hopefully -- know more than I do. Makes no difference on the direction I've given my wife. She'll be in no jeopardy as administrator of my estate -- and sole beneficiary. As administrator appointed in my Will, she needs no court to bless that appointment:

Ah, I see. Running a red light is in the same category as not filing taxes when no taxes are due. Get a grip, man.

Show me that law. Here's what a quick Google finds: So, it looks like my bank manager didn't need to wink and nod -- she (the manager) can determine what amounts to release to my wife -- the sole beneficiary and executor in my Will. Think I won't have the wife bother her with a death certificate, but just go ahead and transfer the money, per her guidance. If there's nobody out there claiming to also be a beneficiary, who's going to file charges...? Sometimes common sense greases the skids -- and is particularly gratifying when it denies greedy lawyers their fees. Oh, Mike -- I told my maid, who earns more than 120k in assessable income, that she now needs to file taxes according to this farang that moderates a forum. Clazy falang was her reply. Yep, wisdom from the working class.

This subject arises regularly on this forum. You've got the 'holier than thou' types who swear your bank accounts must go through probate, and absolutely cannot be touched outside of this process. BS. If you have a single beneficiary (usually a wife, but a GF will do), who's also your executor in your Will -- and you have no outstanding bills nor anyone likely to contest your beneficiary -- set up a plan to transfer your money to beneficiary upon death. And, yes, online transfers will work just fine, tho' she might be restricted to 500k per day. Also, make her a co-signatory on your accounts, which allows her to take your passbook to the bank and withdraw (nice backup, should online method somehow break). As a co-signatory, her name only appears under UV light, thus it is not, and does not, appear as a joint account, which Immigration wouldn't normally allow. (If you break up, cancel the co-signatory account and go back to a single.) Banks have no legal obligation to freeze accounts -- if they have not been notified of your death. And, there is no one obligated to tell the bank of your death. So, have the GF briefed on how to remove your money. With no aggrieved party, no one is going to make an issue of it. But do make a Will. You can find templates for doing it yourself, and if hand written, witnesses aren't even required (although recommended, complete with Thai ID numbers). Thus, should your GF hit a speed bump, and she knows where your Will is, then the burdensome probate process can take place. If that happens, then your Will can be, and will need to be, translated into Thai. But, doubtful it will ever get to this stage. Heck, even our bank manager, with a wink and a nod, advised us to use this method (of course, not all bank managers are so pragmatic).

LMG is the cheapest. You can get a policy up to age 80, with previous medical conditions. Premium is 36700 baht. Renewable up to age 100, but premium is upped to mid 60k for ages past 80. This is a throwaway policy, with its huge deductibles. But since you already have excellent insurance from the US, no big deal. Like you, I have excellent insurance from the US (Tricare). But I needed the LMG policy for O-A extensions. However, last year I switched to an LTR WP visa, and they allowed my Tricare policy to meet the insurance requirement. If you meet the financial requirement for an LTR visa, something to consider -- plus many other benefits as well.

Ah, a little serendipity when you poke the Bear in the eye. But, if you think US and EU sanctions against oil were mainly for profit reasons, and not to protect Ukraine -- well, I'll let the readers assess where you're coming from.

Stupid statement. Sanctions by the US don't benefit the US -- their intent is to thwart the Soviet Union, er Russia, from taking over Ukraine. And the EU is onboard for most of these sanctions, as they have a lot more to lose if Russia becomes their new neighbor. Thailand is playing its cards close to the vest, which is wise. There are probably some interesting discussions behind diplomatic closed doors. But the US, and EU, are smart enough to realize Thailand's dependency on tourism would be jeopardized if Russian airlift was restricted. Actually, the EU has a lot more reason to get everybody onboard with sanctions, so I'd be a lot more interested in hearing about any EU displeasure towards Thailand on this jet fuel episode.... Anyway, it's always fun to hear members of the Old World find fault with the US. Just pay us back for the Marshal Plan, and pay all the costs for NATO, as we certainly could use all those funds we provide for EU's defense to, instead, address our domestic problems. But, maybe come November, the EU won't have the US to bad mouth anymore -- and will be building school houses to teach Cyrillic.

I doubt anybody working the drive through window has ever seen a TM 95.

Good point, and one I missed. Article 15 of the US-Thai DTA seems to say that self-employment income earned in the US, and then remitted to Thailand, "may be taxed" by the US. "May be taxed" is code language in all the model tax treaties for which country has primary taxing authority ("first dibs"). Thus, in this case, the US has primary taxation authority, meaning, it gets to keep all the taxes collected, but has to issue a tax credit to Thailand for the avoidance of double taxation. But, the total taxation in this example would still be $1086 -- $769 paid to the US, and $317 paid to Thailand, after the tax credit is netted out. Hopefully, this whole mess will be simplified by what we heard early on in this new tax situation, i.e., if you pay taxes in your home country on subject income, subject income will not be taxable in Thailand. This certainly would tamp down the complexities inherent in DTAs.

Whoops. Single standard deduction is 14600, for those under 65. Thus, US taxes would be $769 -- but Thai tax credit covers that, so you're still out of pocket $1086 between the two countries.

Thai taxation: 150 + 60 = 210 allowances 780 - 210 = 570 taxable income Taxes on taxable income: 38000 baht -- $1086 @ 35 FX rate US taxation: Single standard deduction: $16200 Adjusted gross income: $22286 @ 35 FX rate Taxable income: $6086 Taxes: $609 Thailand, per DTA, has first dibs. Thus, they get to keep the full $1086 in tax collection. But, they have to give a tax credit to the US, to cover the full $609 in US tax obligation. Bottom line: You end up paying $1086 in taxes between the two countries. But, since Thailand has first dibs, per DTA, you end up paying $477 (1086-609) more in taxes than if you lived in America full time, and Thailand.

Contacted Star Visa, an LTR certified agent here in Chiang Mai, and asked about how they handled TM95 reporting. Their answer was, they can do the TM95 reporting at CM Immigration, i.e., no need for them to go to Bangkok. So, CM Imm has at least one Imm officer familiar with TM95s. But, I could probably spend the whole day wandering around looking for this individual. So, if nothing's resolved about mail in reporting come this July, guess I'll hire Star Visa, for 1000 baht. At least they know what door to knock on at Imm, plus they're a shorter drive than is Imm (tho' the post office is only a stones throw from my house). Oh well.

Capital improvements raise the basis of your investment (thus lowering the capital gains realized upon sale). And, in the US, your basis for capital assets will be upped to the value on your date of death, for purposes of determining estate taxes. So, where Mike seems to be coming from, is the value of all your assets, for the purpose of this new ruling, will be established as of 31 Dec 2023. Thus, all remittances from that pile of money existing pre 2024 is non assessable (exempt) income. Remittances from cap gains of assets sold post Dec 31 2023 -- will use the basis as of Dec 31 2023 to determine cap gains. Hey, this is all new territory we're crossing. But, this does give you a lot of wiggle room to use, should you need to be creative in determining what's, and what's not, assessable income. For my money, using a Dec 31 2023 value as basis is the way to go. And with all the smoke and fog surrounding this whole new adventure into Thai taxation -- I certainly could make a satisfying argument for what is my basis (not that anyone, realistically, is ever going to question you on this). Self-assessment -- which it certainly will be -- should give you the opportunity to pick the grey area that works in your favor.

So, the Thai fat cat can no longer send overseas income back to Thailand in the following year to avoid taxes. Whadaya gonna do? Well, send 10 million each to your cook, your six maids, your three chauffeurs, your two pool boys, your five gardeners, your ten mia nois -- which, of course, means the wife gets double that of each mia noi, which she legally can do at 20 million baht. Of course, you wink wink, nod nod, and have your fingers crossed when you "gift" these transfers, with the understanding on how it's going to be paid back. Two mia nois skip town with your money? Hey, hit men are cheap in Thailand. Farfetched? Maybe. Maybe not....

I guess stranger things have happened. Shielding $600,000 from all taxation by sending it to your wife as a gift doesn't quite resonate with me; nor does paying only 2.5% vice nearly 35% on $1,200,000. But, maybe I'm applying OECD logic to a non-OECD world.

Uh, that loophole certainly doesn't pass the sniff test.

Wrong. That you characterize the remittance as a "gift" doesn't affect the Thai taxation assessability of that remittance. A remittance to buy a condo, to buy fish sauce, or to be a gift to your lover -- no affect on the assessability of that remittance for income tax purposes.

Your US gift to your wife has no US gift tax obligation. And, it is understood that such monies are after-tax monies (or soon will be, once you pay any taxes in arrears). And, with the prevailing understanding that Thailand holds any income taxed by the home country as tax exempt by Thailand -- then, whether or not this money is sent by you direct to Thailand, or by your wife from her account where you deposited her gift -- there's no assessable income involved. But, as stated ad nauseum, this is all part of the self-assessment of the monies you remit to Thailand, plus the requirement to keep good, defensible records. So, having said all that, there's no need to filter money through a wife's account in the guise of a gift. Yes, if you do, she can easily transfer some of that from her Thai acct. to your Social Security bank account. Or, you could just send that money direct to your Social Security bank account in Thailand, secure in the knowledge that this is not assessable income for Thai tax purposes.

Actually, "taxed at source" is literal, and means taxes withheld by the payer to the payee. Perhaps a better descriptor would be "taxed at entry point." But whatever it's called, there certainly will not be any income taxation on a fungible lump of monies arriving in Thailand. Common sense prevails here.

Let's not confuse income tax with gift tax. A gift tax is a 5% tax on gift amounts exceeding 20M/10M, depending on recipient. But, gifts are all from "after tax" monies, so there's no escaping income tax by calling a remitted amount of money a "gift." If a remitted amount qualifies as assessable income, this assessable amount is not affected by whether or not it is characterized as a "gift." Nice try, however.

But if it is assessable, then taxes, if due, must be paid before the concept of even being a gift takes place. I've kind of skirted over much of this subject, but it sounds like what I'm hearing is that by remitting money to Thailand, and wired directly to someone's account as a gift -- then income taxation can be avoided. No way. Pay whatever income taxes are due, then gift it -- and pay the 5% gift tax on amounts over 20/10k, depending on relationship. No free lunch here, folks, by categorizing a remittance to Thailand as a "gift." Nice try, 'tho.

Actually, starting three years or so ago, banks started withholding on all interest paid to accounts with a foreigner's name attached. Thus, I started having withholding on my 800k retirement account, plus on the joint account with my wife ('cause the account had a foreigner's name included). But, no such tax wthheld from my wife's bank accounts, which only had her Thai ID attached, as she hadn't been required to mention her dual citizen US ID. This is blatant discrimination according to the DTA between US and Thailand -- but who's to complain? FBAR reporting is completely divorced from taxable interest on foreign accounts. If you send $10001 to Thailand, then you had over $10000 in the Thai banking system for at least one day -- and you're required to file a FBAR. But if you took that $10001 out of the bank the next day, to buy a car, then you earned no interest on that -- thus no FBAR related earned interest for the year. That you had to report your foreign interest on Schedule B, which also asks about any FBAR filing requirement -- is incidental, as this is just a way for them to have you acknowledge your FBAR filing requirement. Only if you had $400,000 in Thai banks on Dec 31 would you have to file an income related form on your 1040 filing (filing jointly), under FATCA (not FBAR) filing instructions. A situation most of us aren't in... You indicated in an earlier report that you had between 20k and 60k baht of interest from Thai bank accounts. My recommendation would be to let the Thai 15% withholding at source remain, then when you file your US tax return, take this as a tax credit against your US taxes. If above $600 filing jointly, which it sounds like you are, you'll need to file a Form 1116, which is no big deal -- and allows for a carryover, for any disallowed interest. Yes, the rules say, "If you can get the foreign taxes refunded, then you're required to do that." However, if you can't get a Thai TIN, because you don't have a work permit (or whatever) -- and which you need to get a tax refund -- you can just quote denials for TINs from expat forums like this. That some have gotten TINs is nice -- but in the unlikely situation where you get an IRS letter audit -- just quote an expat who had negative results with getting a TIN; you're not required to wear out shoe leather looking for the exception. This sounds a "little over the top." It's not, because you're not evading or avoiding taxes -- you're just paying the taxes to the country who has "first dibs" on them, and avoiding double taxation to a country who demands taxation on all worldwide income. Just wish I had had such ethically pure situations doing taxes for flight crews, and arguing with the IRS that shoes with metal inserts are "uniform only" items, and thus deductible.