JimGant

Did my one-year report in Chiang Mai, using the Star Visa agent. Asked them if I could have done this myself, using the 90-day report drive-thru window. They said, probably not, that I'd have to go inside and find someone who knew what a TM95 was. Anyway, nice to know the report can be done at CM Imm. Here's my receipt. Note they used the machine that spits out 90-day report receipts -- and my receipt is duly noted as a 90-day report receipt. But, the important annotation is: Next report is due in one year, not 90 days. So, all done for this year -- and didn't need to go to Bangkok, or hire an agent to go to Bangkok.

70-72. Her boyfriend then was Phil Mayhew, economics guy, then consul general for a year at Udorn, in 1972. He later returned to Thailand, and was DCM in, I believe, the years you mentioned. We attended his funeral at Arlington a few years back. Obviously, you were State Dept, which means you get no Social Security, which most readers probably don't understand. Also there in 72-73 was Victor Tomseth, who married another embassy worker, Wallapa. Victor was later DCM in Iran, when the hostage crisis hit. And later ambassador to Laos. Wife and Wallapa still keep in contact. Small world, eh?

Did you then work in the US Embassy, as you alluded to in an earlier post? My wife worked there then, before PanAm hired her away, to serve coffee and give blow-job demos in life jackets.

Reading many of your posts, I'm assuming you have a US govt pension, Social Security, and maybe some IRA drawdown. I'm in the same boat. And we're both over the $80k/pa to qualify for the LTR visa. And for me, and probably you, most of my income does not include capital gains. Thus, should the LTR tax exemption be cancelled, I'd still be in neutral taxation position, whereby, even now with Thai tax on my worldwide income, this is the same income I've been paying US income for years. And the US tax would now be reduced, dollar for dollar, by a Thai tax credit. Yes, there are outlier US taxpayers out there. The folks with large amounts of capital gain income, which, should Thailand go worldwide taxation, would now lose the US tax discount for long term cap gains. And pay a substantial taxation penalty, what with Thailand taxing at full, not discounted, rates. But I seriously doubt we're talking too many folks here. And then, the US folks, with poverty level income, that pay no US tax now. But, with Thai worldwide taxation, may now pay some (but not much tax) to Thailand. Oh well. My point: Most US taxpayers, I'd even say 90%, would not have a new tax obligation with the worldwide tax proposal -- since new Thai taxes would be credits absorbed in your US taxes. Yes, the added irritant of having to now file a Thai return is there -- but, hey, probably not too difficult a path to take. And, as an aside, a recent look at the Thai-Canada DTA shows that Canadians have an even better deal, as all their pensions -- govt, private, and IRA-like payouts -- are exclusively taxable by Canada. Maybe that's why we're not hearing a lot of complaints here from Canadians..... Anyway, all the screaming and shouting here from all those folks abandoning ship -- because they may have a future tax bill (increase) -- may be amusing, should the screamers be Americans or Canadians who can't do the math (with apologies to the few cap gain outliers). For Old World types, who now find themselves in a taxable position -- welcome to the world. As far as those besmirching Thailand, or the US -- for sure, both countries have serious problems. But, the glass is not half empty, as your negative remarks indicate. There are many compensating positives that should be emphasized. My roots became deep in Thailand, once we gave up moving into a retirement home planned on a North Carolina golf course; the wife and I loved Thailand, and analyzing long term care costs -- whose expense was shown by my folk's example -- showed Thailand trumped the golf course. And our home here was built single story, with extra rooms for long term care nurses. Now, being aged 80, golf in NC is out of the question. And future nurse occupation here in Thailand seems more certain. Fortunately, this new tax situation has no affect whatsoever on this scenario, as there will be no new taxes. Anyway, Yanks and Canucks -- make sure you do the math, before you head screaming for the borders. Others, well, adios -- may your lives remain tax free.

"Eh" was said with a wink and a smile. Love Canadians. My finest five year tour in the Air Force was at McChord AFB, in Tacoma, Wash, in a NORAD unit, where 30% of us pilots and controllers were Canadians. Never met a bad egg Canadian. And they all played golf, and carried a jug of Rye in their bags -- meaning, by the time of the triple bet 18th hole, they were easy pickings. Good times, good memories. Hope to see more here in Chiang Mai.

The Canada-Thai tax treaty does not have separate Articles for private and govt pensions -- unlike most treaties, including that of your cousins to the south. Thus, all your Canadian pensions, private and govt, are taxable ONLY by Canada. The "ONLY" word, per OECD definitions, gives exclusionary taxation rights to the referenced country. If "ONLY" was omitted from the language, then, in this example, Thailand would have secondary taxation rights. And if their taxation of these pensions was higher than Canada's -- then you pay full fare to Canada, plus the Thai taxes that exceed the Canada tax credit that Thailand has to absorb. But, this is not the case , as Thailand does not, per treaty language, have secondary taxation rights. I don't know if I can say congrats on this treaty language -- 'cause if the treaty gave exclusionary taxation rights of all Canada pensions (private and govt) to Thailand -- and Thailand tax rates were below Canada's, well, then, you'd be in a better position in this situation. I don't know -- you'd have to run the comparative numbers. But, for Canadians, nothing has changed when it comes to this new Thai taxation language -- you still file your Canadian taxes, with your pension data, per normal -- with no need to consider or file a Thai tax return. Eh?

I guess switching to worldwide taxation will finally shut down all these remittance based discussions. I have no doubt that that's where we're headed.

Raised by whom?

And what was that again?

Why do you keep referring to savings? The one-time good deal exemption refers only to "foreign source income." Savings, of course, are a form of income, namely, after-tax income. But unrealized gains can also be considered income, and, as such, can be reported on income statements: Anyway, TRD's one-time good deal exemption is only interested in a number you can use as your total exemption for post 2023 remittances. This number should be obtained by the balance sheet of the value of all your financial assets on 31 Dec 2023. And this number would include fair market value of your securities, which, of course, would include those unrealized gains. But so what -- there are no taxable events going on here interested in capital gains. The only taxable event of interest is -- how much of your post 2023 remittances can be exempted from Thai tax -- by that number obtained in your 31 Dec 2023 balance sheet. Mike Lister has his interpretation -- and I have mine. Take your pick.

Sigh. I'm just suggesting there's enough wiggle room on how to interpret the nature of your pre 2024 portfolios to give yourself maximum advantage on amount of remittance exempt from tax. To include unrealized capital gains. That you don't agree, to include savings that turn into investments, no longer being exempt from remittance taxation -- well, that's your opinion. And an opinion I'm sure the TRD would welcome, since it's to their advantage. Where you get that I'm imposing my "own rules" is a mystery. I'm just looking at all the data, and choosing all the arguable ones that have credence. Should it come to a chat with TRD, I would feel very confident -- based on what we know now -- in my position. No different than when I went across the Potomac to chat with the IRS; just know there are different interpretations of the same data -- and yours may come out second best.

So what if the value on 31/12/2023 includes the unrealized gain from initial purchase. That unrealized gain, I maintain, can be considered "income" -- as can be shown in many scenarios from different countries. Thus, it can be considered part of the "foreign source income" from before 2024 that is given an exemption from remittance taxation. That certainly could result in a spirited discussion with a TRD official -- who, sadly, probably wouldn't have a clue. But, hey, why would you not give yourself every financial advantage, particularly if you've got several examples from the internet to support your position. Plus, you've got probably a 1% chance of being called in for a chat about the validity of remitted pre 2024 income.

That was all explained in a post you had removed -- that included two important links to discussion on income. Possibly, in the interest of an important discussion on savings vs investments, you might repost that removal.

Wow, that sounds ominous. Must be cap gains. Can you elaborate? Thanx.

jayboy, I like your inputs. Hang around some more.

Sounds like a lot of trouble, for an action that's really not very critical to your financial planning -- particularly for those of us who now have pretty extensive roots here.

My apologies. I interpreted that you had already done a TM95 at CM Imm -- and thus were surprised that, per Star Visa's dialogue with me, that there might be a problem.... Thus, I didn't take kindly to the, "go find out for yourself." Sorry.

Hey, jerk weed, can you save me a trip and just report on how it went for you....? Or, is that too much to ask?

Oh, did you have TM95 success at CM Imm? If so, how about a trip report -- would like to know the ropes for next year, as I don't like using an agent. Anybody reading this have TM95 success (or not) at their Imm office? Thanx.

Star Visa just said I was their first TM95 customer, and possibly there could be a speedbump at Immigration -- they didn't know. Will know Monday.

Take a deep breath, and seek professional help. You're giving our profession a bad name.

Of course they're savings, regardless of how they're dressed up. The headliner on this thread says:

Unless it's unrealized cap gain existing -- per its value in the overall portfolio -- pre 2024. As already stated, this is a no nevermind, as the OP's $1000 remittance from a portfolio that existed pre 2024 doesn't need to be one-for-one from the unrealized gain pile of money. But, under FIFO, would be at the beginning of the pile.

Again, there are no published rules that I'm aware of. Are they known to you? If so, do we go FIFO, LIFO, or moving average.? If not existent, or known -- can the reader make his own decision, possibly based on intelligent discussion?

Several months ago I asked BoI about mail-in 365 day reports. They weren't too keen on it, but advised to look at the SMART site and use the address given there. Well, yesterday I brought up that SMART site to get the address -- and it had disappeared. So, I asked BoI about it, and about reporting by mail. Here's their answer: So, no more mail-in options for 365 day reporting, for both LTR and SMART visa holders. I would imagine Immigration just didn't want to deal with mail call. Mail-in was my backup plan. Plan A was using the LTR agent here in Chiang Mai -- Star Visa. So, today I took my filled in TM95 and -- as they said was absolutely required -- my TM30. Imagine my surprise when they said something like, "You're our first TM95 customer; we're not too sure if Immigration has total grasp on this; we'll keep you advised" Gulp. Now, maybe I'll have to go to Bangkok -- or hire a mule to go for me. Probably easier just to fly out and back across the border.