JimGant

40 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Another one - are you serious mate - sanctimonious statements like that just prove you are wrong IMO.

OK, you're right -- only the USA can tax US income. Whew. No more worries about Thai taxation, as US income is all I have.

6 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

 if a USA citizen living in Thailand receives a lump sum termination payment in USA, will they be liable to pay income taxes on that amount to Thailand. My understanding is that USA Citizens only pay income taxes to USA on money earned in USA

I've already quoted the Thai-US DTA, giving primary taxation rights to Thailand on certain kinds of pensions, to include periodic payment pensions, and lump sum pensions. Believe I answered this question in my previous post.

1 hour ago, Mike Teavee said:

Other guys opinion is that a Credit Card purchase is a short term loan & loans are not considered to be assessable income, I originally thought the same but found out that the UK treats any Credit Card purchase as remitted income & as that's the only country I'm familiar with that taxes on a remittance basis changed my opinion. 

Nope. For those UK folks subject to remittance tax, here's what is said about using a UK issued credit card to make purchases, either in the UK, or abroad.

Quote

If a taxpayer who is chargeable on the remittance basis uses a UK credit card to pay for goods or services, either in the UK or overseas and he or she subsequently settles their credit card bill using foreign income or gains, the payment is a taxable remittance.

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/residence-domicile-and-remittance-basis/rdrm36130

So, only if you pay off your UK credit card bill with foreign source income or gains, will it be considered a taxable remittance. Pay it off from your UK bank -- no remittance tax.

Thus, only if I pay off my US credit card bill with, say, a check from my Bangkok Bank account -- or any other foreign source money, will the credit card charges being paid off be considered the equivalent of remitted foreign source income (using the UK example, which is the only one I can find).

So, when I purchase something in Thailand with my US credit card -- and pay it off from my US checking account -- this is not the equivalent of treating the purchase value as a marker for foreign source remitted income. Even if the money I pay it off with would be considered assessable foreign source income -- had it been remitted to Thailand to make that purchase in lieu of my credit card.

Thus, a credit card loan to buy a hamburger in Bangkok is treated the same as a bank loan to buy a condo in Bangkok. Both are loans, and both are paid back from a US source -- and are thus not treated as the equivalent of foreign source remitted income.

40 minutes ago, shdmn said:

Hmmm, 200+ pages of clowns and conspiracy theorists doing their usual whining, or a Thai tax lawyer that does this for a living.  So hard to decide who to listen to.

Bingo!

3 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

Would it be a blanket or all encompassing exemption regardless of the income?  I only used 50K but some have pension that are much higher. Some have pension that are not taxed by the US Governemnt because some have been declared disabled up to 100% and are not subject to US Income Taxes.

All pensions paid for prior govt service are EXCLUSIVELY taxable only by the US. Period. Makes no difference the amount of the pension, or whether or not it is exempt from US taxation. Social Security also exclusively taxable by the US.

5 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Ask yourself, does the way in which the funds are delivered make any difference, TT or cash via ATM

Actually, I think you nailed it in an earlier post, where you said ATM transactions could not be tracked, thus no data for TRD to make any tax evasion case -- unlike for transfers into your bank account, which, of course, would have data for TRD to ask about, "why no tax return?" Thus, just nonsensical to pursue ATM transactions.

2 hours ago, lordgrinz said:

Lets hope they don't operate like the Immigration Office, because some piece of paper you just printed off online won't cut it.

We still get all our bank statements hard copy, snail mail -- since the wife isn't computer literate for such retrievals.

3 hours ago, NJHOUSE said:

I have all my year-end statements with the available balance. They can watch me log into my account and retrieve these statements in real time if they want. What else do you think they expect?

Right on!

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

I don't know if I have to declare this to the tax man, anyone?

Not according to a tax professional from MTG associates, whose video was referenced here. Hey, when interpretations of all this new tax stuff is in such a state of flux -- pick the answer that best suits you, and your bottom line (and hope the matter is not later redefined, to your disadvantage). And, of course, record this source's bonafides, for possible use at a later chat with TRD.

1 hour ago, lordgrinz said:

Yes, because B6 million will go unnoticed by RD? I'm waiting to see how people fair when they try that theory.

I've already sent 5M baht this year to Thailand, in four installments via Wise. Wise taps my savings account, which on Dec 31, 2023, was well north of 5M baht. And, for future wires, I'll have my IRA RMDs (or more, if needed) sent to my savings account -- up to the amount my IRA was valued at on Dec 31, 2023. I guess I could even have my Air Force pension (non assessable via DTA) direct deposited to my savings account. Thus, I'll have a savings account that could never run out of tax exempt remittances, at least in my lifetime.

I guess if I sent many years' worth of large remittances -- and hadn't filed any tax returns 'cause remittances were non assessable income -- TRD might call me in for a chat. But, so what. I'll show them my bank statements and Wise transfer statements. Completely covered.

That I keep good records is just my nature, and not for any deep worry about TRD inquests -- since plan A is my LTR visa. Good records, tho', would be there if plan B is needed.

19 minutes ago, tomkenet said:

But In my home country I get free good quality schools for my kids, good quality healthcare and I get voting rights and equally treatment. 

The most scary part however is having to deal with a revenue department with bad English skill.

 

Sounds like you're a perfect candidate for not moving.

22 minutes ago, stat said:

I am suggesting that there is a real possibility of that happening i.e. unremitted income will be taxable and remitted income will be taxfree.

That makes no sense. If the worldwide taxation scenario is implemented, then the "remitted income" scenario is replaced, and goes away. There won't be any parallel taxation schemes. And if the 'powers that be' wanted LTR visa holders to have a special tax break, then there will have to be some rewording of the Royal Decree to accomodate such a tax break. Meanwhile, BoI is as clueless as the rest of us.

On 6/28/2024 at 3:42 PM, Tonyfarang said:

and I've decided to move away immediately once they officially announce it

Out of curiosity, what country are you from? And, how much will your taxes increase, under either the new remittance system, or under the potential worldwide income method? Or will they increase at all?

1 minute ago, Presnock said:

yeah, 72-73 but mostly then upcountry, 76-79 78-2000 and 2003-2005 at the main bldg.  When was your wife there?

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?

1 hour ago, Presnock said:

Life goes on, first came here in 1972

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.

4 hours ago, jaideedave said:

JG,Eh? 555,

"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.

1 hour ago, jaideedave said:

Interesting. I always struggle with legal jargon, whats your take?

Two of my pensions are gov't and one is private (work related)

I'd appreciate your opinion...

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?

5 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

I was just pointing out that if I remitted the principle & capital gains, I get to choose the cost basis method I use, not TRD.

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.

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

I keep referring to savings because the issue that was raised is whether stock ownership is considered to be the same as savings accounts,

Raised by whom?

28 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Then we were told repeatedly, as a matter of fact, that there is no downside to not filing a tax return, when no tax is due. Eventually we found out there is a significant downside.

And what was that again?