JimGant

If the Wise transfer is from a savings/checking account -- whose Dec 31 2023 end value was known and available for a possible future audit -- then my argument is that you can Wise transfer today -- and in the future -- the total value of that account that existed on Dec 31 2023. Yes, a viable argument has been made that, if you recycle funds out and back into this savings account -- that the Dec 31 2023 value has been violated. I don't agree, as the concept of fungibility -- where in this case, there are no actual monies, with serial numbers and dates, removed and replaced. Thus, it's the value on Dec 31 2023 -- not the fungible monies in the account -- current or future. Anyway, this potential grey area just means: If you're smart, you'll give yourself the benefit of the doubt -- and use the RD apparently acceptable concept that the Dec 31 2023 value of your account is what you can remit to Thailand tax free, currently and in the future. To do otherwise would be stupid. First, if your self-assessment of this concept means no assessable and taxable income -- and thus no need to file a tax return -- you're off the Thai RD radar screen -- thus chance of audit is zip. But, if somehow audited (like, they see you've remitted a super large amount) -- then show your account statement for Dec 31 2023, and the account statement for the Wise withdrawals and remittances. I don't know about CRS, but Yanks are under the FATCA agreements -- and transaction activity is NOT reported. So, don't worry about back filling activity. Relax.

Wrong. If you had $100,000 in your savings account on Dec 31 2023, that's what FIFO would allow you to remit to Thailand. Once you exceed remitting $100,000 to Thailand, then, yes, you're now tapping any post 2023 monies in your savings account -- and are no longer exempt per the decree on pre 2024 monies. Yes, swapping out pre 2024 monies in a savings account with post 2023 monies might be a point of discussion with RD -- but I'd maintain that the fungibility of savings account money means it's the value of the account on Dec 31 2023 -- not the date on specific dollars added or subtracted from the account. In any event, this would be my position on self assessment for Thai tax purposes -- and would mean no tax filing required, and then probably no chance of having to have a chat with RD, as they then would never of ever heard of me.

Yes -- up to the value of that account on Dec 31 2023. This is by using First In, First Out (FIFO) accounting. This was highlighted in a Bangkok Post article in 2012, where FIFO would be allowed for a fungible account of assets (i.e., no specific identifiable assets, with buy and sell dates and values -- which would be the situation for cash or equivalent). "Where securities are certified and the serial numbers of the shares are identified, the specific cost of the share has to be used. The taxpayer is not allowed to use any other accounting method such as first-in first-out (FIFO), last-in first-out (LIFO) or weighted average method as the specific securities can be identified. - For scripless securities, [i.e. fungible cash] the taxpayer is allowed to use any acceptable accounting method such as FIFO, LIFO or weighted average method in calculating cost of securities." https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/general/299691/when-the-revenue-department-changes-its-mind-the-taxpayer-gets-the-headache So, using this guidance, your self-assessment for Thai tax purposes would exclude such remitted savings. And, assuming the pension you have direct deposited to Thailand is exempt from Thai taxation, per DTA, e.g., it's a govt pension -- then no need to file a Thai tax return, no need for a TIN, and thus you're invisible to the Thai RD. And this invisibility could be crucial -- as you really don't want to be invited to the RD for a discussion that would involve your reliance on a 2012 Bangkok Post article (which, at the clerk level, would probably confuse their feeble minds). But once you file a tax return, you're on their radar and thus susceptible for a chat. And supposedly you're supposed to file with assessable income of 60k single, 120k married. But this is not tax evasion, so is not a crime. And in all these tax threads, no one has heard of anyone being challenged for not filing having met these parameters -- with max penalty of 2000 baht. Bottom line: If your self assessment says you owe no taxes, don't file a Thai tax return. Result: Thai RD has no interest, nor knowledge, of you.

Sigh. Another situation of, "after the gunfire stops, now what?" Didn't we learn anything from the Iraq fiasco?

January SS payments DO include the new COLA. If it's not the 2.8% increase you expected, it's due to the increase in Medicare premiums.

We've learned a lot since the Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba. Sadly, that failure meant Cuba has had to mire in an economic disaster that only communism without reality drives (in this regard, Vietnam has shown economic pragmatism can overcome destructive dogma -- China, too, in some regards). This new successful "Bay of Pigs" venture in Venezuela may allow Venezuela to return to pre-Chavez days, where it had a solid middle class of entrepreneurs and a first world presence. Sometimes the end does justify the means. We'll just have to await how it all shakes out Had Castro been snatched in his early days as dictator, Cuba would not be today's basket case. Let's hope Venezuela is now in a position to rise from the ashes that the Chavez/Cuba/Maduro yoke brought about. If so, please quit wringing your hands over methods of obtaining such.

As mentioned previously, if SS is your sole income, you'll absolutely for sure not be liable for taxes -- and thus not required to file a tax return....... ......:cause you only have to file a tax return if your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) -- $2554 in this SS only scenario -- exceeds your standard deduction (or itemized deductions). And the single standard deduction in 2025 is $15750 -- a long ways from $2554. The parlance for all of this is: you only have Taxable Income (TI) if AGI exceeds your deductions; if not, no TI, no taxes owed, no need to file. [Exception: you're self employed and have net earnings exceeding $400; hardly a player in this scenario.]

Well, he got that part right.

Right. Corresponds to Publication 915, the official word. Can't happen. Yes, at max SS, but with no other income -- $2,554 is the amount of SS potentially subject to taxes that would be entered in the gross income column. And with no other income, this would be your total gross income -- BUT it doesn't become taxable income until it exceeds the $15750 standard deduction (single;TY2025;under age 65). Thus, $13000+ of space to plug in additional gross income before reaching taxable income, and then needing to pay tax. [And if over 65, add another $8000 to your standard deduction, which includes Trump's $6000 sweetener.] Bottom line: If SS is your only income, even if you max out, you'll never owe tax on it.

The only time they'll do your return for you is if they believe you owe back taxes:

So, if you overwithhold/pay too much estimated tax -- and therefore owe no taxes -- you don't have to file, if you don't want to. Why would you want to do this? Well, this is what my wife will do after I croak, because she's incapable of filing a tax return; and even getting on the computer and downloading the applicable 1099's to mail to a tax professional (the nearest one being in Bangkok, as there is currently none in CM). But why go thru this hassle, to pay a tax return outfit several hundred dollars -- just to get a Federal tax refund of several hundred dollars? It could be a wash, or nearly so -- with no extra effort. And I've already prepared the W-4 for her survivor pension, with extra withholding, to cover non 1099 income, like interest on her Thai bank account. And she already has in-place a W-4's for her own pension, and even Social Security. Thus, she just pokes into the 22% tax bracket when it comes time to take her Required Minimum Distribution from her IRA; and Schwab has on file to withhold at 22%, meaning this withholding exactly matches dollar-for-dollar the tax liability for this RMD (or any extra distribution, if she wants). So, she'll be pretty much in the ballpark for her target overwithholding -- which, again, would approximate what she'd have to pay a tax professional. The govt does figure your taxes, using available W2 and 1099 data. This is called 'substitute for return' (SRF), but is only meaningful if you owe taxes and the govt thus sends you a bill. But nothing happens if an SRF determines the govt owes you, and not vice versa. Uncle Sam doesn't concern himself with folks who don't file to get their refund. So, if you don't want to file, and you don't owe any taxes -- your free to do so.

When I asked BOI a year ago about reporting by mail, this was their answer: "One-year reports by physical mail are not acceptable." And, of course, online reporting, like TM47 90-day reports, is also not an option for this TM95 one-year report. So, in person -- or hire an agent. And, for those living in major cities, like CM, you can 'in person' report to the local Imm office (or use an agent). Not so sure if podunk Imm offices accept TM95 reports....... ...... so then what -- off to Bangkok or a major city (or hire an agent to do the same)? PIA for those old farts, who don't travel abroad yearly (thus obviating need to file a TM95), and who live in the sticks.

Each account would be specifically identifiable, by year. Thus, the fungibility concept would be out the door. And you'd probably lose -- understandably -- any argument with the Thai RD, as the money you remitted has definitive year earned. But if you included that 2027 earned income into an account of long standing, to include earnings and other dollar inputs from earlier years -- the fungibility concept is your friend. In my case, all the Wise transfers I make are from a savings account established 30 years ago; and here's where FIFO is also your friend, 'cause I could make an argument, in the unlikely event I ever had to, that my use of FIFO is supported by an upstanding source -- the Bangkok Post: So, with FIFO, wiring your money from a long established (or several year) account, would get around that the money wired "is this year's income," assuming, of course, the account was larger at year's beginning than the amount of wired money in current year. A lot of various (but not necessarily nefarious) interpretations out there. Find one, or several, you can hang your hat on (like the Bangkok Post FIFO article) and self assess your Thai tax situation to your advantage. Probably could result in never having to file a Thai tax return, thus RD never ever having heard of you, especially if you never obtain a TIN. But, in the unlikely event you're called in for a chat, your argument re FIFO is certainly not specious, so worst case: having to file a back tax return -- but probably without penalty. And I can only foresee the above "chat" occurring if someday RD does random audits of folks with "very large" (whatever that might be) remittances to Thailand.

Yeah, Trump, mind your own business. Just because you carry the biggest stick in the world, and therefore are probably the only person who could effect peace between two warring countries -- you need to be sensitive to sovereignty issues. So, let the Thais and Cambodians blow each other up; same with Ukraine and Russia. You're embarrassing America by butting in. Besides, all this bloodshed is enhancing my stock in the American arms industry.

The failure to file is for having assessable income in some low numbers, well below the taxable income number. AS it's not tax evasion, and 2000k is the max penalty (no interest on unpaid taxes, since there aren't any) -- previous posts on this forum have just said, why waste your time filing, in no taxes owed. And, also, no reports of anyone being fined for not filing when no taxes owed. Bottom line: If you don't owe taxes, don't file.

Yes, look at the rental income example, above. Thailand here has secondary taxation rights, but has to absorb a credit for the US taxes paid. If this credit is less than the Thai tax bill, then the difference is collected taxes in the Thai coffer. Credit more than Thai taxes -- no collected taxes. This a case where, after doing the math and I saw I'd owe no Thai tax on remitted rental income to Thailand, I'd just not waste anybody's time and just not file a Thai tax return (assuming no other income involved).

Not true, for some double tax agreements (DTAs). For the US, a remitted private pension or an IRA distribution to Thailand -- is PRIMARILY taxable by Thailand according to the DTA. But since the US taxes all worldwide income, it also has taxation rights on this income, albeit SECONDARILY. As such, it has to issue a credit for the Thai taxes paid. But some income, like US government pensions, are EXCLUSIVELY taxable by the US. Thus Thailand can't tax them SECONDARILY. But rental income on US properties is another situation. In this case, the US has PRIMARY taxation rights, but Thailand can also tax this income (if remitted) SECONDARILY. But being in the secondary position means they have to offer a credit for the US taxes paid. Anyway, seemingly confusing, but not really. Just scenarios on preventing double taxation. So, if someday I had a remitted private pension to Thailand, I would file as early as possible in Thailand to cover the tax situation here. I'd then have plenty of time to file my US taxes, and a Form 1116 for a credit for my Thai taxes. That I have to pay US tax -- and did by withholding taxes prior to filing my Thai tax return -- doesn't mean Thailand "can't tax again." If somehow I filed US taxes before my Thai return -- I'd still owe Thai taxes per the DTA; but I'd then have to file an amended US tax return to get the credit for Thai taxes paid.

No, that's American International Tax Advisors.

Bingo. When the suit stated that, even if the only remittance you received was your US Social Security -- totally exempt from Thai taxation -- that you should file a Thai tax return -- then it became apparent that this was a commercial. And of no value. First and foremost, a Thai tax return has no place to show non assessable income. Thus, this would be a null return, with blank lines reserved for assessable income, of which you had none. Would RD be overjoyed, with wasting their time? Would this filing ever be needed, should RD come knocking in the future, whereby you could just show that your bank transfers only consisted of US Social Security? No, Expattax are only out for every expat to pay them 7500 baht for a Thai TIN, unnecessary, unless (gasp!) they convince you that you should file a null tax return -- only 8500 baht, if you only have a single remitted pension. No, a completely worthless video, tho' the Bangkok Post reporter seemed solid.

And what if it had exceeded one million baht? Is there something afoot to have such folks explain to their local RD office why such remittances don't meet the assessability requirement and thus why no tax return required? Don't believe such a one million baht threshold would meet any cost/benefit analysis. But, perhaps larger remittances could be profitable, and thus trigger a chat with your local RD office. Just wonder what that threshold might be..... if such a procedure is being contemplated. Don't really want my self assessments, to include favorable interpretations of grey areas, to see the light of an RD office.

Why in the world would you do this!? Can't you figure out yourself whether or not you owe any tax, as obviously you didn't, based on the past three years? Yes, there may be a grey area you wonder about. But all grey areas have two positions -- so obviously you self assess with the position that favors you. Why would you take the chance that some clueless RD agent would subjectively take the opposite position? Anyway, seems a waste of your time every March.

-- in open cockpit speedboats?

Yawn. Obviously not fishing, crabbing boats -- high speed, open cockpit, with packages -- what could they possibly be?. Probably enough intelligence from their port of departure to nail their true purpose. Hey, if a few innocents are collateral damage -- best they consider the company they keep (kept). Anyway, sometimes the end does justify the means. Thaksin did this early in his career against drug runners. I never had a problem with that. Trump's methods are akin of this -- do what it takes to correct a serious problem -- and ignore the do gooders.

LMG has a policy tailored for OA visa holders. No medical exam required. Can apply up to age 80 -- and renew 'til age 100. High deductible, so basically you're self insuring, but having the policy does meet Immigration's OA policy. https://www.lmginsurance.co.th/en/long-stay-visa-plus-premium-plan-100000-usd

Refugee law violations! If we have a law that says we must allow in refugees from all the crap countries in the world, then Trump is right in closing that door. Trump is a weirdo -- but I must admit he's taken some actions for America's benefit that others were too timid to take, like demanding NATO finally pay its fair share; and finally sealing the borders against unwanted immigrants. A bull in a china shop can be fun to watch -- depending on which china is being broken.