JimGant

50 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

Unless Thailand decides to throw out the DTA with the US and The Treaty of Amity with the US, I will not owe any income taxes on my pensions before I even calculate any deductions allowed in Thailand.

Why is that? Unless your pensions are solely for govt/military service, the DTA explicitly states that Thailand has exclusive taxation rights on private pensions -- and the technical explanation further elaborates that this includes traditional IRAs.

Quote

ARTICLE 20
Pensions and Social Security Payments
1. Subject to the exceptions of paragraph 2 of Article 21 (pensions for Government Service), pensions and other similar remuneration paid to a resident of a Contracting State in consideration of past employment shall be taxable only in that State.

Now, this "exclusivity" is trumped by the "saving clause" in the DTA, giving the US secondary taxation rights to those incomes designated as "exclusive" in the DTA. This "saving clause" is found in all DTAs, and is just a clever way to make sure you're paying someone somewhere taxes -- and there's not a "no non taxation" situation.

Quote

Paragraphs 1, 3 and 4 of Article 20 are subject to the saving clause of paragraph 2 of Article 1 (Personal Scope). Thus, a U.S. citizen who is resident in the other Contracting State, and receives either a pension, annuity or alimony payment from the United States, may [with just a few exceptions, like alimony and child support -- but not IRAs] be subject to U.S. tax on the payment, notwithstanding the rules in those three paragraphs that give the State of residence of the recipient the exclusive taxing right.

Source: Technical Explanation

Thailand could write their tax code to exclude taxation on those incomes that the DTA says they have exclusive taxation rights on. Why they would want to throw away potential tax collections -- is beyond me. But they could do this, and it wouldn't violate the DTA, since it doesn't violate the spirit on no double taxation. It just means the US taxation on your IRA (required by the saving clause) is full blast, with no discount from non  existent tax credits from non existent Thai taxation on your IRA.

So, when it comes to Traditional IRAs, it really makes no difference whether or not Thailand chooses to tax this remitted IRA -- unless the Thai taxation exceeds that of the US taxation on same IRA. Then, you'd be out of pocket for the higher Thai tax; but then there would be no US tax due, as it would be totally wiped out by the Thai tax credit. But probable situation would be the US has a higher tax bill: thus pay full tax bill to Thailand; and some tax to the US, albeit net of the credit for Thai taxes.

Thus, the saving clause makes any exclusion from Thai taxes of your IRA (or private pension) -- not a meaningful part of your financial planning. *

* Unless you hire Thomas Carden at AIT in Bangkok. He has an original thought that only the DTA with Thailand has IRAs excluded from the saving clause. Thus, only by being an expat tax resident in Thailand, and no where else, can you avoid US taxes on your IRA. Sound too good to be true? For sure -- but apparently the IRS doesn't have the resources to uncover this scheme, as many have used Carden to avoid taxes on their IRAs -- and have gotten away with it. Feeling lucky?

8 hours ago, zakalwe said:

Stated by the rude entitled Israeli who I'm going to doubt here. Her behavior fits a pattern and she is just making excuses after she got caught.

Actually, she was just displaying a key reason for anti-semitism -- HUBRIS.

4 hours ago, CMBob said:

even when using an agent, the person extending needs to show up at Immigration here in CM (mainly for the photo).

Another plus for the LTR visa -- never ever having to visit CM Imm again.

1 hour ago, NorthernRyland said:

It was inside the mall in its own room surely it had AC.

It was joined at the hip with the parking lot. Thus, not in the AC bubble of the mall.

Here's an interesting story to reinforce why many of us love Chiang Mai.

https://www.businessinsider.com/retire-abroad-journey-us-thailand-disney-imagineers-chiang-mai-healthcare-2025-5

31 minutes ago, OJAS said:

This is, I think, all the more reason for the need for the State Pension and company pensions to be formally codified in the DTA - preferably in the same way as Government pensions have been in Article 19, which would, of course, eliminate the need for tax credits!

Yeah, amendments, to include clarification of omissions, are called protocols to tax treaties. Doubt we'll ever see such as it pertains to State and private pensions in the Uk-Thai DTA.

However, Thailand can "override" tax treaty language (or absence thereof) by domestic law, as long as it doesn't abrogate the intent of the treaty, namely, eliminating double taxation.

Quote

https://repository.law.umich.edu/book_chapters/330/

And in this regard, we've heard Thailand say they'll absorb a tax credit for taxes paid to the UK -- and also say, when Por 161 came out in Sept 2023, that they'll not tax any remitted income on which the home country has also taxed. Unfortunately, no official follow-up on that utterance.

Would be nice if TRD would solidify matters, using domestic law to firm up the DTA. Meanwhile, I guess, Brits could just say: Nothing in the DTA saying I owe any taxes to Thailand; and act accordingly.

20 hours ago, orchidfan said:

So very nice BBL staff pointed.out that due to the new law, the sim card (and same number) must be in my name (as per my bank acc) or no go with the mobile app OR ibanking !

Yes, iBanking too.

I got this message in my iBanking account mailbox from BBL:

Quote

Dear Bualuang iBanking member,

To enhance your security, please ensure that your mobile no. registered with Bualuang iBanking is up to date and that the mobile no. owner's name matches the name registered with Bualuang iBanking.

You can verify the ownership of your mobile no. by dialing *179*your 13-digit Thai citizen ID no.# and call.

If your mobile no. owner's name does not match the name registered with Bualuang iBanking, please follow with one of the options below.
Option 1: Contact mobile service center with your citizen ID card to update your mobile no. ownership name.
Option 2: Contact our branch to change your mobile no. or request an exemption if updating mobile no. owner name is inconvenient.

If you want to update your mobile no., please follow with one of the options below.
Option 1: For member who uses Mobile Banking, you can update mobile no. via Mobile Banking by going to "Settings" Click "My profile"
Option 2: For member who does not use Mobile Banking, please visit any Bangkok Bank branch to update your mobile no.

For assistance, please contact Bangkok Bank Call Center 1333 or (66) 2645 5555.

Yours sincerely,
Bualuang iBanking

All our household phones are in wife's name. Thus, my iBank account is paired with a phone in my wife's name. I have no Mobile banking; so iBanking is the only thing affected by the phone number mismatch.

But, from their message (in bold, above), I can just have the requirement waived, if I just request an exemption due to "inconvenience." Sounds like Bangkok Bank has some adults in the loop, when dealing with "fire drill" requirements coming down from on high.

Will check it out, next time I have to go to the bank.

44 minutes ago, Talon said:

because there are no areas on the tax form to exclude funds brought over that were accrued prior to Jan 1, 2024, and there is nowhere to exclude Social Security funds that are exempt.

They're automatically excluded --'cause there's no requirement to include non assessable income.

2 hours ago, OJAS said:

 How do you square Article 23 with the DTT Digest note* I referred to previously?

I guess I would have to go with language from an Article in a signed treaty over a footnote in an HMRC digest....

...... particularly since we've heard utterances from the TRD that Thailand will grant tax credits for taxes paid in home country. But, it would be nice to know if such utterances are codified -- or just a TRD official's opinion...

But, if I were a Brit doing a Thai tax return -- I know which way my self-assessment would lean.

23 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Go to the banks with him and add him as beneficiary. In the states it's called a TOD

Not allowed in Thailand.

2 hours ago, crazykopite said:

I’ve been there worn the T shirt even with a will staying your the beneficery the banks won’t release any money

Initiating an online transfer doesn't require bank involvement.

On 4/25/2025 at 11:58 AM, rasalvaje said:

What is the easiest and most thrifty way to leave it to him

Have the accounts online capable. Also, make sure your friend also has an online account. Establish his account as a transferee of your accounts -- and do a trial transfer, as this will satisfy the OTP requirement. Give your friend the logon particulars of your accounts (or tell him where this info can be found upon your death).

And, you'll need a Will with your friend as sole beneficiary of your Thai bank accounts. This isn't needed for anything other than establishing that there are no other beneficiary claimants to your bank assets; just makes things above board in the highly unlikely chance your friend is questioned (why and by whom -- I don't know; the bank doesn't keep track of client obituaries, so activity in these accounts would go unnoticed.) And, of course, having a Will would be necessary, in the unlikely event matters somehow end up in probate.... (again, unlikely).

Win, win. You can do you own Will for free, using one of the many templates available. And your money is speedily given to the sole beneficiary, saving many months of probate time plus six figures in probate expenses.

The only aggrieved party is the lawyer mafia, denied their ridiculous fee, because they've lobbied Thailand to NOT have "pay on death" procedures, to pass on financial assets without a Will or probate. Screw them.

Oh, this also works, should you be in a coma in the hospital and your friend can tap your accounts, as needed. And when you croak, remind your friend to leave a little bit in each account and certainly not try to close these accounts. Attention by bank staff not wanted.

On 4/23/2025 at 10:18 AM, scorecard said:

Flight attendants 80 - 90% female. All middle aged, all overweight

Thank the unions for that. Years ago, PanAm had twice yearly weight checks, which you had to pass or be grounded. Also, strict grooming standards. Unions argued that was discriminatory, as the males weren't held to the same standards. Now, we have what we have -- mile high piggers, whose age requires them to wear diapers.

Pilot unions also argued to allow otherwise healthy pilots to be overweight. Only restriction: fatties could not fly Boeing products, because they have a control column, which might get jammed by a pot belly. Thus, restricted to Airbus products, where there's a sidestick. 😞

16 hours ago, OJAS said:

......means that Thai tax residents who are in receipt of one or both pension types are not immune from being taxed twice over in both the UK and Thailand, with no relief from double taxation being seemingly possible

Actually, it looks like relief is provided in Article 23: Elimination of Double Taxation:

Quote

(3) In the case of Thailand, United Kingdom tax payable in accordance with this
Convention in respect of income from sources within the United Kingdom shall be
allowed as a credit against Thai tax payable in respect of that income. The credit shall
not, however, exceed that part of the Thai tax, as computed before the credit is given,
which is appropriate to such item of income.

22 hours ago, treetops said:

The UK State Pension (or OAP) is often confused with these Government pensions but shouldn't be as it is classed as "assessable income" for Thai tax purposes.  Have a look at the DTA and you'll see the exact language used.

Actually, the UK-Thai DTA is completely silent on pensions or similar payments -- except in Article 19, where pensions for govt and/or military service are addressed -- and where you find they are exempt from Thai taxation. And the UK-Thai DTA doesn't even have an "Other Income" Article, where incomes not specifically addressed in their own Articles are addressed. And which, in the UK-Thai DTA, could wrap up loose ends, like OAP and private pensions, which aren't addressed anywhere in the DTA.

Google the UK-Singapore, or UK-Vietnam DTAs -- and note they both have an Article 18 addressing pensions, other than those for govt service. Pretty explicit. Here's what the Singapore one says:

Quote

ARTICLE 18 – PENSIONS
(1) Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 19 of this Agreement  [This is where govt pensions are shown as taxable only by the paying country.]
(a) pensions and other similar remuneration paid in consideration of past
employment,
(b) any payments made under the social security legislation of either Contracting
State, and
(c) any annuity paid, to an individual who is a resident of a Contracting State, and is subject to tax in respect thereof in that State, shall be taxable only in that State.

Hey, why doesn't the UK-Thai DTA have such clarifying language -- maybe 'cause it was ratified in 1981 and the Singapore and Vietnam DTAs with the UK were ratified in 1997 -- when maybe the Model OECD and UN treaties had been updated. Still, with such confusion, there are avenues for writing protocols/amendments to clear up such matters....

And, as mentioned, the UK-Thai DTA doesn't have an "Other Income" Article, which could clarify how OAP and private pensions are treated. Most DTAs have such an Article; here's the one from the Vietnam DTA:

Quote

Article 21 - OTHER INCOME

(1) Items of income beneficially owned by a resident of a Contracting State,
wherever arising, which are not dealt with in the foregoing Articles of this
Agreement, other than income paid out of trusts or the estates of deceased persons in
the course of administration, shall be taxable only in that state.

Such an Article in the UK-Thai DTA would probably put an end to any argument against Thailand having primary taxation rights on OAPs and private pensions. But, in its absence, if I were a Brit, I'd use my own interpretive thinking in my self-assessment of what's taxable -- and how the absence of definition could work in my favor. It might not make make a difference with a piddly OAP -- but it could with a large remitted private pension.

How such firms, like Expattax Thailand, can demonstrably declare that such pensions are primarily taxable by Thailand -- when there's nothing in the DTA or any related protocol -- is beyond me. Of course, their smooth presentation on their FAQ pages, and Webinars -- can set the hook. And, for a mere 14000 baht, you can hire their services to pay Thailand taxes the DTA says nothing about..... No thanks.

On 4/23/2025 at 8:43 AM, henryford1958 said:

How did you record the UK tax paid under the dual tax arrangements. As i understand it the standard tax form does not provide for an entry showing UK tax paid.?

Do a tax return with manufactured numbers. First, do a straight forward tax return, including UK remitted assessable income, noting total Thai taxes due. Then, net out from Thai taxes due the UK taxes that Thailand allows as an offsetting credit. Then, with your spreadsheet, find out what manufactured number for UK remitted assessable income, when plugged in, has a tax return with a tax owed that represents the netted tax credit for UK taxes.

You may find that "zero" is the magic number, meaning the UK taxes on that remitted income exceeds the Thai taxes on that exact same income. Thus, you just leave the income line for remitted foreign income blank. Or, if Thai income tax exceeds UK income tax on that same amount, some manufactured positive number will be placed on that line to arrive at the correct Thai tax, netted for the UK tax credit.

Anyway, you're completely kosher here (except, maybe, for mechanics), as total Thai tax due incorporates the credit for UK taxes -- assuming the Thai instructions allow for a UK tax credit. Thus, you've not short changed Thailand one satang -- and, of course, you'd keep good notes on this procedure, in the unlikely event of an audit.

And, of course, this is not a procedure you'd want to do face to face with your local TRD official.... Nope, electronic filing only, unless you can do a manual return yourself, and drop in the mailbox at your local TRD -- or maybe even mail it in, if allowed (don't believe it is.....).

On 4/14/2025 at 7:56 PM, Yumthai said:

So you're implying remittances forwarded to construction companies (within X days?), car dealers and by extension any Thai company dissociated from the remitter would be -illegally- considered non assessable income by TRD since beneficial for Thai economy. Interesting.

Yep. Certainly in the interest of not disrupting FDI -- one of BoI's price projects -- enuf so that I'm sure they'd object to any over concern of large remittances by TRD.....

.... and furthermore, along with your observation, that TRD just isn't equipped/funded to ferret out valid DTA and Por 162 remittances. Self assessment by the remitter will logically remain the name of the game.

3 hours ago, Yumthai said:

How much % do you assess people who remit undeclared several millions -truly tax-exempted or not- to buy property in Thailand will be likely to be audited?

Thailand's not completely stupid -- they're not going to torpedo the golden goose that's foreign direct investment by quizzing all large expat remitters. So, if a large chunk of money is wired to Thailand, and the amount was large enough to trigger TRD's concern -- I imagine their next question to the bank would be: did it just sit there, or was it forwarded to, say, a construction company.

In my case, as I am sending  millions to Thailand these days -- 'cause I can't make my Thai nieces and nephews PODs of my US financial accounts (no SSN) and I have no US Will to cover this event -- it might raise a red flag, as this money isn't transferred to a construction company. So what? Call me in for a chat, and I'll show you my LTR visa, or that the money comes from a savings account whose balance on Dec 31 2023 was well in excess of what I've wired (Por 162).

On 4/6/2025 at 1:14 AM, ukrules said:

The dude in the video seemed to think not and said this also applies to foreigners, perhaps this explains why some people have been told they don't have to pay anything while others have to pay something.

Anyway - it's Carden from AITA and here's the video at the exact part where he begins to discuss this equality thing : 

If I were a Brit, I'd certainly bank Carden's interpretation, and thus NOT consider my remitted OAP as assessable income. There's tons of wiggle room with this, as the UK-Thai DTA never addresses OAPs -- and there's not even an "other income" Article in the DTA addressing income not specific to other Articles. Thus OAP is an orphan, ripe for interpretation to your advantage.

So, if you have to file a Thai tax return ('cause you have assessable income that exceeds allowances, and thus you owe taxes on it) -- do so; but don't include your OAP. And, of course, if no tax return need to be filed, 'cause OAP's non inclusion puts you below the taxable threshold -- don't file. Don't get a TIN, if you haven't already. And thus stay off the TRD radar screen. Nothing's going to happen. Less than a 1% chance, I would guess, of being called in for a chat at TRD -- unless you remit a huge amount of money to Thailand and thus raise a red flag. And if called in -- take your thumb drive with Carden's and his licensed Thai tax associate's advice on OAP assessability. Hey, always give yourself the advantage in a gray area, particularly if you have a thumb drive backing up your decision.

Why some folks, like ExpatThaiTax say, yes, OAPs are assessable -- is beyond me. It really is a gray area, when the DTA is so silent about it. And, if TRD had put something out there to clarify, in Thailand's favor -- I would think Carden would have included this assessment. Or maybe not -- he's the dude that advertised to US expats that, retire in Thailand, and never have to pay taxes on your Traditional IRA again. Snake oil, anyone?

1 hour ago, NoDisplayName said:

So you're saying the internets tax expert I found online made a mistake saying that there is a technicality within the DTA making US social security taxable specifically in the case of non-resident non-citizens?

Is that Thomas Carden? If so, stand by for a deluge on his lack of bonafides.

7 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

If a Thai spouse gets survivor benefits, or If an American gets Thai citizenship, and are tax-resident, then it seems US social security would be taxable.

US Social Security is only taxable by the US - in all situations. A govt pension, however, can be taxable by Thailand -- if the recipient is both a resident and a citizen (solely) of Thailand. So your Thai wife, who lives in Thailand, is never taxable by Thailand on her survivor Social Security (or her own Social Security). However, if she's getting a survivor benefit from your govt pension -- and is a tax resident of Thailand -- she would be subject to Thai taxes on this survivor govt pension UNLESS she's a dual US-Thai citizen.

Quote

As a general matter, the result will be the same whether Article 20 or 21 applies, since social security benefits are taxable exclusively by the source country and so are government pensions. The result will differ only when the payment is made to a citizen and resident of the other Contracting State, who is not also a citizen of the paying State. In such a case, social security benefits continue to be taxable at source while government pensions become taxable only in the residence country.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/thaitech.pdf