JimGant

There's never going to be a "withholding at entry point" for any remittances. First and foremost, because remitted cash flows can never parse what is, and what isn't, income. Most probably are after tax capital for investment, living expenses, whatever. And "withholding at source" of income earned in the US, and remitted to Thailand -- is only for non resident aliens. Automatically at 30%, but reduced to treaty rates -- normally 15% -- if the alien files a W-8BEN. So, as a US citizen, any Thai taxation will be up to your self-assessment as to what is subject to Thai taxation via the DTA. Gov't pensions and Social Security are the obvious exemptions from Thai taxes. Sucking it from a pre 2024 bank account would also make it exempt. Just keep good records, in the unlikely event that you are subject to a random compliance audit.

The password certainly wasn't available to outsiders -- it's only written down in the sanctity of my office. That our two IRA accounts that USAA sold to Schwab three years ago had a recent hack attempt on Jan 26 -- but failed, as I had changed the passwords after the USAA transfer caper -- leads me to believe there's mischief about in the inner workings of USAA.

Well, it was on Nov 29th and 30th, when someone transferred $5000 (the max allowed) each day from my USAA checking account to a bank account in Florida. I didn't discover this until Dec 7th, when I logged into my online USAA account to double check bank account balances, to make sure they tallied with mine. When I noticed the transfers, I immediately called USAA's fraud line, and they froze both my and my wife's online USAA accounts (and the bogus transfer conduit). As it turned out, the crook had logged into my wife's online USAA account, set up a transfer account to this bogus account in Florida, and had labelled the owner as my wife. As such, it was allowed to be a "push/pull" account, meaning he could "pull" transfers from his bogus Florida account (USAA never verified that the bogus account's owner was my wife, which, of course, it wasn't). I still don't know if this was a push, or pull operation -- not that it matters, as the results were the same. Two weeks later, I got a message from the USAA fraud department stating that: "They had discovered no fraud." Period. Huh?!. This meant it had been either me, or my wife, who had sent the $10000 to the bogus account in Florida. They did say that I could call and request a full report on how they arrived at their findings. So, of course, I called -- and was put on hold for 52 minutes. Finally a gruff voice came on, obviously pre briefed on the subject at hand, and told me that USAA doesn't give out reports on cases NOT ruled as fraud! Jeez, this was contrary to what they had said in their message. He did volunteer that, "All traffic related to the transfers was on computers recognized by USAA as mine." End of discourse. A little investigation on my part, apparently a lot more than they did, discovered that the crook had put a spam filter on my gmail account (the one both me and the wife have as primary for USAA email), meaning, I could not get any correspondence from USAA. I hadn't noticed this, because recent USAA emails had only been perfunctory, i.e, not any warnings, like: "New transfer account set up -- was this you?" And, of course, with the spam filter, I wouldn't have -- and didn't -- get any such warnings! A later look in the gmail spam folder, however, showed much of the missing USAA email correspondence. Smart crook. And, how did I realize I was getting blocked from USAA email? When I went to unfreeze my USAA online account, we tried three times to get the one time six digit code sent to my primary email. No luck. But when sent to my secondary email address on file, bingo. That's when I got introduced to spam filters (and that the related folders aren't normally shown, unless requested -- which is why I was in the dark about these missing emails.) But, of course, the crook didn't have a spam filter on his email reader, so he could read all correspondence from USAA, to include the one time six digit code sent when USAA asked if the crook wanted his computer to be recognized as belonging to my wife's USAA online account. Duh. So this is why the USAA fraud department concluded that I or my wife had conducted the transfers! It didn't dawn on them that, as the crook has access to the wife's USAA account, where he could read the primary email contact address --'cause it is NOT XXXXED out -- that any one time security codes sent to that address would and could be read by the crook. Are they phu****** brain dead! Anyway, this has all recently been fired to the top of USAA management (unfortunately, run by all civilians -- the Generals McDermotts and Herres long gone). It will be interesting to hear their response, particularly as I included several references to nearly identical situations to mine -- one resolved when a local investigative TV channel got involved. Sadly, USAA has really gone downhill. They're already paying the Feds $140M in fines, for shoddy security procedures. And the number of complaints you can find online is staggering. I've been a member for 56 years, and it used to feel like a club of officers and senior NCOs. Now, with the Gronkowski commercials, every swinging d*** who had a dishonorably discharged relative can be a member. Sure ain't the same -- with management on par with its new members. Oh, put the "[email protected]" in your address book or contact list. This should eliminate someone putting a spam filter over your USAA email contact address. And, do change that password periodically, and go to MFA sign ins. I never changed my or my wife's passwords -- my bad. And her account was dormant, as she's joint with me on all accounts, so only I needed to log into my account to check things. I certainly now check periodically her account for strange activity.

What's that have to do with a procedure to eliminate unwanted protoplasm?

There's nothing in this remittance charade that dictates whether or not money sent from a bank account is "old" money (i.e., pre 2024) or "new" money (i.e., interest earned post Jan 2024). And, even more, if you add earnings to this account post Jan 2024, these earnings can be either non assessable via the DTA, like gov't pensions -- or assessable, like private pensions. So, you send a chunk of money to Thailand from this account -- from which tranches does this money come from? There certainly aren't any rules regarding this -- at least as of now. So, as part of the whole self-assessment drill, it would seem it's up to you to identify which tranches you tapped for remittance. With good records, you certainly could make sure you're remittances are first tapping the non assessable funds in that bank account -- hey, your call. But, jeez, I can't imagine such a detailed reporting requirement, with all the associated costly manpower, ever occurring. Maybe a random compliance audit here and there. No, just another aspect of the necessary self-assessment aspect of this goat rope. Just be prepared to argue your methodology of identifying tranches for cash flow remitted.

A little common sense would put this ridiculous rumor to rest. Why would any cash flow into Thailand automatically be considered "income," and not just a capital input for, say, Foreign Direct Investment, or for providing for living expenses. If this cash flow came from pre 2024 savings, or from DTA exempted income, it's not assessable income. But nobody's going to parse this cash flow to determine what it is, or isn't. It will be you, the tax resident, to parse this cash flow. And, why in the world -- if RD decided all incoming cash flows were income -- would they tax it at the top marginal tax rate of 35%? Again, common sense says it would climb the laddered tax rate scale, zero, to five percent, etc. Come on, folks -- engage a little logic.

The DTA says Thailand has exclusive taxation rights on your private pension (but the US has secondary rights, due to the saving clause that allows the US to override all aspects of DTA language). So, if your private pension exceeds all those allowances, deductions, 150k freebies offered in a Thai tax return -- then, yeah, you have Thai taxable income, and thus need to file a Thai tax return. But you get a credit for these Thai taxes against your US tax bill; but, as you say, you owe no US taxes. Well, then, the credit is worthless (well, not quite -- you could file an extensive Form 1116, which would allow a carry-over of this credit, should you have future US taxable income.... a lot of work if your future shows no US taxation). Anyway, this is a case where having to pay Thai taxes, and no US taxes -- means you're now in a situation of owing someone taxes (but, without exploring various math scenarios, I really think if you owe no US taxes, because the standard deduction exceeds your adjusted gross income, then you most likely won't meet the Thai taxable income threshold either). As far as someone parsing your Social Security remittances apart from your private pension remittances -- of course this won't, and can't happen -- fungibility of money remittances is a wonderful thing. As said a monotonous amount of time on these threads -- it will all be self-assessment. Keep good records; report what looks correct to you; and give yourself the benefit of the doubt, particularly if you can support a good argument, should it (unlikely) ever come to that. [I give myself a tax credit for Bangkok Bank withheld taxes on my US return. Rules say, if I can get this withholding refunded, I can't get the credit. My excuse, should I ever get a letter audit from the IRS, is that I read on an expat forum that I can't get a tax refund without a TIN; and I can't get a TIN without a work permit. This would be my excuse if ever audited (weak as it may be). Integrity? No tax evasion? Nope -- Thailand keeps the taxes, and the US gives a credit, vice US gets the taxes, and Thailand has to refund their withholding taxes to me. Thus, taxes working where I live.]

List all your bank and IRA/401k balances as of 12/31/2023. This is the amount you can remit to Thailand that will be non assessable, i.e., not reportable, on a Thai tax return -- for ever and ever going forward into 2024 and beyond. Just keep good records, like, say, you open a new bank account in 2024, and fill it with pre 2024 funds, plus you use it for direct deposits of your gov't pensions, and Social Security payments (exempt by DTA). Thus, this new bank account contains only money that is not reportable on a Thai tax return. And this should be the source of your Wise or SWIFT transfers. I mention including your 12/31/23 IRA/401k balance, because of the uniqueness of Thailand's remittance rule, plus the exemption for pre 2024 income. Thus, Thailand says income earned pre 2024 is exempt from their new remittance rule. But money in an IRA pre 2024 has also been earned -- it's just tax deferred until it is payed out. Thus, I would be completely in my rights to tell Thai RD that my IRA funds pre 2024 are not reportable, as they were earned pre 2024. That it's taxable in a later year, when withdrawn -- is neither here nor there (until Thailand drops the remittance malarkey and just looks at taxable worldwide income).

Hear hear.

If you really needed hand holding, which you won't with the professional approach of BoI, Star Visa in CM is on the BoI list of agents. But, you still have to go to Bangkok for the final inkings -- they can't do that for you. Actually, my trip, as I hate traveling, was a surprise joy, as I treated myself to everything five star -- hotel, limo to and from airport, limo to Boi, surf and turf dinners, young... nevermind. But, hopefully the internet will be available for the one year report -- mail would be an ok backup. Star Visa, however, says they can do that report for you, if needed. Which, it probably won't be.

Well, DTAs can be amended with "protocols." Hopefully, one such protocol might be re the UK-Thai DTA, and will finally address private pensions, which the current DTA is silent on. Other protocols might just update DTAs that have grown long in the tooth, and thus have led to misunderstandings. Can't really envision a scenario where an updated DTA would be detrimental to me.... But, who knows...

That's nice. But if you're in Thailand for 180 days or more -- you're a resident for tax purposes. That you don't have a residence status that allows you to get a Thai passport makes no difference to the taxation aspect. Again, if you're here for 180 or more days, you're subject to the DTA and Thai taxation. A quick glance at the OZ-Thai DTA shows a carbon copy of most English speaking countries' DTAs, all based on OECD and UN Model tax treaties. For private pensions: Key to the above, the the phrase: "shall be taxable ONLY in that State." This means exclusive taxation rights. As pointed out by an OZ tax accountant somewhere in all these threads, yes, this means Oz has no taxation rights on these private pensions, only Thailand. That they don't exercise this right -- because it's not remitted -- apparently doesn't negate the exclusivity. And OZ apparently doesn't have something like the saving clause found in the US DTA, which trumps the exclusivity, and allows taxation by the US, in spite of what's declared in the DTA. A good deal, I guess -- if Thai taxation rates are lower than Aussie rates of taxation.

For those of us who will break even, because any increase in Thai taxes will be an equal decrease (through credits) in our home country taxes (the US, for example) -- then I certainly have no problem with my taxes now transferring to Thailand. Less money for infrastructure improvements in the US, that I'll never see -- and more money for Block 70 F-16's, to ward off the hoards of Burmese Mig-29's and SU-30's (well, ok, maybe mo' betta going to increased welfare benefits).

No penalties for not filing if no tax owed. Only if filing late, and taxes are owed. Then, it's a fine equivalent to taxes owed, or twice taxes owed (I forgot what drives the difference).

Ok. So then does Thailand have exclusive taxation rights -- thus the UK can't tax these private and State pensions? Or does Thailand have primary taxation rights, but the UK can also tax, but has to give a credit for Thai taxes? Or in reverse -- the UK has primary taxation rights? Without any clarity in the DTA, we're in a double taxation quandary. Dunno. Hope it all sorts out for the Brits. But, since Yorktown, I won't lose too much sleep.

I said, "unless they're gov't pensions."

Unless you don't live in that country, then most DTAs have the country of residence with exclusive or primary taxation rights, unless they're gov't pensions. But you knew that....

Certainly not to Thailand, if not remitted. This, however, may change, if and when they figure out that the remittance gimmick is still costing them lost tax revenues.

So, Thai law says that, unless exempted by law, decree, or language in a DTA, it's assessable income. So, what do the Brits say about that private pension that's not mentioned in the DTA? Do they bend over and agree that Thai law allows for their taxation? Or do they say, "Nothing in the DTA gives Thailand taxation rights, either exclusive or primary, so we reserve the right to tax that income." And they do. What does the expat Brit do? If he gets a tax bill from the Brit tax folks, I guess he pays it, as I doubt he'll complain that Thailand says they have primary or exclusive taxation rights. To which the Brit tax folks say, "Where in the DTA does it say that?" Anyway, a big mess without specific language in the DTA. And there's no default position in the absence of specific language, which would be that one country has exclusive taxation rights (and thus the other country has no taxation rights). Or one has primary taxation rights (like we saw recently with Belgium), where the primary country keeps all the tax collection, but issues a credit to the secondary country, who gets to keep any taxes above the issued credit. So, what's a Brit expat with State and private pensions going to do? Maybe, like The Cyclist, visit your local RD office and ask them to sort out this mess. Or, file your Brit tax return, then do a quick assessment on whether or not, should this income be remitted, that you'd be liable for some Thai taxation. If not, kick back, have a beer, and don't worry about filing a Thai tax return.

If that is true, the tax department will refund the paid tax in Belgium if it is more than you had to pay in Thailand?? As double taxes in tyhe whole world are not done. Here's a quote from the Belgium-Thai DTA re non government pensions: Most DTAs have the country of residency as the primary, or even exclusive, taxing country. Belgium, however, gets first taxation rights on private pensions paid in Belgium, and Thailand gets secondary taxation authority. This is indicated by the language "may be taxed" which is OECD Model tax language to indicate taxation may occur in both countries, but the "may be taxed" country has first dibs. (To indicate exclusive taxation rights, where only one country can tax, the language is "may only be taxed.") Thus, the recent statement from the Belgium embassy is consistent with the DTA: Belgium has first taxation rights, but Thailand can also tax. But because Thailand is the secondary taxing authority, it has to grant a credit for Belgium taxes paid. Therefore, if those Belgium taxes are more than the Thai taxes, no taxes owed to Thailand. If less, then you still pay full fare to Belgium, but you also pay Thailand a tax equal to the amount that exceeds the credit. If it's obvious you won't owe Thailand any taxes after the credit, makes you want to not file a tax return with Thailand. And if you don't owe taxes, no penalty, no jail time. Hmmmm.

Why not?

..... or, what -- that everything that is not included is taxable by the country of residence?

BS

As I posted somewhere in this mess of threads, for Brits, their DTA does NOT define assessable income when it comes to private/State pensions. As such, how is one to know that his Brit private pension is assessable income for Thai tax purposes?

DTA's address income, not income remitted. Thus, Thai RD gives credit that foreigners have some brain power to claim remitted income is from last year. Whether it is or not, is neither here nor there, as RD doesn't have the resources to call people in for questioning. And for those with direct deposits into Thailand of their pensions? You'd think that would be easy pickings for RD. But apparently not, as they didn't waste resources hitting all the banks to see if Joe Farang's direct deposit was from Boeing (taxable) or Uncle Sam (not taxable).