JimGant

The easiest and safest payment method is: pay on delivery. I use this all the time with Lazada, from furniture to vitamins. Never had to return an item, so don't know how this works. But, certainly paying the delivery man the amount described in the contract, is a no-brainer -- no worries about paying for something never delivered; nor worries about credit card info going astray.

Just create your own fillable fields using Adobe Acrobat. Yeah, I know -- the cost is ridiculous, plus you can't buy it anymore -- you have to subscribe and pay annually. Fortunately, I've some older pirated versions that work just fine -- except with some newer PDF fillable forms. Can you find such software on the street anymore?

Yes, under the current system, where income remitted the following year is tax exempt (and we filter this thru a home bank account, not via direct deposit to Thailand). But if all remittances, whenever remitted, are subject to taxation, and income has to be parsed from savings, then it becomes unmanageable (when I Wise a huge chunk of my savings account to Thailand, a savings account consisting of multiple after tax direct deposits) -- and established with an inheritance -- and where accounting rules, like Fifo or Lifo, don't apply to remittances (these are GAAP terms) -- how are you going to sort out this fungible mess of dollars?). Anyway, we've heard rumblings about converting to an income vice remittance system. And, if Thailand is serious about collecting more taxes from overseas income, then this is the way they'll have to go; because their current 'brought in next year' is very clever at tax avoidance, and doesn't require a parsing between income and savings: It just gives blanket cover to all cash flow sent into Thailand, with the understanding that any income involved had to be earned in a previous year, otherwise the sender was nuts. Now, however, with the new proposed rules, parsing must take place, as you can't tax all remitted cash flow -- and such parsing is impossible, with reasonable screening resources. Thus, we'll either return to the old system, if the fat cats have their way -- or income, not remittances, will be the taxation of the future.

Oh, yawn. How are they going to determine what amount of your remittance to Thailand is income or post-taxation savings? They can't, and they won't, as they're not brain dead about all the negatives being addressed on this thread. Most importantly, foreign direct investment (FDI) would evaporate if the they taxed all remittances -- and they're not about to go there. Yes, there's income out there to be gained, if Thailand did away with the remittance rule (and the Thai fat cats didn't prevent that tax avoidance scheme from happening). So, say they did -- now worldwide income, subject to DTA exemptions or primary taxation authority rules, would dictate how taxation goes forth in Thailand. In my situation (US), I still would not need to declare my Air Force pension and Social Security pay as assessable income in Thailand (as US has "exclusive" taxation rights on those). But my IRA annual payout (due to RMD) would, under the DTA, be taxable primarily by Thailand, with the US as secondary taxation authority -- meaning, Thailand keeps all the taxes; the US keeps only the taxes, if any, not negated by the tax credit from Thailand. For me? Since Thai taxes would be less than US taxes on this IRA payout, my total tax payout from both countries would be no different than under the old rules, where I didn't need to file with Thailand. And, now, in all fairness -- Thailand finally gets those taxes dictated by the US-Thai DTA -- which had been precluded due to the 'remitted in a a later year' Thai law. Fine by me. Anyway, for Yanks, nothing's going to change with your worldwide tax bill -- only that more of your taxes may go to Thailand, where before they went to the US. Thus, no need to plan for a 185 day vacation from Thailand (186 in leap year) to avoid taxes. Now, for those of you screaming about the unfairness of having Thailand tax some of your income, but who now have none of your income being taxed, including in your home country -- welcome to the new OECD effort for "fiscal fairness." And, yes, CRS and FATCA reporting will be a "gotcha" for you, should Thailand go to taxing income, and not remittances. And Thailand really has no choice, as trying to parse remittances for taxation purposes is a non-starter. But, maybe the Thai fat cats will win out, and this new tax proposal will self-destruct. Thailand will survive -- just jump of VAT a couple of points. If you're a Yank, I wouldn't waste too much time reading this thread, as all the doom and gloom doesn't affect you.

Sounds like the Norwegian example. The Norwegian - Thai DTA has Thailand as the primary tax authority for Norwegian tax residents of Thailand, to include Norwegian govt pensions. All's that's required is for Norwegians to produce a Thai tax return, showing that all their Norwegian income was taxed by the Thais. As such, Norway will exclude such income from their taxes, which, in most cases, would be higher than that of the Thais. But, unlike with other DTAs, there is no provision for a tax credit, with the difference being paid into the Norwegian coffer. Instead, it's just: You pay taxes in Thailand, you don't pay taxes in Norway. Nice. I guess Norwegians (and others with similar DTAs) aren't losing too much sleep over these new tax regulations.

Naaa. Identifying misrepresentation suffices as a hobby.

That would be unusual since every other country I file taxes in or have ever filed taxes in, does. Well, in the US, you don't report these on your Form 1040: Gifts, inheritance, welfare payments, alimony (since 2018), child support payments, health care benefits, life insurance proceeds, credit card cash rebates, scholarships, etc. But, yeah, you do report tax exempt interest from municipal bonds, since Uncle Sam needs this to figure your "modified adjusted gross income," which, if too high, means you pay a higher Medicare premium. Anyway, I'll let you worry about reporting all your non-assessable income, lest the fraud police come knocking. Jeez.

Has it ever occurred to you that, the reason for no place to notate non-assessable income, is because they're not interested in income that has no meaning in regards to your tax bill..... Trying to humor you, perhaps....? And your implication that you'd be guilty of fraud, if you didn't provide info on non-assessable income, is just plain weird.

No, but under current rules I have no assessable income, since to be assessable, it has to be remitted in the year earned. Plus, even if remitted in same year earned, my military retirement pay and Social Security would not be assessable income, since the US has exclusive taxation rights, per the DTA, on this income. Maybe I misunderstood an earlier post of yours which seemed to say you filed an annual Thai tax return that included non assessable income......? If so, why would you do this -- do you think the Thais are interested in numbers that don't result in tax revenue?

Completely wrong.

Thailand woke up a few years back, when they noted that first world countries, like the US, collected taxes from non resident Thai citizens, who had bank accounts in the States, and who maybe visited the States as tourists (but never long enough to become tax residents). Such taxes were 'withholding at the source', and defined as 'final taxation.' By fiat, 30% -- but reducible via DTA, and the filing of a W8BEN with the withholder, to 15%. Of course, this would be the only way to get taxes from these folks, as they weren't required to file a tax return. Thus, a fiat 30%/15%, regardless of what tax bracket you might be in, should you file a return. Thailand took note, realizing a lot of long term tourists had bank accounts, but weren't considered tax residents due to time spent here. So, every bank account with a farang identifier, gets 15% withheld -- even my joint account with Thai wife. Pretty smart, actually, as how many affected tourists have the time or inclination to get back some measily baht withholding tax..... And for full time farangs, probably most, with no other tax obligations, let it slide, to the benefit of Thai coffers.

You need to figure your effective tax rate on your rental income. Easy. What's your tax bill before you add the rental income to your taxable income pile; then what's the tax bill afterwards. That additional tax, divided by your rental income, is your effective taxation on the rental income. But, the rate's not that important -- what's important is the dollar amount that's used as the tax credit on your Thai tax bill. And if that's greater than your Thai tax, nothing paid to Thailand. But, if rental income is the only income subject to Thai taxation (as other income may be gov't pensions, social security, Roth payouts -- all NOT subject to inclusion on your Thai tax return), your Thai tax return, with only rental income, may have an effective taxation less than that of your US return. Thus, all the Thai tax is covered by the credit. But, if the other way, then, yes, you'll pay whatever remains of the Thai tax, after taking the credit for the US tax. But, they're not going to screw us on this LTR exemption. BoI's boss is the Prime Minister, and they're not about to let the Ministry of Finance tarnish their LTR effort and reputation.

I keep hearing this phrase from you, and wonder where you got it from? The last thing Thailand's RD wants are thousands of pages with numbers that don't generate any tax revenue. If I don't have any taxable income to report, because: It wasn't remitted; or it was remitted but was exempt from Thai taxes due to exclusivity in the DTA (e.g,. my US Air Force pension and Social Security); or it was remitted, but was tax exempt income in my home country (Roth payouts, interest from tax exempt bonds, etc). See here on this last point: Then, no need to file a Thai tax return. What, pray tell, is the fraud that might be involved.....? So, like in the US, if you have no taxable income, no tax return is required to be filed (a few exceptions, like, if you're independently employed). Thus, Thailand is not prepared to deal with all this paperwork from tax residents filing tax returns, but who don't owe any taxes. Logic dictates they'll just have to go on the self-assessment wagon, with some random audits, particularly of large sum remitters, to see what's what. I'm not worried, and wouldn't be, even if I didn't have an LTR visa. Thailand's not going to shoot themselves in the foot by examining all foreign remittance into Thailand -- thus killing Foreign Direct Investment -- a big necessity for the economy to go forward. No, I think what we'll see is taxation on worldwide income (subject to DTA dictates) and not taxation of remitted cash flow, where maybe income can be parsed from capital (not likely). Thailand's not stupid -- the remitted gimmick was to allow Thai fat cats a tax avoidance scheme. Hopefully, such fat cats won't queer the situation that now requires taxation on worldwide income, and not just on remitted income. Stay tuned.

Under the DTA between the US and Thailand, the US has primary taxing authority (but not exclusive) on rental income from properties in the US. Thailand could also tax it, but would have to give a credit for all the tax paid to the US, which probably means little or no tax paid to Thailand. So, assuming you don't get an LTR visa, or the LTR tax exemption falls through -- worst case would probably be the paperwork drill of maybe having to file a Thai tax return. From the technical explanation of Article 6 (Rents) of the Thai-US DTA.

I submitted three 1099's -- Air Force, Social Security, and RMD from my Schwab IRA. Submitted a summary page explaining and totalizing. Also submitted the related Form 1040, but as this was a joint return, the consolidated numbers are worthless without the 1099 breakouts. Also submitted current year's projected pay, based on pay stubs, plus proof of already taken RMD. Guess this satisfied BOI, as I didn't receive any requests for further information.

Use a collared shirt for your photo too. As I recall, someone was denied his photo submission because he was wearing a tee shirt. Handy with Photoshop -- dress yourself up in a coat and tie.

The only tax rates mentioned in the DTAs are those 10 and 15% figures applicable to interest and dividends. For other income, like pensions, you pay full fare taxation to the country doing the taxing.

I must of missed that bulletin. Originally, only in person or via an agent was acceptable. Then, I believe, by mail was allowed. So, now, online?

I'd put all my money on BoI. The LTR visas are their pet project, and if they've promised LTR visa holders that their foreign income won't be taxed, they'll certainly have higher horse power to back up that contract should RD pull a fast one. Why? Do a Google and note who they work for: Office of the Prime Minister. BoI has bigger fish to fry, with talk about not parsing out income from remittances and just taxing the whole cash flow. That ain't going to happen, as by taxing capital inflows, Foreign Direct Investment would die -- and FDI is BoI's main reason for existence. Thus, the only logical way of taxing just income is to -- just tax income as in occurs abroad, whether remitted or not. So, if your future holds sending a pile of capital to Thailand to buy a condo, I wouldn't worry too much that that will have any tax implications. IMO.

The speaker, Thomas Carden, has many mistakes in his repertoire. Six years ago on this forum, we discussed his too-good-to-be-true product that would allow US taxpayers who lived in Thailand for over 180 days to avoid all taxation (Thai and US) on their IRA distributions. His rationale: The "saving clause" in the US-Thai DTA does not apply to private pensions, including IRA's. This would make Thailand the only country in the world, then, where you could move to and cash out your IRAs tax free, to include exception from US taxes. Yeah, right. Anyway, the below thread ref is long and probably of interest primarily to US types, especially those now living over 180 days in Thailand and are paying taxes on their US IRA distributions. But, it does give perspective on Carden's dubious standards. https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/3/ Pay particular attention to the Swiss-US DTA and its IRA treatment -- and how it's been vetted by the Senior Technical Reviewer in the Office of Chief Counsel, IRS. No such vetting has been done with the US-Thai DTA in regards to IRAs, and those tax returns filed by Carden, exempting IRAs from taxation, if audited, have only had low level auditors completely overwhelmed with treaty language, tax code language, and Carden's snake oil interpretation of the saving clause. So, yeah, if you hire Carden, you can save a bundle on your taxes, including filing amended tax returns for the previous three years. And probably with little risk. I just don't like the unethical.

Oh, BS. That's what DTAs are all about, defining which contracting state has exclusive taxing authority; no taxing authority; or partial authority (and credits involved, if both countries should tax). My govt pension, due to DTAs, is not taxable by any European country in which I might reside -- so what's this "sole tax sovereignty" of European countries all about? Do your homework.

Right now the Visa rate and Wise rates for dollar to baht exchange are the same: 35.45 (MC is probably about the same, as it usually is). This has always been an attractive feature of using my fee free US credit card -- the Visa Fx rate approximates the interbank exchange rate, similar to Wise. So, I can enjoy the full exchange rate, like 35.45 -- and get a 2% cash reward in addition. And, if I used my fee free Schwab debit/ATM card in a Thai ATM, I'd also realize the 35.45 rate. If I sent $1000 via Wise, after their fees, I'd get an effective exchange rate of 35.14 (slightly better for $10000, at 35.18). Don't know what the over the counter fees are today, if any. Obviously, if no fees, this would beat Wise for getting cash into your hand.

Well, I reported this earlier, in more detail, but here's a ruling on the latest US income tax model (2006) for DTAs. Whether such language applies to all/most DTAs is questionable, but there's a large commonality amongst DTAs, largely due to most countries following the Model language from the OECD and UN DTA boilerplate. Now, if your DTA had this language, but Thailand decided to ignore it -- well, that's a whole different question. But it's doubtful Thailand would want to torpedo DTAs, as they seem to be, overall, in Thailand's favor.

Or, I guess, your wife's death certificate. Which leads me to say: I believe your marriage extension is good until expiration date after your wife's death. Not sure how that works for divorce.....(?).

How does this "...may be..." work out in real life? Do representatives of the UK and Thailand throw dice every year to decide which country gets to tax this type of income for that year? Here's some information from the Technical Explanation of the US-Thai DTA: The first paragraph of Article 6 states the general rule that income of a resident of a Contracting State derived from real property situated in the other Contracting State may be taxed in the Contracting State in which the property is situated. . This Article does not grant an exclusive taxing right to the situs State; the situs State is merely given the primary right to tax. Taxing rights granted by the agreements will be either primary or subsidiary. Primary rights give an unrestricted right to tax the property in question; subsidiary rights allow taxation, but only after giving credit for the tax on the property in the other country. Presumably such explanation would apply to UK DTAs, as they adhere basically to either the OECD Model or UN Model tax treaties, as do US DTAs. Thus, the UK has primary taxation rights on rental income. Thailand, however, can also tax this income (if remitted to Thailand), but must give a credit for the taxes paid to the UK. So, if Thai taxation has a higher effective tax rate on this rental income than that of the UK, then your total tax bill will be both the UK taxes and the Thai taxes that exceed the tax credit for the UK taxes. Thus, when you see may be taxed, and both countries decide to tax subject income, then your tax bill will equate to whichever country's effective tax rate is higher.