JimGant

Nope. DTA gives Thailand "exclusive" taxation rights on remitted IRAs, meaning only Thailand can tax it. However, the US has this "saving clause" in all its DTAs, meaning, it always has secondary taxation rights on taxation (except for a few items, like child care and alimony). Thus, Thailand taxes your remitted IRA -- and as exclusive taxation authority in the DTA -- gets to keep ALL TAXES COLLECTED, and doesn't have to absorb a tax credit from the US. The US, on the other hand, does have to absorb a tax credit for Thai taxes paid. If these are less than the US tax on your IRA, your total out-of-pocket tax bill, to both countries, would equal the tax bill if only the US taxed your IRA. If Thai taxes higher than US taxes, well, your total tax bill, both countries, equals your Thai tax bill ('cause Thai tax credit wipes out your total US tax bill). As a note for discussion, here's the Por 162 language, meant to exclude pre 2024 income from Thai taxes: For my traditional IRA, all the original funding occurred by 1990. This was with, of course, pre 2024 income -- albeit tax deferred income (which makes no never mind here, for Por 162 purposes). Since then - because the IRA holds stock mutual funds -- every year capital gains are "realized," and this pre-2024 income is then reinvested. So, except for the 2024 reinvested cap gains, my IRA adheres -- as far as I can see -- to the Por 162 exemption on "foreign sourced income derived before 1 Jan 2024." Now, one expat advisor out there -- Expatthaitax -- says, nope, only remitted money from pre 2024 bank accounts (no IRAs, brokerage accounts, investments apply) is covered by Por 162. I don't agree -- but would change my mind with something definitive from TRD. But, what all this means is that, if I follow my own counsel and believe my IRA remittances are exempt per Por 162 -- then, I'm just not required to declare my IRA remittance in a Thai tax return. But, I still have to declare my IRA distribution on my US tax return -- without, of course, any Thai tax credit, since I don't declare this IRA distribution on a Thai tax return. Bottom line: US taxes are probably greater than what I would have paid Thailand. So, Por 162 probably gives me no advantage.

Nonsense. Christ, it's already bullet proof, with that LTR visa in your passport, should TRD come knocking. Which they won't, if you're completely off their radar screen, 'cause you didn't file a blank tax return.

And, of course, their minimum rate starts at 7500bt (the figure we've seen most advertised), which, I guess, is what they'd charge for a blank tax return. But, then, you'd need to pay another 8000bt to get a TIN. There's no way TRD is interested in monies that aren't taxable. How do I know? Because there aren't any lines on the tax form to list such monies. No way do you have to file a tax return -- by law -- if you have no assessable income. And, per Royal Decree, you have none courtesy of your LTR visa [however, jury still out on whether or not such exempt income must not be from current tax year...]. Would it be possible to provide the names of these two Expat tax companies, so that they can be included on the shyster list.....? Thanx.

Yeah, his ignorance is becoming annoying. Remittance income -- only pertinent to two nations in the world (Thailand and Malta) -- is not even a footnote in any Double Tax Treaty. And, not in any CRS dialogue. Not sure what his agenda is.....

I hope she was just daft, and not up-to-speed on TRD guidance on Por 162 pre 2024 income.....I say this because Expatthaitax (a tax advisory firm) has put the word out that Por 162 exemption only applies to pre 2024 bank accounts. Period. Thus, money in investments, brokerages, Individual Retirement Accounts, etc are NOT covered. Where Expatthaitax got their readout of Por 162 from, I dunno. But maybe this TRD lady got the same briefing......

Makes no difference what "filtering" system you use, since the remittance aspect to taxation will have disappeared.

Currently, only assessable income is included on your tax return. Income non assessable, because of DTA or because it was pre 2024 income (Por 162), is NOT shown anywhere on your return. And, then, of course it doesn't affect your tax bracket -- and wouldn't be shown as a tax deduction, since there's no equivalent non assessble income to deduct it from. Much discussion on other threads about TRD eventually getting around to asking you to declare ALL remitted income -- assessable and non assessable. This is a Canadian model, where non taxable (non assessable) income is factored in with taxable income, to potentially drive up the tax bracket, and thus collect more taxes on taxable income. Thailand would be smart to emulate this, as its potential to raise tax brackets, and thus taxes collected on assessable income. And, if they asked you to label each element of your non assessable income, potential there to discover inappropriately labelled, and thus taxable, income. But, since they'll have to bang this off of 61 separate DTAs for most non assessable income, this would most likely not be a cost effective.

Or, like for me, and probably many Yanks, our tax returns are joint. Thus, the return, by itself, doesn't parse my income from my wife's. So it's worthless. So, in my case, I did submit the first two pages of my joint 1040 -- but also the 1099s that defined my specific taxable income for the year. With an explanatory note. No problem. Oh, and the tax return/1099s were for only the past year. Some forms of LTR, but not WP, require the past two years. I had to get BoI to clarify this for me.

Well, they may think that, since you report it, that it's assessable income, and thus potentially taxable. Because, there are no lines to report non assessable foreign remitted income. That you end up paying tax on this, because you're stupid enough to report non assessable income -- because you're on some kind of crusade -- is fine with me. Maybe pays for those needed road repairs in my neighborhood.

Ah, Oldcpu's answer to that, with his report on how the Canadians require reporting global income, even if it's not taxable -- to add to your taxable income and adjust your tax bracket upwards. Very clever. Now, you pay more taxes on taxable income -- because you have a higher tax bracket, courtesy of having to report non taxable income. Anyway, Thailand doesn't do this, of course. But they could, if they, in the future, had you report non assessable foreign remitted income, and used this to adjust your tax bracket. Then, there could be a higher tax bill on assessable income, 'cause you're in a higher tax bracket. That would, then, give meaning to having to report non assessable foreign remitted income. But, I wouldn't hold my breath on Thailand adopting this approach. Bad news, Oldcpu: When Canada becomes the 51st state of the US, all your worldwide income will be taxable. Good news: You won't have to learn or speak French.

How many space heaters is a better wonder....

That doesn't quite square with this: Not that Expatthai gets it right every time......

I won't doubt that -- the US saving clause, allowing them to tax all worldwide income regardless of DTA, can be invoked for resident aliens. And that's what appears to be what happened with your colleagues. As such, this income is no longer considered "only taxable in the UK" and would be entered on the appropriate line for taxable income, on the 1040 or its schedules. But, I responded to your literal declaration: Thus, I took your "only taxable in the UK" literally, meaning it's not taxable in the US -- and therefore it is NOT shown anywhere on the US tax filing (even a Form 8833 wouldn't be required). And, "only taxable in the UK" means it is not taxable in Thailand -- and is therefore not shown anywhere on the Thai tax form -- your first clue to this is that there is no place to put it on the form. Your lobbying for reporting non assessable income is starting to wear thin.

You would not have to declare your UK Govt Pension. The IRS isn't interested on tax exempt income, and appropriately has no line items for them (with the exception of tax exempt interest on govt bonds, a figure used to modify adjusted gross income, and therefore potentially raise Medicare premiums). Same logic used by Thailand, i.e., my US govt pension is fully exempt from Thai taxation, so they have no interest in seeing this figure -- that's why there is no line item for it.

Well, if those remittances are taxable, per DTA by Thailand, and if they exceed those 60/120/220 filing thresholds -- they'll hear about them in my tax filing. All those other remittances, because the DTA says they're not taxable, or because Por 162 exempts them -- will be invisible to TRD, since no need to declare them on a tax return. There is no requirement to provide TRD with data on remitted income that is not assessable.

Huh? Let country B read the DTA to see what income isn't coming their way for taxation. Since they can't tax this income, why do they have to know about it?

This is where I lose you -- why do they have to be declared?. If the DTA says a certain type of income is taxable exclusively by country A, then that is solely where it needs to be mentioned in a tax return. Country B need never know about this income -- thus never needing its inclusion in a country B tax return. Again, I'm not sure where you're going with this ---- Please elaborate. Thank you.

Not exactly sure where you're going with this..... A Thai citizen, residing in the US, is subject to US taxes on his worldwide income, has to file a 1040 US tax return, but can avail himself of all the deductions and other amenities afforded to US citizens. But, he is also covered by the US-Thai DTA -- so there are some incomes, like his Thai govt pension, not subject to US taxes. Thus, you might say, "non assessable." Pretty much a carbon copy of how a US Thai tax resident is treated is treated in Thailand. So, excuse my ignorance -- but what was your point in bringing this up?

Adherence to thresholds doesn't apply to non assessable income. Or, am I missing something?

There's a difference?

Well, that's on the other side of the coin, you know, the side that says: Must only file if assessable income exceeds the 60/120/20k arbitrary thresholds.

Question? Did that IRA consist of pre 2024 Income? Why, yes. And you have heard of FIFO, meaning that 300k remittance certainly didn't encompass any 2024 IRA activity, since your overall value was 3M at end of 2023. Ok. And Por 162 exempts all pre 2024 income, which, by definition of income, certainly includes your IRA. Ok. So, quit wasting my time and get out of here.

Before Por 162, if you had an IRA withdrawal, due, maybe, to Required Minimum Distribution -- and remitted in same year as withdrawal -- Thailand had primary taxation rights on this (but the US secondary rights -- per saving clause -- meaning they also could tax, but would have to absorb a tax credit for the Thai taxes). This was, and is, explicitly spelled out in the US-Thai DTA. But along came Por 162, which, in my reading (discussed in detail, earlier) exempted all IRA withdrawals (except those representing 2024 IRA activity, or later), since such withdrawals were from pre 2024 income, which Por 162 exempts. Anyway, jury, for some, still out on this. So, pre Por 161 and 162 days, the DTA is explicit about IRAs and 401ks having Thailand (country of residence) sole taxation authority, with, due to saving clause in DTA, allowing secondary taxation rights to US. And, for those not believing that IRAs fall under Por 162, then nothing has changed with the DTA, and all subsequent remittances of such IRAs to Thailand will be primarily taxable by Thailand (and secondarily by US, with absorbed tax credit). And, of course, such remitted IRA monies are assessable, and as such, are subject to Thai taxation filing. Roth IRAs are a little more difficult to address, primarily because the US-Thai DTA was approved prior to there ever being Roth IRAs -- so nothing addressing them. However, the US-UK DTA addressed this issue, and added an amendment /protocol that essentially said: If retirement monies, specifically Roth IRAs) are exempt from taxation by the US, such monies are also exempt from UK taxation (correct dialogue in technical explanation of US-UK DTA). Of course, nothing (yet) exists in the US-Thai DTA addressing this, so it's pretty much a quandary, for now. But, the latest OECD and UN Model taxation treaties are addressing this issue, coming to the conclusion that how the US and UK handled the Roth question is where future treaties/related protocols should go. What to do? Well, like my reading of Por 162 exemptions of traditional IRAs, I'd use the same logic for Roth IRAs. And, in fact, you'd probably even be on more solid ground, since the money in Roth IRAs is pre 2024 *after tax* income (at least for the principal, which FIFO nicely covers). Traditional IRAs had *tax deferred/pre tax income* --'tho it's still pre 2024 income, which Por 162 doesn't slice and dice to any degree seen (except maybe by the Expatthaitax folks). Anyway, long winded. Sorry. Just my take on matters -- having dealt with gray areas on the US Tax Code, as a CPA there for several years. Obviously, this doesn't give me any leg-up on Thai tax matters, nor whether or not TRD auditors would be as conciliatory as the auditors I encounters at IRS......

Actually it suggests one thing -- self-assessment is alive and well. Thailand is acting like an OECD nation, where only a cursory math check is done by algorithm before a refund check is issued. Only is your return possibly scrutinized in greater detail in the next year or two or three. And if there's a potential problem, you'll hear about it. Obviously if you pass the math test, you'll get the refund check and the benefit of any doubt, at least initially. To hold up checks for anything more than a quick glance at your return -- would not be prudent.

The majority of my remittances are non assessable monies -- govt pension, social security, savings, etc. That lump sum would have no value to TRD, unless the assessable amount is isolated. And that would require self-assessment from me.