JimGant

Right now it's not. But, they could, in the future, modify the tax filing forms, and provide a line for non assessable income. This would not violate any DTAs, as it's not affecting the purpose of the DTA, namely, preventing double taxation. It's only providing a new reporting set of data (for whatever reason?). Why? To see if new tax forms have been issued with line items for non assessable income? Don't you have any hobbies?

Best input yet on this thread.

Let's not get hysterical. Failure to file 'cause you owe no taxes, but exceed those 120/220k thresholds -- is --max -- a 2000 bt fine. Doubtful such a fine has ever been assessed, 'cause if you don't owe taxes, and don't file a return, and don't have a TIN -- you're completely off the radar.

How do you figure out "expensive" with nothing to compare to...? Ok, you've been here 20 years, and now your only conception of prices is solely based on Thailand -- and what Somchai pays. I guess my conception is a little more worldly.

What a load of BS. Pay 8000 bt to file a null tax return, 'cause your assessable income exceeds those 120/220k thresholds -- but your TEDA prevents any taxes due. What they don't say is, pay another 7500 bt to get a TIN (my assumption). And, waste half a day plus, if you live in Bangkok, dotting the i's and crossing the t's -- and fighting traffic. Live up country? Not sure how you interface in that situation.... So, 8000 bt -- maybe 15,500 bt -- 100% guaranteed cost -- plus, of course, your time. Do nothing, sit back and have a beer, or a round of golf -- and have a 1% chance that TRD will even hear of you, let alone serve you with a 2000 bt fine. No brainer. Yeah, that Integrity guy sure has it right about these illegal charlatans.

Your Canadian DTA exempted income doesn't exist for Thai taxation purposes. Thus, no where, no need to list on a Thai tax return.

More interested in the bottom line, rather than the discrimination aspect. That Thailand, even with price discrimination, is a lot cheaper than comparable services in the US -- is all I care about. I guess I'm not an overly sensitive individual....

Right. Half the foreign prostitutes arrested recently in Thailand were African. Hey, after a few beers, "bad features" disappear -- it's only in the morning that you realize the errors of your ways.

You're over thinking this. This just means, as "tax exempt" per Royal Decree -- just don't enter it on your tax return (which, by Royal Decree probably means no tax return filing required, unless you have in-Thailand income).

You don't, of course. So, you'll have to get it at your local TRD -- the same place you said you're going to file a PND 91 -- which, of course, also requires a TIN. Not sure what point you're trying to make.....?

What difference would that make, if you file electronically? Only if your local tax office is in compliance with the algorithms at the central TRD office -- would you be well served. But, good chance they don't have a solid grasp of all that's in those algorithms -- and could give you bad advice. No, best keep your own counsel on what's needed for filing -- or if you feel incompetent, hire an agent.

Perhaps "leave well-enough alone" comes to mind?

Exactly what questions did you have for TRD that you couldn't answer for yourself? Certainly, nothing to do with your DTA, or your remitted income subject to Por 162? Maybe whether or not you had to include non assessable income on your return? A clever fellow would assume -- if there are no lines for including non assessable income, maybe it's not required.... Duh.

Not if you're single, whose filing threshold requirement is 120k -- well below the 180k average annual wage. And, if your married, and your wife makes 3.4k annually -- you now meet the 220k threshold requiring filing a tax return. Sounds like a lot of folks are ignoring (more likely, unaware) of the filing requirement. Understandable, since it's a dumb requirement, as there's no revenue gained by requiring null tax filings.

Yeah, that worked really well for you, didn't it. I'm 100% certain you can better interpret your DTA -- and how Por 162 applies to you -- than Somchai at TRD. But, as we all know about Thais -- if you ask Somchai a question, he'll be forced to answer with something, as "I don't know" doesn't exist in the Thai vocabulary. And his answer will most likely be wrong. So, avoid the hassle of asking TRD for advice; most of us can figure out what our non-assessable income is; and, if we break those 120/220k thresholds with assessable income, whether or not to file a tax return (of course, we're also smart enough to know what TEDAs to plug in -- and if we owe taxes, of course we need to file a tax return). But to visit TRD for advice? Naaa. Only plan to talk to Somchai in the unlikely event you're called in for a chat. And, as it's understood you'll prepare your tax return -- if required -- with due dilligence -- what worry could you possibly have?

Out of curiosity, does your spreadsheet show you don't owe any Thai taxes (but you're supposed to file 'cause your assessable income exceeded 120/220k)? And, when the lady implied you needed to fill in line items with non assessable income -- when no such lines exist -- did you realize this was a certifiable goat **ck? And, then, did you ever consider walking away, knowing that, by not owing any taxes, you were not subject to any injurious penalties -- and you were totally wasting an otherwise good day? Just curious.

Kudos to TRD, for extracting the chaff from the wheat.

Because dems da rules.....as Appletons says....and as I've been trying to tell everyone for the past six months but people like Jim Gant says that's not sensible! Let's get our definitions straight. Even you , CM, say no need to file if no assessable income. Only if assessable income exceeds 120k/220k (single/married) do the rules say you need to file. My position has been that, if your TEDA (plus 150k zero bracket) exceeds your assessable income -- and therefore you have NO taxable income, and thus no taxes owed -- go have a beer, don't get a TIN (and become a pawn in their system), and save yourself the hassle of filing a Thai tax return. Unless you remit a huge amount to Thailand - and TRD asks the bankers to report such people -- you don't exist in TRD's sights. Thus, very remote they'll come knocking for an audit. And if they do -- worst case advertised is a 2000 baht fine -- 'cause you're not a tax evader. So, what to do? Go have that beer -- and relax.

Oh, barf burgers. I've never felt discriminated against. Did I ever have to pay double to enter a Thai national park? Dunno. But if I did, it was well less than entering Yosemite Park in the US. That I pay more than the ordinary Thai citizen -- is kinda like I pay more as a rich American in Medicare premiums, than an ordinary American ('cause I'm richer, as determined by my tax return). Progressive taxation brackets explains the whole social situation. Probably good you're gone. You'd certainly be hard to live next door to, being so paranoid about your existence in Thailand. You started out about Thai taxation, and that you had to pay it. Not sure where you're from -- but, yeah, maybe if from an EU country, you now have to pay someone (Thailand), when otherwise you lived tax free in the world. Welcome to the 21st century -- where your taxes are now in the country whose potholes you now pay to fix. For us Yanks, no change in our total tax picture (more to Thailand, less to the US) -- except for those few living on long term cap gains. Thus, for most Yanks, the new tax situation is a non player. No taxes, no discrimination, no Thai-like irritants. Care to say where you now live? Anyway, glad you're now happy, and were flexible enough to leave Thailand. For many of us here, we're settled in, burned our bridges to home country, and really have no perception of where else to move. Fortunately, for most of us, our worldwide total tax bill situation hasn't changed; we don't worry about paying 200 vice 100 baht to enter a park; and the irritants you mention (well over exaggerated) are well overcome by the hospitality of the Thai people.

If the wife remitted monies from an offshore account in her name, which contained monies from a bank loan, from an inheritance from her father, and from a gift from you -- sounds like a completely non income remitting event. So, why would she be subject to Thai taxation? Yes, you -- the gifter -- are certainly money laundering that gift. Ho hum.

I guess the UK requires some non assessable (tax exempt) income to be reported -- don't know what that drives? And, the US requires tax exempt interest (on govt bonds) to be reported -- and that drives (when added to taxable income) what your Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) is, a number that determines your Medicare premium. And, certainly CM, you meant "non assessable INCOME," not non assessable FUNDS (which could include your inheritance from Aunt Martha)? But even here, a line item (or many), showing non assessable income(s) -- won't mean a damn, unless TRD has the time and assets (they don't) to scrutinize each from their library containing 61different DTAs. No, there is nothing I can see that would drive the requirement for a non assessable income line item (unless, it exceeded an established large threshold number, thus driving an audit). But, the folks they're interested in won't even be filing tax returns. So, what makes sense, is for TRD to ask the Thai banking system to provide a list of foreigners whose annual remittance exceeds some large number. Then, determine from Immigration, whether or not these folks exceeded 180 days of stay. Then, decide who to have a chat with. But, no -- a line item, or items, of non assessable income(s) on your tax return -- doesn't pass the smell test.

Why is explaining to you so difficult? I've already pointed out that the existing DTAs with Thailand have absolutely nothing in them dealing with Thailand's insistence that only remitted income is subject to the DTA language. This is a Thailand-only footnote, that when removed, will just have the DTA revert to its original intent -- covering ALL income in the specific category. The remittance footnote was just a convenience for Thailand, that had absolutely no affect on the DTA's purpose of preventing double taxation. Do me a favor -- read your country's DTA with Thailand, and show me where in it changes are required to bring this DTA up to speed to accommodate worldwide taxation. I guarantee you won't find any. Out of curiosity -- what is your background? You seem like a bright fella. Just curious about your work background. Fair enuf?

Geez, the poor guy admitted he knew his current non remittance situation had no tax implications. But, he wanted to know, per DTA, what he might expect IF and WHEN Thailand goes to world wide taxation. And, yes, that DTA will still be valid. What's wrong with preparing for potential occurrences .......? Gosh darn, he might even use a spreadsheet with any and all new found information...

A completely valid wangle, as existing DTAs will definitely govern how world wide taxation will be handled.

The DTAs with Thailand are all based on Model OECD and UN tax treaties, where you'll not find the phrase "remitted income." Check your country's DTA with Thailand, and you'll see the wording fits just fine with worldwide taxation. Remitted is just a footnote by Thailand to the income language in the DTAs, allowing a discount on that worldwide income that doesn't cross the Thai border. Thus, nothing needed to modify DTAs, if and when Thailand switches to worldwide taxation. And, I see no need to modify today's TEDAs either, if the remittance footnote goes away -- those TEDAs fit just fine with worldwide taxation. So, CM -- your spreadsheet drill should be pretty accurate for a worldwide taxation scenario.