OJAS

"An medical insurance is required for every retirement extension if it is based on a original Non-OA visa (Issued at the Thai Embassy in your home country)" Does the above extract from your quote mean that Phuket are now enforcing the insurance requirement for retirees who originally entered Thailand on the basis of a non-OA visa issued before October 2019 (when this requirement was first introduced)? Thusfar they have been the only office who have not insisted on this requirement being complied with in these circumstances!

Ah, yes, the Land Of The Unbroken Toilet known as the UK - if you can find one, that is!

I don't find trips with my family particularly boring, thank you very much. Certainly nowhere near as boring as reading threads on here originated by posters complaining about boring family trips!

Yep, transfers from the UK seem generally to go smoothly - and that is my personal experience as well. Where there are negative issues with Wise, these seem to relate to transfers originating in Australia (as graphically illustrated by this thread), the USA or mainland Europe.

It would appear that website links are no longer displayed on here as hyperlinks (i.e. in blue & underlined). Any reason for this, please? In addition has Forum Support now bitten the dust? Could find no evidence of its current existence after an extensive search!

In proving your tax residency status in Thailand (as pointed out by @oldcpu), your tax office will probably be reliant on the IMM stamps in your passport in practice. So definitely have your passport (+ copies of relevant pages) on you when you visit them. More generally, I would strongly advise you to have a native Thai speaker accompany you on any trip to your office. The grasp of English among TRD office staff tends to be next-to-zero (certainly that was the case in my local office when I obtained a TIN there a few months ago). In addition, they may require from you a completed form in Thai* - which, thankfully, my wife was on hand to do the honours in my case! * https://www.rd.go.th/fileadmin/tax_pdf/request/lp10.1_110355.pdf

I edited my original posting while you were replying to it!

150k THB should be fully covered by TEDA's as things stand.

But to describe the replacement doc as a "single, generic, worldwide DTA" is IMHO a complete misnomer since we would, in effect, be talking about a taxation diktat which Thailand has seen fit to impose unilaterally on the international community. And, were Thailand foolish enough to bin all existing 61 DTA's, it had better IMHO brace itself for a severe backlash from the international community, which might well take the form of harsh economic sanctions aimed at bringing the country to its knees.

This would involve a herculean effort on the international stage. Thailand has entered into no fewer than 61 DTA's with other countries*, each of which would need to be renegotiated on a bilateral basis. And for Thailand to seek complete unanimity from these 61 countries on a consistent approach in future DTA's with each of them would almost certainly, in any event, prove easier said than done to achieve in practice. * https://www.rd.go.th/english/766.html

Depends on its source in your home country. If covered by its DTA with Thailand (e.g. UK Government occupational pensions) then no tax liabililty here in LOS.

A case of the local office making up their own rules (but to your benefit, for a change!), perhaps?

IMHO anyone considering a switch to marriage extensions should weigh up the likely risk in their case of being faced with the same sort of tragic situation as faced the OP of the following thread:

That would appear to imply that it would be pointless for the TRD to continue with the PND91 form since no-one would be able to use it in practice!

That load of "crap",as you choose to call it, has, in fact, proved invaluable to me (and no doubt to many others on here as well) in getting to grips with the whole complex taxation issue. If you find yourself getting tripped up by the TRD as a result of a dogged determination and refusal to read it, then I, for one, won't be shedding any tears for you!

Did you not receive a letter from the DWP back in 2019 advising you of the rate at which your SP was to be paid (which then, of course, was to be frozen for ever and ever amen while you were in Thailand)? EDIT: I am, of course, assuming that, not only did you become eligible for the SP in 2019, but you also actually claimed it then (in my case I became eligible in 2014 but didn't actually claim until 2015 so as to get at least 1 triple-lock increase under the belt)!

And that in turn begs a further question - namely, that, if tax returns relating to remitted pension income have to be filed on a PND90, what would the TRD's view be if and when such income were eventually taxed at source (i.e. on the basis of the date a pension was earned) instead, with remittances no longer entering the frame? If the TRD were happy for "at source" pension income to be reported on a PND91, having previously insisted on remitted income being reported on a PND90, that would IMHO be taking crass illogicality to an extreme level!

That would surely mean that only those who were solely in receipt of Thai pensions (or other Thai income from employment) would be able to file on the basis of the PND91 form, would it not?

If your sole source of assessable income is the UK State Pension (as it is in my case), I would have thought that the answer to your question was unhesitatingly in the affirmative!

Well I for one am not prepared to engage myself, through my wife, in a potentially lengthy and convoluted discussion solely in the Thai language with my local office (because no-one there speaks English), which would almost certainly prove inconclusive (and, hence, a complete waste of our time) in any event. PND91 is the form which, as far as I am concerned, I need to complete, given that my sole source of assessable income is the UK State Pension, and I see no reason why I should now be expected to get my head around the far more complicated PND90 form, given the relatively small amount by way of assessable income involved in my case, which is fully covered by TEDA's in any event. So I'm still planning to file on the basis of the PND91, and shall take it from there. But many thanks for forwarding an extremely useful document in my case.

Might be worth his while adding a further month retrospectively, on the off-chance that he encounters a rogue officer who is labouring under the misapprehension that 800k seasoning still starts 3 months before application date.

Precisely what does this term mean? Occupational pensions and/or government pensions like the UK State Pension? The UK figure appears at first glance to be the current State Pension triple-lock one, but how can we be sure that like is being compared with like in the case of this and the remaining countries' figures stated? As @topt has stated, we really do need a link clarifying the sources of these figures - and confirming that they have not been arbitrarily plucked out of the air.

Who were Wise's partner bank in this instance? BKKB themselves or Kasikorn?

Link confirming this assertion, please.

Nothing among all the Euro-waffle contained in the OP that I can see, which states clearly and unambiguously precisely on which specific grounds those Brussels-based charlatans consider that the UK has not complied FULLY (in block capitals for emphasis) with said provisions.