thaibreaker

I am of course talking about those who actually know what they are talking about here. You know who, I suppose. Separate those from others. I got the answer I needed from one of those persons on this forum.

Thanks. But that's another topic, and has nothing to do with my question.

Thank you, just as I thought. Most appreciated.

I was asked by a friend yesterday if there was any 180 days limit a year rule for tourists in Thailand. My answer was no, there is not. Based on years of experience, you can certainly stay a longer period than 180 days a year, through a combination of tourist visas, SETV or METV, visa exemptions (30 days plus 30 days extensions) or visa on arrival (VOA). You can even get a maximum of 267 days on a METV alone, extended before it expires. Yet, I now see this misinformation is spreading at certain communities online, on Facebook and even on youtube. I understand that certain consulates, like the one at Savannakhet, might be imposing such "rule", but that doesn't mean there is an official rule, or that you can't obtain entries legally at other borders, by land or air, which give you extended days, weeks or months of stay (incl. two times by land). There sure are a lot of people currently on longer tourist stays this year alone. I do understand that anyone might be denied entry, based on their history, at the immigration officer's discretion, but I can't find this "rule" anywhere. I believe it was once an immigration rule, a long, long time ago, but it was quickly scrapped. Aseannow has the most qualified people online to answer that with certainty, but I'm sure I am right. A confirmation here would be most appreciated. Thank you.

Seriously, it was you who took it for granted that I lived in Thailand. I never said I did. I do balance my days well, spend months at the time in Thailand, but pay taxes in Norway, and have my home address there. For now. That might change, I will see. Again, my original post had nothing to do with you, it was a comment to the Brit, as I have stated. I asked him a question, and got the answer I needed from him. Then you came rushing in. Then I was only explaining to you how small the tax percent is in Norway for a 250k income. You did not seem to know. Zero percent. It is a reason every link and website does not include the trygdeavgift into the tax percent they present, as it is not considered a tax in that form. More of a membership of Norway, with all benefits, like free health care. There has been no fault in anything I have posted. If I strike you as not serious, you strike me as not a pleasant person. I did not need the lecture, nor did I ask for it. I am perfectly aware of Norwegian tax rules, and everything you have written. None of it was news to me.

It's 5.1 percent of pensions, not 7.4. I never said I was living in Thailand. I wrote I was living in Norway. For me it's not a problem to balance the days between Thailand and Norway, so I won't miss out on the membership of Folketrygden, free health care and such. It's too valuable to miss out on. My original post was aimed at the Brit who got a pension from Norway. I got the answer I was looking for, so I'm all good. Move on.

The percent you pay as a member of Folketrygden, called trygdeavgift, is not 7.4 percent for pensions. It is 5.1 percent. This is not included in the zero tax graphics in the link. The tax is zero percent up to 250.000. The trygdeavgift of 5,1 percent is considered more as a membership of all the goods Norway offer. ????That membership, I will personally do everything to keep that. It's voluntary if you live in Thailand, correct. It secures free health care and a lot more benefits. Btw, I am sure you know a lot about taxes. I have never said different. But I found your first two post very condescending, and also not entirely correct in my case (with low income). There are more people who knows a thing or two. Just saying.

Lol. It's you who don't know about taxes for lower income in Norway. Get down from your high horse, and read up. Start with the link above. It's never too late to learn something. In fact, a 65.000 baht pension income in Norway, equals to about 235.000 NOK. After all normal deductions everyone get is made, that will equal to zero tax in Norway. Zero. Of course I'm a "member" of Nav. I live in Norway. In Thailand I will have to pay taxes from that, based on the same numbers and deductions. I'm not even 65, and don't get the 190.000 baht deduction. That is, if this change will be forced upon us, which so far it hasn't. That 180/183 issue you are trying to make a number of, seriously.. It was a typo. And you jumped all over it. Don't be that guy, fellow Norwegian.

A better link for you here. Updated, and it shows 0 percent taxes up to 250.000 NOK pension, for 2023. 65.000 baht a month should equal around 235.000 NOK a year. That's my reality, as well as others with similar income, for me by choice (from 62 years old). Thailand can't compete with that. https://www.smartepenger.no/skatt/1905-skatteprosent-pa-pensjonsinntekt

Do that, and your marriage might not be so happily ever after.. Just sayin'.

Thank you for your answer. Of course, I perfectly understand if you are saving money doing so. So that makes a lot of sense. I only pay 1.7 percent tax in Norway on a 65.000 baht pension (by choice I take out a lower percentage of my pension for now), so I will have nothing to gain from it, quite the opposite. But it all shows that for now, this is an optional thing to do, as long as Thailand is not asking or forcing anyone to do it. I guess that might change, we will see. Wish you the best. Cheers.

You are just saying there is no 180 days rule, but in the same sentence confirming it. Seriously? Or was it the 183 (call it a typo) you were thinking about? As explained by the one I asked, you must individually compare what your tax will be in both countries. A tax from my pension, of 65.000 baht, which is very low all considered (the percentage of income is by choice for now, from 62), is in Norway 1.7 percent. That is my reality, you obviously have a different income, and so another reality. I was only comparing to the table shown in this thread, where the same income results in 20 percent tax in Thailand. That's a huge difference for me, and if I have to pay that, I can't afford living in Thailand on 65.000 baht. As said, the people I know don't go through it by choice. Because they have nothing to gain from it. But good for you if your income is a lot higher, but I still don't understand how you only can pay under 10 percent tax, in Thailand. It does not align with the table shown in this thread.

Thanks for telling us your situation. But may I ask, as a Norwegian myself, why do you choose to pay taxes in Thailand, since you already do pay taxes from your pension in Norway? I assume this is something you have chosen to do, and filled out all the needed forms for that purpose. Most retirees I know from Norway do not go through this, because it's so much hassle doing so, with all the paperwork before getting your refund. And then you are in best case status quo, or probably minus, with taxes and all the expenses you have had. Now, I do know the 183 days rule, but as far as I know, Thai authorities never ask for this pension to be taxed by Thailand. And since you pay full tax in Norway, most Norwegians just let this be. For me personally, the taxes are much higher in Thailand than Norwegian government deduct from my pension. So I just wonder. Why go through it. But kudos to you anyway, you are doing the right thing. And the right thing, is what scares a lot of people in this thread, to start paying Thai taxes for pension income, and go through all the hassle for a refund. Norway do have the same tax double agreement as 60 other countries, but with some small differences.

Far, far from it. In my country, the taxes on a 65.000 baht monthly pension, is under 2 %. Yes, you read that correctly. The question I might ask, is if these new rules will make you have to pay the dividend. That would be devastating for most foreigners.

A big change indeed, but if they do, they level with Malaysia's 90 days visa exempt. Many prefer Malaysia just for that. A similar rule in Thailand would boost tourism.

He just demonstrated it for you. When you leave after 3 days or whatever, you'll ask for a reentry permit. It costs 1000 baht. Then your issue is no longer an issue. I totally agree with others, your plan seems silly, most of all because, as Brit Tim explains, some immigration officers won't do what you ask, because they then may seem to "miss" your tourist visa sticker. Listen to both, and be sensible. A reentry permit is easy to get, and cheap. And btw, you are getting solid advice and answers here. Treat them as such.

I think what they meant to write there was "Bullman was" etc. Not "Killer was" etc. If they meant the latter, they surely would have put "The" in front. A mixup of words, me thinks.

I can. If you have a job that requires a lot of travelling, your passport may sometimes be caught up in the process of getting a visa, or such. That means you need a second passport to be available for you in the meantime, in case you haven't got your first one back. This is actually not uncommon where I live. I believe most countries issue a second passport if it's needed for your work.

Hard to disagree with that. You're spot on. Took me some time to pick my wife, but I think the only honest, hard working and humble woman in Thailand landed with me. Well, we all think that, don't we ????

I have another story from when I was caught for overstaying my visa a long time ago, and sent to IDC. On the second day we stood before a judge to pay our fines of 3000 baht, to avoid 60 days real jail time in a Thai prison, instead of being sent back to IDC. To get that money, the immigration officer who escorted us from IDC to the court, escorted us to the nearest ATM to withdraw our funds. Unfortunately my card did not work with this bank. I knew it as soon o saw which bank this ATM represented. I asked the immi officer if there was any way he could take me to another ATM. Not a chance. Then I asked him if he could borrow me the 3000 baht, and I would pay him back 6000 baht on our way back to IDC. He actually trusted me, and I did escape jail that day. On our way back we stopped at another ATM bank, I withdrew what I promised, and paid him back double. Now, that is something I never expected an immi officer would ever do. He could easily have lost his money, if I wasn't keeping my word. He had no guarantees, I could be desperate enough to do anything to stay out of that Thai prison, and screwed him over. I would of course never do that, but he didn't know that.