jayboy

I agree that the original post is hard to decipher but your interpretation of it seems correct. In my view there needs to be applied a degree of common sense to this subject, and it's simply inappropriate to describe the use of offshore cards for Thailand services as "tax evasion", not least because there's no certainty payment would be made out of taxable income.It all depends on the circumstances particularly the frequency and intent.As far as the Thai RD department is concerned I would be astonished if they had any problem with a retired expatriate occasionally using an offshore card - not that they would ever know, at least for the foreseeable future.

I was wondering whether it will be necessary to isolate the interest earned on pre-2024 savings.Most people with cash holdings tend to roll up the interest and capital on maturity of the deposit's term.Under the new dispensation pre 2024 savings are not taxable and indeed apparently do not even have to be declared on a Thai tax return if remitted.But the interest component is surely taxable and would be difficult to disentangle.

Copter sounds fun

Not sure the media in Thailand has done a decent job in explaining the issues.In contrast the top Bangkok based firms have been helpful.For example https://www.mazars.co.th/Home/Insights/Doing-Business-in-Thailand/Tax/Revenue-Department-s-guidance-on-foreign-income Interesting to note the Mazars view based on RD announcements that income earned before 2024 does NOT have to be declared on tax return.Don't think this has been dealt with specifically on this forum. I'm not sure how interest on cash deposits arranged before 2024 would be treated.I suppose it's just another reminder to ensure comprehensive records are kept in case RD has any questions. Still not sure whether tax resident who funds entirely from non taxable pre-2024 sources needs to file a return at all.

To be frank this often applies to the sex tourists who visit Pattaya

Are you suggesting that the inhabitants of Gaza do not support the Hamas terrorist leadership? If so surely they should be assisting the Israelis in destroying Hamas. If there is however a wide measure of support then the Israeli campaign seems justified.

From their <deleted>ty corporate websites, one can hazard a guess

Would you? I looked at the respective corporatewebsites of the speakers at this event - deeply unimpressive and , though I could be wrong, likely to be the usual bottom feeders on bewildered foreigners. I would suggest rely on the tried and tested Bangkok firms - Mazars, Price Waterhouse etc

Many years ago when British Airways was still a well regarded airline its Chairman,Sir John King, was on a business trip from London to New York flying First Class.He heard from the crew that there had been some overbooking and that unfortunately a First Class passenger had had to be consigned to the back of the plane.He immediately got up collected his bags and told the crew to switch him with the aggrieved passenger.His view that paying passengers should always get priority over BA staff however exalted they were.So Sir John went cattle class to New York that day. A year or so ago I told this story to a Thai friend who was very familiar with TG.His reaction was that not only would TG managers find the story hard to believe but they would completely fail to understand the mindset of Sir John and the priority he gave to paying passengers.Sir John was no shrinking violet.He was a self made hard as nails businessman and could be ruthless - but he understood the important things.

Slightly off topic bit I've been wondering about the 13 digit numbers on the TINs.Somewhere I've seen a useful breakdown of how these numbers are allocated for foreigners - but I can't track it down.Can any one help?

I have no idea what this word salad is meant to convey.It doesn't really address any of the specific issues raised.Anyway enough is enough - for me anyway - and the position on tax returns in the past is I think now clear enough.It would be ungracious not to acknowledge Mike's work on the tax issue in general for this forum.I do appreciate if one has for years submitted tax returns albeit unnecessarily and as part of tiny minority one looks for ways to justify it.Fair enough - it's not a big deal

Nobody has said otherwise Nobody has suggested this Simply not true.You simply don't have the evidence to support this. A decent lawyer unlike a "by the books" accountant understands the art of the possible. I'm intrigued, though only mildly because the issue isn't really active, why you keep digging yourself further into a hole.

The Revenue Code content is well known and has not changed for many years.Thailand was quite correct to address the anomaly particularly as current and past taxable income was obviously fungible. However we are talking about tax returns.For the group under discussion - defined in my posts - it is wrong to suggest they must submit a tax return for 2023 even if they remitted last year from current income.They will need to in the future almost certainly. The objective on this forum should be to give sound practical advice - often to people who don't have much experience in tax matters.The fact that some submitted returns in the past is not relevant.

Misleading advice in my view and I think he is well aware of that.If in doubt check with top tier accountancy firms - though it's all rather pointless now.We know what revenue code says but as in every jurisdiction there is a need to know practical implications. For avoidance of doubt we are talking about a specific group of expatriates - retired, no Thai income, resident 180 days+. As we all know situation changes - in practical terms - in 2024 tax year.

Please be aware that there are different opinions on 'who needs to file this year'. The consensus view is that resident retirees with no Thai income do not but they may well have to next year depending on their circumstances.

And digging into this rather strange response, I note you finally seem to accept you are out on a limb.Ben said 1% which I suppose could be true though he, you and I don't really know.What is indisputable fact is that the vast majority don't. Such a pity as it's water under the bridge now.

Did these foreigners share their financial details with you? Many foreigners have Thai investments and business interests.Of course they would file tax returns.

Agreed and you are in the vanguard of providing an excellent information base on this subject (future tax obligations of resident expatriates). But in this instance the subject was past filings and here you have been misleading.The vast majority of resident pensioner expatriates with no Thai income have not been filing returns.None of the major accounting firms in Bangkok nor the RD itself recommended this. Please give it a rest.Most of us know the technical position.

In the circumstances the word 'theoretically' is absolutely appropriate.

I know of at least two people who have recently acquired a TIN not so much because of the recent tax change but because their banks in Jersey and Isle of Man were making ominous noises they would be trouble ahead if they didn’t have one.

Once again no informed person is saying that.Ignorant and poorly briefed people put forward a great deal of foolish things - we need not spend too much time on them.I also take your general point.However on the particular issue of past filings there is a rather common Thai twist - there was a technical requirement not reflected in practical implementation.That situation has now changed - not as you have pointed out in the legal substance - and a different approach is now required.None of this really needs explaining to those have had long experience of doing business in Thailand.Planning laws are a rather good example of this.

I think most informed people (including me and everyone I know in Thailand) knew very well that overseas income was taxable and strictly speaking a return should be filed.But they were also aware of the current year income/previous years income distinction.They also knew that overseas income was fungible.They knew that RD did not expect the category under consideration to file returns.And on the whole they didn't.The change is as you point out is rather small but it is important as it tips the balance for affected resident expatriates to file returns from now on - probably.

Mike, you have done a fantastic job on this forum in clarifying the new tax situation - to the extent this can be done on existing knowledge.The Memorandum you produced was an excellent piece of work, though obviously still work in progress. However you are simply not representing the position accurately regarding filing tax returns in the past by most resident expats, and I am particularly referring to retired expats who spend more than half the year in the Kingdom and have no income of any kind generated in Thailand.. You might argue that they should have filed - but overwhelmingly they have not.The situation has changed now, in part due to Common Reporting Standards with information sharing by international banks.So we must comply and the vast majority will.But there is no penalty for not having filed in previous years. I was employed as a senior manager in India and then in Thailand and in both countries paid income tax - couldn't avoid it actually (PAYE). Couldn't have obtained Thai Permanent Residence without paying years of income tax. Since retirement I have never filed a tax return because I had no domestic income but I will almost certainly file for the 2024 tax year.This is also the case for most people in my situation.A couple of friendsmade inquiries of RD a few years ago and were told it was not necessary - no Thai income. Call it the Nelson Touch. So in my opinion you are completely out on a limb on this aspect.It's not really even up for debate.You will certainly say that your punctilious adherence to the letter of the law trumps the actual practice of most retired expatriate residents.Perhaps it does.It's really just a minor detail but if there is misleading information or deviation from reality in just a small part, there's a danger of the whole being tainted. As Falstaff said, Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?

That is in fact what I was referring to, the separate offshore presences - usually based in the Channel Islands.I assumed the original poster was referring to Barclay's equivalent. Having said that my feeling is that even these off shore entities flirt with debanking customers who don't measure up for one reason or another.

That's my understanding also.As it happens, my pre -31.1.24 savings are mostly in Channel Islands cash deposits with a major UK bank.A cut off accounts statement as at 31.12.23 is therefore available, and it seems v.probable that remittances to Thailand from this source will be exempt from tax.so far so good and therefore my main concern is whether future remittances from this source are assessable for Thai tax, and whether they need to be entered in a Thai tax return.Don't mind either way but obviously would prefer the route with less paperwork.