jayboy

Deplorable though the war on drugs was, particularly its brutal implementation, there is reason to believe that very many of the murdered 2500 were criminally involved in the drug trade.None of them deserved to die in this way but it's striking how some restrict their concern to the alleged drug dealers' families and friends (many of whom were criminals though many were not) but there never seems to be any mention or concern for the hundreds of thousands of Thais whose lives have been blighted or ended by this disgusting trade.It probably explains why most Thais of all classes supported the campaign.

And people still say Pattaya has no class.

Is this part of the Business Times article correct?, " What’s clear for now is that the tweaked tax ruling will go into effect on Jan 1, 2024, which means it applies to foreign income earned after Jan 1, 2023." Surely it should be foreign income earned after Jan 1, 2024? The Mazars tax partner sums up the position accurately, Actually though not mentioned tax clearance procedures on departure also remain on the books though thankfully not enforced. I don't understand your last sentence.Being a tax resident has nothing to do with taking advantage of Thai hospitality.Obviously foreigners living in Thailand should respect the law.

You must have had astonishingly high levels of savings to make the claiming of interest worth the while, since interest rates offered by Thai banks have been abysmal for years. And you didn't learn the meaning of tax evasion? You're too hard on yourself.You didn't do anything wrong (apart from the pointless virtue signalling.)

If I may say so you're just digging yourself in deeper.Also you don't seem to understand the meaning of tax evasion.If you want to give yourself a pat on the back for voluntarily filing tax returns in the past by all means do so.But it's more productive for forum members to understand real and practical requirements going forward - so let's concentrate on that rather than pointless and irrelevant virtue signalling. Incidentally if you got entangled in the Thai tax net in the past there presumably must have been a reason.Was it to claim tax back on deposits in Thai banks? If so do you understand the meaning of "de minimis"?

Don't be so defensive.Nobody is criticizing those who quite unnecessarily filed Thai tax returns when not expected to do so.The fact that you compare not filing a return in the past as akin to drunk driving suggest you may have lost a sense of perspective.

I don't think you are suggesting otherwise but to be clear that is the expected position as from 1.1.24 not the position previously existing.In practice the vast majority of expatriate residents not employed in Thailand did not file returns with the RD.The RD turned a blind eye to this or at least did not take action.Quite why the tiny number of expat residents with no Thai income felt the urge to file returns is anyone's guess.Even now it's not really clear whether all expatriates will be required to file (eg low income pensioners). Furthermore despite RD clarification there are countless questions how "assessable income" will be treated or indeed what comprises "assessable income". My hunch is that this will all become much clearer over the next 12 months.

The mystery is why any travelers patronize duty free shops at all in Thailand, whether on departure or on arrival.The price of wine, spirits and beer is not materially cheaper than downtown outlets.The service is generally surly and incompetent.The main corporate provider, King Power, is a pile of s**t and widely disliked in Thailand by foreigners and locals alike.

You make some very good points, in particular drawing attention to the credentials and added value - particularly RD experience - of the Thai professionals working there.I have now looked at their website.Everything looks kosher.I wonder what their charges are. My position is that information supplied by the RD so far doesn't really need a professional spin/explanation because the whole initiative remains work in progress and the announcements are easily understood (though I recognize some on this forum might disagree). All that might change as we move forward.In summary I agree your comments in full with the caveat that legislative developments are rarely if ever conducted transparently in Thailand.

No they really aren't.The benchmark is that of a well informed layman, not of some frazzled pensioner.Anybody with a working brain can understand the RD's pronouncements on this matter. I'm not just kicking up the sand here.We will have to await the practical aspects over the next year or so, what to be included in filings or even whether to file at all etc.At the moment we are in the realm of speculation. When all is clear specialist firms will certainly have a role.

You are aware presumably that this small tax consultancy firm - which I have no reason to believe isn't competent - have at this moment no more knowledge of how these developments will pan out in practice than any well informed layman?

That's obvious.More to the point, you seem to be a patsy swallowing the lie propagated time and time again that any politician challenging the unelected elites who run Thailand must be guilty of some "crime" - anything will do - blocking their advance (and the aspirations of the Thai people). In this instance the wheel has turned and it suits the gangsters (oligarchs,generals, feudalists etc) in charge to rehabilitate Yingluck. Whether their strategy will work is anybody's guess.

Those "excuses sound completely plausible to me.Perhaps you are just talking for those who are cash strapped and with too much time on their hands.

And good luck to him with the stringent medical examination required to resume his US commercial pilot license.

What am I missing here? How in the future (ie from 1.1.24) can money earned before 1.1.24 be remitted in the year of earning?

One of the many points that needs to be clarified.

Correct, and I would suggest that those that do are essentially in a holding pattern, perhaps remitting funds sufficient for 2024 but not much more.It wouldn't make sense as matters stand to remit more than one year's subsistence to Thailand because (a) there is still too much uncertainty on exactly what is proposed and (b) investments/cash holdings acquired prior to 1.1.24 would be exempt from tax anyway.

What has this to do with the subject? The vast majority of resident expatriates do not falsify their position with their home countries nor do they intend to evade tax responsibilities in Thailand.

You don't speak for the "rest of us", so tone down the rhetoric.The reality is that many resident expatriate retirees, quite legally, have not up to now been paying Thai income tax.Most realize that for the tax year 2024 they will probably have to, although many details still remain unclear.There is no psychological barrier and I'm assuming that most will do what is required to remain within the law.You have jumped the gun by filing prematurely but that's your choice and obviously I don't know your personal circumstances. Incidentally your "decide whether to leave or stay" spiel misses the mark.Most of us are not floating wanderers seeking the most attractive fiscal regime but wholly committed to Thailand.Unlike you some of us have permanent residence or even citizenship We will obey the law and seek to minimize tax paid.

I think what is most daunting is the prospect of paying tax in a case where none was payable before - not some anxiety at the process involved. There are always some clerical types who will get off on completing the paperwork.Happy Christmas to them. Yes I'm sure RD bureaucrats were super helpful to eager foreigners especially those naive enough to insist on making tax returns when it wasn't really necessary.Let's see how helpful they are when it is actually necessary.

As I have already tried to explain, an infrastructure has developed - hotels, supporting services, golf, Bangkok weekenders etc so that Pattaya has a momentum of its own and has in fact for several decades.But the truth is, which even major hoteliers don't deny, that it was built on prostitution. I can think of other places round the globe which more discretely perhaps had the same kind of origin.What's unique to Pattaya is the mainly very downmarket clientele.Look at the farang influencers who promote Pattaya on social media.I mean just look at them.

Don't confuse the economic development of the Eastern Seaboard with the prostitution driven economic activity of Pattaya.

It began as a small fishing village but its growth and reputation were driven by prostitution.It's true that Thais and for that matter non monger expatriates from Bangkok given the short distance use its hotels/golfing infrastructure at weekends - but there is not much of a long term sophisticated resident Thai or farang community.The dominant Thai influence on Pattaya's administration is essentially criminal in nature.

You make some fair points and obviously there are going to be exceptions, no doubt many. However Pattaya is a resort built on prostitution and that is the reality.The judging by Soi Nana/Cowboy argument doesn't really work because Bangkok is built on so much else and has a sophisticated and educated middle class.

But the vast majority of people who actually live there and not on monger holiday are former mongers or reformed mongers. I've no objection to the Sin City concept but the sheer dreariness and vulgarity is hard to stomach.