Yumthai

https://www.rd.go.th/english/37745.html Section 17 In relation to tax return filing, it shall be filed within the time limit specified in the Chapters regarding taxes and in accordance with the form prescribed by the Director-General. https://www.rd.go.th/english/37746.html Section 35 Any person failing to comply with Sections 17, Sections 50 Bis, Sections 51 or Sections 69, unless in case of a force majeure, shall be subject to a fine not exceeding 2,000 Baht. IMHO, the Section 17 statement implies tax return shall be filed if there is taxable income. I can't find any reference of the 2,000 THB fine for not filing from the most prominent law firms. How come? Could the English version of the RD pages be mistranslated? If the fine for not filing statement is correct then all locals and foreigners must file, which is far from the case.

How unlucky... I'm pretty sure the thousands of Thai "girlfriends" who receive multiple remittances from their sponsor boyfriends do not pay any single satang of tax on that money. No need to declare up to HKD120,000 (US$15K) in/out HK.

That alone confirms that any remittance done in a year someone is non-resident for tax purposes is tax-free, regardless of tax residency when the money was earned.

The single one fine modality for not filing tax returns is given in the link from Sherrings you quote: "200% of the assessed amount of tax that is payable". No other penalty is mentioned. In other words, no tax due no fine.

LTR catches the upper middle class of the top tier countries with the highest incomes.

What you quote refers to UK (tax) residents having domicile outside UK, not UK people being non-residents for tax purposes. I think all non-residents for tax purposes Brits as @topt mentioned can confirm that they do not pay tax on their foreign-sources income even remitted in UK. I get your point. Thailand will have to amend its current tax and residence law in order to tax non-residents for tax purposes on their foreign-sourced income. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_taxation#cite_note-tj1-129 When sorting by "Taxes foreign income of non-resident citizens" column, few countries appear to tax foreign income under certain specific conditions/exceptions.

Source? Official information I can find online seems to indicate UK non-residents do not pay UK tax on their foreign-sourced income. Your UK residence status affects whether you need to pay tax in the UK on your foreign income. Non-residents only pay tax on their UK income - they do not pay UK tax on their foreign income. https://www.gov.uk/tax-foreign-income/residence

Except that US 1040-NR is related to Income Effectively Connected With U.S. Trade or Business (i.e. local income). AFAIK non-residents for tax purposes worldwide are (potentially) taxed on local-sourced income only. Is there any country that taxes its non-residents on foreign-sourced remittances? If Thailand is trying to do that, it would be a premiere.

That statement implies you are tax resident while bringing foreign-sourced income in any tax year (while being tax resident) into Thailand.

Here's a link "Cryptocurrency Tax and Frequently Asked Questions" from Bitkub. https://support.bitkub.com/en/support/solutions/articles/151000033321-cryptocurrency-tax-and-frequently-asked-questions There are 2 methods of cost calculation for crypto tax payment: Method 1: First in - first out method or FIFO Method 2: Moving average cost method 11. Can I choose the tax calculation method by myself or is there a requirement specified by the Revenue Department? Answer: You are free to choose the calculation method by yourself from the 2 provided by the Revenue Department. However, in 1 tax year, you will need to use only 1 method for the whole year for calculation. For example, if you used the FIFO method early this year, in the same year, you could use this method only. You would be able to change to the Moving Average Cost in the next year if you wish to change, or you could continue using the FIFO method. What do we learn? - It's related to crypto but we can assume that RD would recommend the same methods for other income tax calculation. - RD is aware of and recommends 2 cost calculation methods (and LIFO is not mentioned). - Taxpayer is free to choose the calculation method between the 2 provided.

They would not inquire on past tax calendar years unless audited. Then the simple answer will be: "I didn't file because I was not tax resident that year." No further question will be asked and no actions done because at this point and with the current law no penalty arises when remitting foreign-sourced income in a year you are not tax resident.

Anyone who is not tax resident in Thailand has nothing to prove to RD as his foreign-sourced remittances are tax-free and do not have to be declared.

A TIN for CRS/FATCA is never a requirement if the individual is legally not required to get one. Likewise, W-8BEN form contains the box 6b to check for those who are not legally required to obtain an FTIN from their jurisdiction of residence. Now, some financial institutions may have too picky internal policies. You are still free to vote with your feet.

Maybe it's time to move to more flexible and closer jurisdictions like priority/premium banking in Singapore or HK as they certainly have more understanding of a Thai resident situation. Hopefully decentralized blockchain adoption is on its way giving back his full money control to each individual.

Why would they close your account if you are legally exempted from tax and not required to have a TIN?

It could be implied but maybe it would be worth indicating that Thai-sourced income (and define it vs foreign-sourced) is always taxable in Thailand wherever it is received and regardless of the tax residence status.

Even if they wanted this is unenforceable according to the current Thai tax and residence law. The year you are tax resident you declare and pay tax on the previous year (1 single year) income. The year you are not tax resident remitted foreign-sourced income is not to be declared nor taxable.

I would write "receive income FROM inside or FROM outside Thailand" or simply "receive income within Thailand".

The way it is written is misleading as it is understood with "receive income inside or outside Thailand" that worldwide income is then taxable. "receive income inside or outside Thailand" is only valid for Thai-sourced income (Work performed in Thailand, Business in Thailand, Business of an employer in Thailand, Property located in Thailand). Foreign-sourced income must be remitted in Thailand in order to be taxed, and not taxable in Thailand if kept offshore (or remitted but tax exempted).

Possible, but the gifter should have already been known from the RD as TH taxpayer and Thai (tax) resident the year the gift occurs.

Agreed. Hence, it should be noted in the tax guide that: 53) Note: Only funds that are exempt from Thai tax or funds on which Thai tax has already been paid, can be Gifted. It is not possible to Gift funds that are assessable income, in order to avoid Thai tax. is an opinion/interpretation and not from Thai official source.

Yes, I consider paying 1M (5%) in tax negligible because the remaining 19M (that I will certainly make keep growing at more than 5% yearly over years) is more than enough to cover comfortably my family life. I'm not into collecting money for money, it's just a tool. But like you said, to each their own. I've lived in Bali. I'll choose Thailand anytime even if I had to pay 1M (5%) more in tax.

Nowadays working girls all accept PromptPay.

Indeed local income is always taxable, I was referring to foreign-sourced income remitted in Thailand legally tax-free while holding LTR visa.

Personaly, if I had 20M USD tax rates will not be the priority criteria I consider to select the place I want to live. Paying 1M USD in tax is 5%, will still have plenty of money to support a comfortable lifestyle almost anywhere in the world. Having to pay 5% (1K USD) on 20K USD would certainly be more concerning. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that tax is fair, just that legal tax loopholes should not exist only for the wealthiest ones.