Jump to content

Thai gov. to tax (remitted) income from abroad for tax residents starting 2024 - Part I


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

, I do not know for certain that banks are reporting inbound remittances to the RD, but I do know for certain that other forms of income such as interest income (there's that word again) are because the RD knows these amounts when I go to do my tax return.

Only if you have given your TIN to the bank.

Most people don't do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Lorry said:

Only if you have given your TIN to the bank.

Most people don't do that. 

You may at some point in the future need to give your bank your TIN to keep the account open bearing in mind the BoT being stricter about non resident accounts. SCB won't open a bank account now without a TIN. You may need a TIN in order to keep the account open in order to be able to show financial proof at extension time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Yes, it's in English, it says INCOME!

 

I'd take a picture of showing the bank app but I only have one phone!! 

I was also wondering about that and thank you for this additional information.

 

I have a strong feeling that "INCOME" on your bank statement is UOB's shorthand for "incoming remittance" and that it is not used to mean "income" in the context of tax laws and regulations.

 

The systems of the Thai banks I currently use look quite advanced to me, but I hate the lack of clear and complete information I am given for incoming remittances. A couple of years ago, I got a deposit to my account without any clue to who the sender was. I wrote to the bank to ask for this information and was told that they could not give it to me. Also the message for the beneficiary the sender puts on his payment order to his bank is never transmitted to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

If you want to stop with holding tax on the first 20k of interest, you must give the bank your TIN, at least I had to.

Yes, that's how it works.

 

In the cases where a bank is withholding tax — like in my case — they obviously have to report the amount of withheld tax to the RD and remit it to them. Sometimes, I wonder what additional information information, eg my name and the amount of interest paid to me, also gets sent to the RD.

Edited by Puccini
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would there be any upside to getting a Thai citizenship? Or is it basically same same? More hassle vs. tax authorities?

 

And

 

If one had three passports - two of countries having a tax agreement with Thailand, the other...don't think so - would you have to use the same passport for immigration and tax ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, paddypower said:

I am comfortable that the amount of pension receipts we remit to Thailand annually does not exceed the total of our personal health insurance premiums (inpatient only,) outpatient costs and prescription costs. I think we're ok, when filing our joint Thai tax returns annually.

As previously mentioned, the allowance for health insurance premium paid (per actual expenditure) as documented by receipts from a health insurance company doing business in Thailand is 25k each per year. This amount is deductible from the amount of pension income remitted. But you can't short-cut the process by presenting payment for health insurance instead of pension income -- that is a false declaration = perjury. You remit assessable income from pension, then you pay for health insurance with those funds, which are then deduct from the amount of the income remitted.

 

If you directly remit funds to pay your health insurance premiums to a company doing business in Thailand, it could be characterized as income by the RD, if they interpret the remittance as the UK does under its' remittance-based taxation system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JimGant said:

Labelled by whom? If you send a Wise transfer, you're saying it's labelled as income? Makes no sense -- how would anybody in Thailand know it's income, if sent from one of your financial institution's accounts? Only if it's a direct deposit from, say, a pension payment -- would it have the flavor of income. But even here, it may not be income for Thai tax purposes (think: exempt due to DTA). So, labeling it "income" serves no purpose as far as the RD is concerned.

 

And, labeling all incoming remittances as "income" would push all FDI to other countries.

 

So, no, they're not going to label all remittances as income (which, if the obvious escaped you, would include FDI's) So logic and logistical common sense would dictate they're restricted to: PIT collection depends on taxpayers' faithful and full declaration of income in their PIT returns. Yes, sample audits for compliance may occur in larger numbers. And, FATCA and CRS reporting may increase the spotlight on compliance.

 

But for Americans, nothing changes, since we're already taxed on our worldwide income. Possibly Thai RD may fine tune the DTA, and figure out that Thailand (per DTA) had "primary tax authority" on my IRA payout. Ok, then this is where "faithful and full declaration" comes in, and I need to file a Thai tax return, declaring my IRA payout as assessable income for Thai tax purposes. Then, I take this tax payment as a credit against my US taxes -- and break even in my overall tax payment situation (note: for high five figure income, Thai tax MAY BE higher than US, and the difference has to be eaten -- not a huge number, however).

 

So, fellow Yanks. Go watch the NFL, and let the others worry about, hey, there may be taxes in their future.

I am not sure it matters whether the recipient Thai bank labels an inbound remittance as income or something else. That is an internal matter for the bank. The RD expects tax residents to declare income by themselves. They may get details of remittances from banks but I think the bank description of income probably just means inflow.  If it is over 50 USD or used to be that much, the bank has to ask you for the purpose, but not the source, and report to the BoT (not the RD).  The choices for foreigners are I think living expenses, purchase of condo etc.  I was told by the bank officer that loan was not acceptable for foreigners but OK for Thais. If under that amount, it seems to just slide straight into your bank acount with no questions asked.  Of course it will be very easy for the RD to get details of all remittances to individual accounts. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2023 at 3:32 PM, bugger bognor said:

still a lot of delusional expats debating a non story my prediction of 200 pages of crap by Xmas looks like an underestimate , the law HASTNT changed and has been in place for decades!!!! A Statement of 2 paragraphs by an Advisory board has got you loosing your small minds, nothing will change for 99,9% Of all expats, A top legal firm in Bangkok has quoted it would need up to 30000 pages of legislation written up to implement the kind of taxation you fear so much it would also need 1000s of new staff to deal with it is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOR ANOTHER DECADE AT LEAST mark my words,and even if t did happen if you can't work out how easy it would be to avoid tax you DESERVE TO PAY IT , 

It was not from an advisory board. It was from the director-general of the RD. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There might be some communication issues about "labelling" that could cause confusion.

 

When you transfer funds out of Thailand through a Thai bank, they are required to ask you the purpose of the transfer of funds -- to enter into a form to report to the Bank of Thailand.  So this way of labelling answers the question: What will the funds be used for?  For example: living expenses, education expenses, purchase condominium, etc.

 

When we do our own transfers to remit fund into Thailand, we can usually add notes to the wire transfer with SWIFT. So we could label according to the purpose of using the funds, or we could specify the source, such as: pension, annuity, etc.  

 

When documenting remittances, we need to be clear whether labelling by purpose or source of funds transferred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, sometime said:

Are they short sighted, the more they take off the expats in tax the less the expats will spend so less for the working Thai people, even bringing money in to buy a new car will be taxable.

Nobody other than the doom mongers have suggested that would happen, I think there is zero percent chance that it would.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JimTripper said:

Hello, Do I need to file taxes next year? Thanks for your help.

Without knowing your financial situation, your nationality, your age, how much money your transferred into Thailand, from what source or how many days you spent in Thailand this year, I'd say the answer is maybe!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Morch said:

Would there be any upside to getting a Thai citizenship? Or is it basically same same? More hassle vs. tax authorities?

 

And

 

If one had three passports - two of countries having a tax agreement with Thailand, the other...don't think so - would you have to use the same passport for immigration and tax ?

 

The Revenue Code doesn't distinguish between nationalities and set different rules for each of them, it only distinguishes between tax resident and not tax resident based on the number of days spent in Thailand each year. Obtaining Thai citizenship, if you could even get it in the first place, is therefore unlikely to change very much regarding your tax position.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

The Revenue Code doesn't distinguish between nationalities and set different rules for each of them, it only distinguishes between tax resident and not tax resident based on the number of days spent in Thailand each year. Obtaining Thai citizenship, if you could even get it in the first place, is therefore unlikely to change very much regarding your tax position.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Question is, are you going to file a tax return and declare it? Because if not, there probably isn't an issue, unless of course it's seriously big money. And if you and you declare it as savings, assuming you even need to do that, the fact the money has been in the account for a very long time should be sufficient to prove it was savings.

 

 

Thanks very much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Yumthai said:

Some data:

https://www.worldeconomics.com/National-Statistics/Informal-Economy/United Kingdom.aspx

The size of United Kingdom's informal economy is estimated to be 10.3% which represents approximatly $358 billion at GDP PPP levels.

The size of Thailand's informal economy is estimated to be 46.2%.

Thanks - I always suspected that.

If anyone thinks that the Thai Govt is not going to see that and try to get additional taxes from all tax residents in Thailand, to pay for all the election promises etc., then they are very much mistaken.  This new change is a step in that direction - and if any Expat thinks it will absolutely 'not apply to me', then they are very mistaken twice. Only if and when the Thai RD issues clarifications and exemptions that specifically state that money brought into Thailand by long-stay Expats is not taxable income (given certain conditions), such as Malaysia and Philippines and others have done, then it would be wise not to ignore this matter and assume it will go away. Hopefully the Thai RD clarifications and exemptions will be issued soon, or they delay implementation like Malaysia did, but until then IMO it is best to 'watch this space'. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

If anyone thinks that the Thai Govt is not going to see that and try to get additional taxes from all tax residents in Thailand, to pay for all the election promises etc., then they are very much mistaken.

That is not the point. Their issue is law enforcement and corruption.

Until proven otherwise, numbers speak for themselves: Thailand is still not able to enforce tax laws nor get rid of "workarounds".

 

Anyone can speculate this will change in the coming years, Thailand becoming Singapore.

Choose your side and plan accordingly.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

There is a basic law of economics. 

You subsidize things you want more of

You tax things you want less of

You  tax things like gas guzzling cars, cigarettes, alcohol, in part to reduce the purchase of them.  

There is an old adage that Be Careful What You Wish For Because It May Come True

About the time that there is a diminished expatriate population in Thailand and the taxi drivers, hospitals, restaurants, condo developements etc also don't have customers, only then will the politicians realize that for every action there is a reaction and in this case I suggest Thailand not the foreigner who chooses not to come will be the loser. 

That was a quote from Reaganomics rather than long basic law of economics, In practise, in Thailand, subsidies are a way of supporting the poor and rural population, taxes are something that other people pay. Thailand's tax system has always been supported by the wealthy and by corporates, and of course the tax that everyone pays, VAT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...