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

[stat]

15 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

This comes back to the old issue of whether Gift tax can be used to escape assessible tax on income. I don't believe a person can remit assessible income as a Gift to avoid paying Thai PIT on that income because the loss to Revenue is too great, potentially it reduces the tax from 35% to 5% or even 0%..

Of course one can not be liable for PIT, as seen by the numerous examples given in the press who only did not pass as gifts because there was a 2 year gap between wedding and gift. Your arguments are non existing as the other loophole remitting earned income in another year was far bigger and no one cared for decades.

 

 

[stat]

7 hours ago, Lorry said:

NOooo

The gifter HAS received the money,  and then gifts it.

One cannot gift money one has not received first.

And one receives it as a salary from one's work, as capital gains, whatever. 

When one receives it one has to pay tax on it.

How one then uses the money (buy beer, gift it to Thai wife, whatever), is irrelevant for ones taxes.

 

Money Mr X gets is tax-free if Mr X got this money as a gift from a relative. 

Talking about Mr X's tax-burden here.

Not talking about the relatives tax-burden.

 

A practical example:

Noi works at True call center, 35,000 per month

Daeng is a manager at a bank branch, 60,000 per month

Pat is an executive at a company, 120,000 per month

Som is a surgeon at a private hospital,  350,000 per month

Tik is a smart investor and makes about 1m a month

 

They all gift all their income to their parents.  According to your logic, they all wouldn't pay any taxes. 

Thais would have found out about this tax-avoidance scheme a long time ago.

I will have to ask some Thais whether this works.  Unfortunately,  I don't know Tik, the smart investor, and Som might be reluctant to talk about her taxes. Noi probably knows nothing... Anybody can help here?

 

What @Mike Teaveemeans is, basically you can deduct up to 10m resp. 20m for gifts for relatives from your taxable income. 

The opposite opinion is, only the giftee doesn't have to pay taxes on gifts.

Any middle class Thai or Thai tax adviser should know the answer...

 

Your are missing some vital distinctions. All the examples have to pay TH PIT no matter what they do with their money afterwards.

[oldcpu]

11 hours ago, Yumthai said:

Ignorance is bliss.

 

Well if you wish to adopt a 'wait and see' until the sky falls -  and call those who don't think the sky will fall as blissfully ignorant, feel free to so so.   I will keep laughing and I suspect many others will also.   lol !!

 

I prefer to deal in facts.  A Thai Royal decree has a lot more 'weight' in my books than your provocation and exaggeration.

 

11 hours ago, Yumthai said:

My comment on LTR is a bit exaggerated and provocative,....

 

Regardless ... You stated what you stated -  on this forum where an underlying view of MANY is that Thailand wants to get at foreigners money, and that makes that exaggeration and provocation very very laughable. 

 

Once again I prefer to deal in facts.  A Thai Royal decree has a lot more 'weight' in my books than your provocation and exaggeration.

[gk10012001]

so a new arrival wants to start the non imm O visa process and then do extensions due to retirement over 55.  I decide to put 800 k baht on deposit instead of the monthly transfer method. (USA citizen).  So now Thailand would want to tax that fairly large amount of money that I put on deposit just for visa purposes!

[Lorry]

2 hours ago, gk10012001 said:

so a new arrival wants to start the non imm O visa process and then do extensions due to retirement over 55.  I decide to put 800 k baht on deposit instead of the monthly transfer method. (USA citizen).  So now Thailand would want to tax that fairly large amount of money that I put on deposit just for visa purposes!

Yes.

 

Actually, I am tempted to buy a condo for a good price,  3.3m (normal price 3.6m to 3.8m)

But I fear I have to explain to the RD why the money I use is not assessable income.

And the discussion of gift tax has made one thing very clear: we know absolutely nothing about how the RD thinks and how things will play out. We are just guessing.

So if the RD doesn't accept my reasoning,  the condo price would be 4.4m, not a good price anymore. 

I am not sure how to proceed,  but probably won't buy.

 

Actually, this is the biggest problem about the new taxes:

How to deal with the uncertainty?

We won't know how things play out before mid-2026.

What to do until then?

[UKresonant]

1 hour ago, gk10012001 said:

so a new arrival wants to start the non imm O visa process and then do extensions due to retirement over 55.  I decide to put 800 k baht on deposit instead of the monthly transfer method. (USA citizen).  So now Thailand would want to tax that fairly large amount of money that I put on deposit just for visa purposes!

It would seem that way unless you stay under 179 Days. 

The other way is to place it in an isolated account whilst non TH tax resident, it should be non assessable savings (if non TH Thai tax  resident when it was earned / derived)

 

But the thing that is a bit of a bug, is the monthly income method, RD recognising Gross for taxation, but immigration only recognise net remitted, so that would be 81250 gross per month (if live income), plus transfer fees, plus additional Thai tax... It seems to continue down hill since the end of 2017, only with the COV pause.

 

 

 

[Mike Lister]

2 hours ago, gk10012001 said:

so a new arrival wants to start the non imm O visa process and then do extensions due to retirement over 55.  I decide to put 800 k baht on deposit instead of the monthly transfer method. (USA citizen).  So now Thailand would want to tax that fairly large amount of money that I put on deposit just for visa purposes!

Not if the money they use is savings that are not assessible, rather than income. Most people have savings, a retiree who's fronting 800k for a visa is unlikely to use income for that purpose. Anyway, any income earned before 1 January 2024 is tax free anyway. I can see you still haven't read the link I gave you!

[Mike Lister]

46 minutes ago, Lorry said:

Yes.

 

Actually, I am tempted to buy a condo for a good price,  3.3m (normal price 3.6m to 3.8m)

But I fear I have to explain to the RD why the money I use is not assessable income.

And the discussion of gift tax has made one thing very clear: we know absolutely nothing about how the RD thinks and how things will play out. We are just guessing.

So if the RD doesn't accept my reasoning,  the condo price would be 4.4m, not a good price anymore. 

I am not sure how to proceed,  but probably won't buy.

 

Actually, this is the biggest problem about the new taxes:

How to deal with the uncertainty?

We won't know how things play out before mid-2026.

What to do until then?

No!!! (not yes above)

 

Why would you have to explain anything to anyone? I imagine you're going to buy your condo with savings or pre 1 January 2024 income? In which case, why would you even need to file a tax return? 

 

As others have already said and has been quoted several times......don't try and imagine how the Revenue thinks, just look at how the rules are written, it's very black and white in that regard.

[ukrules]

16 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

฿10 million THB (about $33,000 USD)

lol, 10 million baht is currently worth $270,000

[ukrules]

54 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Anyway, any income earned before 1 January 2024 is tax free anyway.

 

Indeed, but in future years as that fairly recent date becomes more distant the net will gradually widen to include all sorts of liquidated income / earnings.

 

I believe the main issue will be people selling assets back home to retire in Thailand, back in the UK it is quite common for many people to buy a house and live in it for decades or even their entire working life, then maybe sell it when retiring.

Of course the tax rate is 0% if you sell your main residence in many countries, quite unlike in Thailand.

Some people will sell the house, bank the profit and remit a big chunk of it to buy somewhere to live in Thailand and that's great, so long as they don't stay for more than 180 days, but if they move to Thailand in March or April of that year and transfer the money this is where they will fall into the trap of residency and personal income tax on something that's taxed at 0% back home as everyone already knows - the difference will be the whole amount and could easily creep up into the 35% bracket.

 

This problem stood out immediately to me when they first announced it and I expect some unfortunate people will have significant issues due to this and not being aware of it. Which they won't accept as an excuse.

 

[Mike Lister]

1 minute ago, ukrules said:

 

Indeed, but in future years as that fairly recent date becomes more distant the net will gradually widen to include all sorts of liquidated income / earnings.

 

I believe the main issue will be people selling assets back home to retire in Thailand, back in the UK it is quite common for many people to buy a house and live in it for decades or even their entire working life, then maybe sell it when retiring.

Of course the tax rate is 0% if you sell your main residence in many countries, quite unlike in Thailand.

Some people will sell the house, bank the profit and remit a big chunk of it to buy somewhere to live in Thailand and that's great, so long as they don't stay for more than 180 days, but if they move to Thailand in March or April of that year and transfer the money this is where they will fall into the trap of residency and personal income tax on something that's taxed at 0% back home as everyone already knows - the difference will be the whole amount and could easily creep up into the 35% bracket.

 

This problem stood out immediately to me when they first announced it and I expect some unfortunate people will have significant issues due to this and not being aware of it. Which they won't accept as an excuse.

 

Capital gains treatment is not entirely clear yet but there are two ways that are safe. The first is to sell the property before moving here and convert that equity into savings which, as long as any interest on them is kept separate, will be free of Thai tax. The other option is to sell the property and make sure you are not tax resident in Thailand in the year the proceeds are remitted to Thailand. In a worst case scenario, that means spending not more than 179 days here in a tax year before spending the rest of the year somewhere else. If you do those things, there is no Thai tax.

[Mike Teavee]

34 minutes ago, ukrules said:

lol, 10 million baht is currently worth $270,000

And I've always thought the FX rates on XE were amongst the best but they also stated... 

• Inheritances above ฿100 million THB (about $335,000 USD),

• Non Transferable property rights above ฿20 million THB (about $67,000 USD)

Also out by a factor of roughly 10X 😄 

 

[UKresonant]

8 minutes ago, ukrules said:

 

Indeed, but in future years as that fairly recent date becomes more distant the net will gradually widen to include all sorts of liquidated income / earnings.

 

I believe the main issue will be people selling assets back home to retire in Thailand, back in the UK it is quite common for many people to buy a house and live in it for decades or even their entire working life, then maybe sell it when retiring.

Of course the tax rate is 0% if you sell your main residence in many countries, quite unlike in Thailand.

Some people will sell the house, bank the profit and remit a big chunk of it to buy somewhere to live in Thailand and that's great, so long as they don't stay for more than 180 days, but if they move to Thailand in March or April of that year and transfer the money this is where they will fall into the trap of residency and personal income tax on something that's taxed at 0% back home as everyone already knows - the difference will be the whole amount and could easily creep up into the 35% bracket.

 

This problem stood out immediately to me when they first announced it and I expect some unfortunate people will have significant issues due to this and not being aware of it. Which they won't accept as an excuse.

 

Selling the House.

Tax free lump sum upto 25% of a UK pension  taken on commencement (<max £268k circa THB 12M)

Tax free Individual Saxings Accounts, not tax free in Thailand.

 

So many traps for newbies bringing  money with them in the 1st half of the year.  6th July onwards for such newbies.

 

The maybe very recently discovered the Thailand magnificent first impression, and configuring any financial aspects for such very recent. 

 

A nightmare waiting to happen to some folks... .especially with the amount of old info still on www. Finds the first incorrect site and it's a personal financial disaster. Unless they retreat out again for some months.

[Mike Lister]

1 hour ago, UKresonant said:

Selling the House.

Tax free lump sum upto 25% of a UK pension  taken on commencement (<max £268k circa THB 12M)

Tax free Individual Saxings Accounts, not tax free in Thailand.

 

So many traps for newbies bringing  money with them in the 1st half of the year.  6th July onwards for such newbies.

 

The maybe very recently discovered the Thailand magnificent first impression, and configuring any financial aspects for such very recent. 

 

A nightmare waiting to happen to some folks... .especially with the amount of old info still on www. Finds the first incorrect site and it's a personal financial disaster. Unless they retreat out again for some months.

I couldn't agree more. Which is why I believe very very strongly that we need to get the Introduction to Thai Tax document right and get that information into as many hands as possible. That  means getting these discussions right, along with peoples behaviour and attitude. It means putting an end to the sniping and false challenges and actively working to find answers. It's one thing to have a theoretical and cerebral debate about shop talk or your hobby (tax) but it's something else entirely to try and educate the membership with as much fact as we can possibly derive from different sources. It's not impossible to do that but it takes effort and discipline.

[Mike Teavee]

I'm up early adjusting the Stop limits on some UK shares that have done well recently & a thought struck me... 

 

If I paid £10,000 for some shares & sold them for £30,000 I've realised a gain of £20,000 but as there's no CGT to pay in the UK, if I remit the £30,000 into Thailand I'm liable for tax on the full £20,000 gain. 

 

However, if I use that £30,000 to purchase some new shares (same company or another) & sell them straight away then I'll lose on the dealing charges & spread between buy & sell price but this won't be anywhere near the tax on 920,000B.

 

 

Not planning on doing this anytime soon, but if I do decide to bring significant income from Capital Gains I'll be looking at "Bed & Breakfasting" it in the UK before I do.

 

[NB UK has a 30 day rule to stop you crystalising CGT gains/losses by selling & immediately repurchasing the same stock but as Thailand doesn't seem to have any separate provisions for CGT but treats it as Income Tax then I'm assuming they don't have something similar].

 

[Mike Lister]

5 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

I'm up early adjusting the Stop limits on some UK shares that have done well recently & a thought struck me... 

 

If I paid £10,000 for some shares & sold them for £30,000 I've realised a gain of £20,000 but as there's no CGT to pay in the UK, if I remit the £30,000 into Thailand I'm liable for tax on the full £20,000 gain. 

 

However, if I use that £30,000 to purchase some new shares (same company or another) & sell them straight away then I'll lose on the dealing charges & spread between buy & sell price but this won't be anywhere near the tax on 920,000B.

 

 

Not planning on doing this anytime soon, but if I do decide to bring significant income from Capital Gains I'll be looking at "Bed & Breakfasting" it in the UK before I do.

 

[NB UK has a 30 day rule to stop you crystalising CGT gains/losses by selling & immediately repurchasing the same stock but as Thailand doesn't seem to have any separate provisions for CGT but treats it as Income Tax then I'm assuming they don't have something similar].

 

Well spotted! Yes, bed and breakfasting is a good approach to reducing CG liability, it's completely legal and is all done outside of Thailand and doesn't involve any form of manipulation.

 

But if you don't go that route and instead you decide to sell those shares, how long after they become savings will the TRD regard them as savings? JG started to mention this earlier. If the income from the shares is tax paid in the home country, those proceeds should be regarded as savings straight away but will the TRD view things the same way.

[Mike Teavee]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

Well spotted! Yes, bed and breakfasting is a good approach to reducing CG liability, it's completely legal and is all done outside of Thailand and doesn't involve any form of manipulation.

 

But if you don't go that route and instead you decide to sell those shares, how long after they become savings will the TRD regard them as savings? JG started to mention this earlier. If the income from the shares is tax paid in the home country, those proceeds should be regarded as savings straight away but will the TRD view things the same way.

 

I'm not sure it ever becomes savings if it's "Earned" after 1/1/2024, so maybe "Bed & Breakfasting" is a way to move from a position of having a high capital gain to one where you've got zero/little & so when you came to sell the asset, the money would be as good as "Savings".

 

To take it to extremes I guess there is nothing to stop you taking all of your income (Dividends, Rent, Pensions, even gains from selling your house), buying assets with it, selling the assets & remitting the proceeds with no/little tax to pay. 

[Mike Lister]

23 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

 

I'm not sure it ever becomes savings if it's "Earned" after 1/1/2024, so maybe "Bed & Breakfasting" is a way to move from a position of having a high capital gain to one where you've got zero/little & so when you came to sell the asset, the money would be as good as "Savings".

 

To take it to extremes I guess there is nothing to stop you taking all of your income (Dividends, Rent, Pensions, even gains from selling your house), buying assets with it, selling the assets & remitting the proceeds with no/little tax to pay. 

Taking it to even greater extremes, a Capital Gain that is sold and converted to savings in the home country, can't realistically be viewed as being earned income, twenty or thirty years hence. Ten years hence? Doubtful! How about five years hence? I'd be very surprised! If the same year, sure there's a case to be made, so I guess the answer is somewhere between one and five years....maybe.

[Mike Teavee]

6 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Taking it to even greater extremes, a Capital Gain that is sold and converted to savings in the home country, can't realistically be viewed as being earned income, twenty or thirty years hence. Ten years hence? Doubtful! How about five years hence? I'd be very surprised! If the same year, sure there's a case to be made, so I guess the answer is somewhere between one and five years....maybe.

Thailand doesn't seem to have anything specific around CGT & treats it as Income so I guess as an extreme it would be 10 years as that's the furthest they can go back for Tax Audits?

[Mike Lister]

5 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

Thailand doesn't seem to have anything specific around CGT & treats it as Income so I guess as an extreme it would be 10 years as that's the furthest they can go back for Tax Audits?

I think that's extreme. In practise, I doubt the average TRD person will look at remitted savings and wonder where they came from five years earlier, would you? I wouldn't, the further you move away from today, the less likely a check will be made. I think this is especially true when the taxpayer is older or retired and has a consistent income track record....in other words, the sniff test. If the taxpayer is younger or perhaps even middle aged with inconsistent revenue flows, the idea of nomad working and untaxed income would be prominent in my thinking. But pensioners and retirees, I don't think so.

[Lorry]

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

No!!! (not yes above)

 

Why would you have to explain anything to anyone? I imagine you're going to buy your condo with savings or pre 1 January 2024 income? In which case, why would you even need to file a tax return? 

 

As others have already said and has been quoted several times......don't try and imagine how the Revenue thinks, just look at how the rules are written, it's very black and white in that regard.

The only rules in black and white are RD 161/2566 "all remitted income is to be taxed" and the later rule "not income from 2023 or earlier".

I wouldn't consider the RD's Q&A as binding rules.

RD 161/2566 seems to be well known in the bureaucracy by now.

 

Several posters have asked RD offices or RD and government hotlines.  Not surprisingly,  they got all kinds of different answers. And that's what scares me.

Of course,  if I remit 3.3m now it's savings from before 2024. I didn't make 3.3m in 4 months of 2024.

But do I know what proof the RD will want to see?

Immigration doesn't trust in Thailand's own bank books,  do you think the RD will trust some foreign pdf print-outs? Maybe.

I don't want to remit money and much (maybe years) later be told by the RD "No, the way you did it we consider as taxable income"

 

Yes, I agree with you that staying 179 days only is probably the safest way. But even this is controversial, the RD hotline told poster 4myr he would still have to pay taxes on remitted income,  even if he only stayed 179 days in the year of remittance.

 

I will have the least headache if I don't remit any money into Thailand any more,  at least not over the tax-free thresholds. 

[Mike Teavee]

2 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

I think that's extreme. In practise, I doubt the average TRD person will look at remitted savings and wonder where they came from five years earlier, would you? I wouldn't, the further you move away from today, the less likely a check will be made. I think this is especially true when the taxpayer is older or retired and has a consistent income track record....in other words, the sniff test. If the taxpayer is younger or perhaps even middle aged with inconsistent revenue flows, the idea of nomad working and untaxed income would be prominent in my thinking. But pensioners and retirees, I don't think so.

I agree & end of the day it comes down to "Technically" Vs "Practically". 

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, Lorry said:

The only rules in black and white are RD 161/2566 "all remitted income is to be taxed" and the later rule "not income from 2023 or earlier".

I wouldn't consider the RD's Q&A as binding rules.

RD 161/2566 seems to be well known in the bureaucracy by now.

 

Several posters have asked RD offices or RD and government hotlines.  Not surprisingly,  they got all kinds of different answers. And that's what scares me.

Of course,  if I remit 3.3m now it's savings from before 2024. I didn't make 3.3m in 4 months of 2024.

But do I know what proof the RD will want to see?

Immigration doesn't trust in Thailand's own bank books,  do you think the RD will trust some foreign pdf print-outs? Maybe.

I don't want to remit money and much (maybe years) later be told by the RD "No, the way you did it we consider as taxable income"

 

Yes, I agree with you that staying 179 days only is probably the safest way. But even this is controversial, the RD hotline told poster 4myr he would still have to pay taxes on remitted income,  even if he only stayed 179 days in the year of remittance.

"the RD hotline told poster 4myr he would still have to pay taxes on remitted income,  even if he only stayed 179 days in the year of remittance".

 

Walk into any upcountry branch of any bank in Thailand and ask if you can open a bank account and you'll get different answers from everyone you visit, despite those rules being laid out crystal clear in the bank headquarters rules set. Ask ten people here the same question and you'll likely get ten different answers.

 

It's the way it is, it's part of the landscape. That doesn't mean the person that 4myr spoke to was correct.

 

If you have a reasonable audit trail of statements over time, from your remitting bank, I'm pretty certain that will be sufficient, that's my personal opinion and it's the basis on which I am working personally.

[Mike Teavee]

2 minutes ago, Lorry said:

Yes, I agree with you that staying 179 days only is probably the safest way. But even this is controversial, the RD hotline told poster 4myr he would still have to pay taxes on remitted income,  even if he only stayed 179 days in the year of remittance.

(Technically) he is liable to tax on income remitted during the year he was not tax resident if the income was "Earned" during a year when he was tax resident... E.g. Earn income in 2025, be a non-Tax resident & remit the income in 2026 & (Technically) you're still liable for tax on it. 

 

Flip side is true also, earn income in 2025 when you're not a tax resident & remit it in 2026 when you are, no tax to pay. 

 

 

FWIW I be taking no chances when it comes to remitting my pension tax free lump sum and/or proceeds from the sale of my UK house, I'll be getting the money & remitting it in the same year when I'll be non-Tax resident. 

[Mike Lister]

I think one of the things I'm seeing here is individual risk tolerance. We have one poster who takes zero risk on this and insists on seeing everything in black and white first before he acts and even then he's probably going to expect a worst case outcome, a sort of belt and braces combined with the glass is half empty. I think ultimately this person is a pessimist by nature.

 

There's another poster who takes the opposite approach which is , "give it a try, you've nothing to loose", not necessarily an optimist, more of a, what the heck, kind of approach.

 

Most people sit somewhere in the middle of those two positions, I know I do. If I wanted to buy a home here, I think I'd satisfy myself that I could prove the funds were savings and exempt and then do it. I think waiting for absolute proof that leaves me feeling all warm and fuzzy, probably isn't realistic in Thailand because it may never come. 

 

[Lorry]

1 hour ago, Mike Teavee said:

Flip side is true also, earn income in 2025 when you're not a tax resident & remit it in 2026 when you are, no tax to pay

I don't want to try this. 

 

1 hour ago, Mike Teavee said:

FWIW I be taking no chances when it comes to remitting my pension tax free lump sum and/or proceeds from the sale of my UK house, I'll be getting the money & remitting it in the same year when I'll be non-Tax resident. 

Very good advice, thx

[Mike Teavee]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

I think one of the things I'm seeing here is individual risk tolerance. We have one poster who takes zero risk on this and insists on seeing everything in black and white first before he acts and even then he's probably going to expect a worst case outcome, a sort of belt and braces combined with the glass is half empty.

 

There's another poster who takes the opposite approach which is , "give it a try, you've nothing to loose".

 

Most people sit somewhere in the middle of those two positions, I know I do. If I wanted to buy a home here, I think I'd satisfy myself that I could prove the funds were savings and exempt and then do it. I think waiting for absolute proof that leaves me feeling all warm and fuzzy, probably isn't realistic in Thailand because it may never come. 

 

I think most people do sit in the middle but sensibly assess the impact of getting it wrong E.g. for me... 

1. Remit income up to my Allowances + 150K ( Total of 235K) & not file a return, worse case, 2,000B fine (They'd owe me 5,000 in Withheld tax on my Bank Account interest so can take it out of that & give me the extra 3K). 
2. Do the same for the GF (Total of 210K) + "Gift" her 2x100K, worse case, (IIRC) twice the Tax due on the 200K (She's already used the 1st 150K at 0% so it would be 150K at 10% + 50K at 15% = 22,500 doubled) 45K + 2K fine=47K. 
3.  Remit the Tax Free Lump Sum from my Pension + some Capital Gains for a total of say 12Million THB = 7,460,500 (2x3,730,250) + 2K fine. 

1st 2 I've no qualms about but the 3rd one, no way...  Besides there's something intensely satisfying in having a 6 month holiday on money that you would otherwise have given to a Tax Man 😄 

[Dogmatix]

I don't think that a total prohibition on discussion of gifting and gift tax would enhance the usefulness of this thread to members very much.  Gifting was mentioned as being tax exempt up to the set limits by the RD in its original Q&A on P. 161/2566 with the obvious implication that gifts of foreign source income can be made in a tax exempt way.

 

There must have been a significant amount of gifting done since the Gift Tax was introduced in 2016.  What would be useful to members would be information about how this amendment has been applied by the RD.  Prohibitions on discussion of certain key aspects of P. 161/2566 or unsupported assumptions by individual members about how the RD considers gifting are not a substitute for rolling up the sleeves and collating this type of information for the benefit of members. Time spent expressing unsupported opinions could be more usefully spent rolling up the sleeves and doing the digging.

 

 

[Mike Lister]

43 minutes ago, Dogmatix said:

I don't think that a total prohibition on discussion of gifting and gift tax would enhance the usefulness of this thread to members very much.  Gifting was mentioned as being tax exempt up to the set limits by the RD in its original Q&A on P. 161/2566 with the obvious implication that gifts of foreign source income can be made in a tax exempt way.

 

There must have been a significant amount of gifting done since the Gift Tax was introduced in 2016.  What would be useful to members would be information about how this amendment has been applied by the RD.  Prohibitions on discussion of certain key aspects of P. 161/2566 or unsupported assumptions by individual members about how the RD considers gifting are not a substitute for rolling up the sleeves and collating this type of information for the benefit of members. Time spent expressing unsupported opinions could be more usefully spent rolling up the sleeves and doing the digging.

 

 

Please go back and read again the message i posted on this subject. There has not been a total ban or prohibition introduced on Gift Tax discussions. The word "ban" was first introduced in a now redacted inappropriately worded post by another member and you have now introduced the word prohibition for the first time! I trust you will be more diligent in your assessment of tax related documentation!

 

I have merely asked for members co-operation in moving the narrative away from Gift Tax and ways to avoid paying Thai tax. This is because we do not want to see the debate make the short leap from discussing avoidance, to describing evasion plus we do not want to be seen as the go to place to obtain tax avoidance measures, legal or otherwise. This has been done for several other reasons, including complaints from several members that the thread had been hijacked and a concern that the emphasis of the thread was no longer appropriate ....I shared similar concerns.

 

If you wish to have a debate on this subject, please PM me or Admin with your concerns. But as also stated previously, I see no reason to have a public debate and instead the thread and its participants should just move on.

 

As far as best use of my time is concerned: As I said in great detail recently, I have no intention of doing any research into Gift tax cases or anything similar, I leave that to the experts in such things. 

 

I appreciate you cooperation.

 

 

[Lorry]

1 hour ago, Dogmatix said:

I don't think that a total prohibition on discussion of gifting and gift tax would enhance the usefulness of this thread to members very much.  Gifting was mentioned as being tax exempt up to the set limits by the RD in its original Q&A on P. 161/2566 with the obvious implication that gifts of foreign source income can be made in a tax exempt way.

 

There must have been a significant amount of gifting done since the Gift Tax was introduced in 2016.  What would be useful to members would be information about how this amendment has been applied by the RD.  Prohibitions on discussion of certain key aspects of P. 161/2566 or unsupported assumptions by individual members about how the RD considers gifting are not a substitute for rolling up the sleeves and collating this type of information for the benefit of members. Time spent expressing unsupported opinions could be more usefully spent rolling up the sleeves and doing the digging.

 

 

You are right, and I am one of those your post seems to address.

Actually, I started diggjng, but found nothing so far.

I will dig more.

 

Thanks a lot for your criticism, I appreciate it.