All those who wished for a tightening up of visa requirements, well done. You might be getting what you wanted, only in a way that affects you.

We recently established a hub in Bangkok as part of McKinsey’s Digital Labs in order to bring the best of our global firm to the region and expand the digital capabilities of future Thai leaders.

 

The precise answers are to be asked to McKinsey.

6 minutes ago, mokwit said:

All those who wished for a tightening up of visa requirements, well done. You might be getting what you wanted, only in a way that affects you.

Yep ever since the first crackdown on the monthly visia runners to Cambodia this forum has had plenty of members that gloated and mocked anyone who had a lesser visa than them....But its gotten more quiet as the Non-O started to recive a few adjustments........lol

1 hour ago, vukovar77 said:

Taxing pensions double if tax is aready payed in home country is very bad deccision ,from my point of view.

 

You cannot be subject to double taxation on pension or anything else if there is a tax treaty between your country and Thailand.

 

The big problem is for people who  ard non resident for tax purposes in their home countey and have income which is assessable under thd Thai Revenue code. 

 

We have actually heard from some who prefer to be subject to taxes in Thailand because rates are lower than in their home country. For others the opposite might apply in which case they might want to consider whether they can legally claim tax residency in their home country (assuming there is a DTA). 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Dogmatix said:

The latest ruling says any prior rulings that contradict it are rescinded. Thus the 2023 ruling that overseas savings are not taxable could be deemed as rescinded. Savings are prior years earnings which the latest duly says are taxable without time limit.

2003 not 2023.

 

And as the latest ruling makes no statement about overseas savings of foreign residents I can't see how it would be rescinded. 

One small observation  ...  if an expat happens to have an annual visa-extension due in January 2024, it might be wise to get it done early before 31st December 2023, so that you're not one of the guinea-pigs in uncharted-territory, turning-up to Immigration in the first month of this possible clusterf*ck ?  ????

I pay tax here and in my home country, which has a tax agreement with Thailand, but the tax I pay here is on what is annually transferred of the pension the amount I not transfer is taxed in home country, but does this new regulation possible also mean that we have to pay tax on interest of savings placed in the home country and are savings that have never been near Thailand and will never come near Thailand? 

Thanks

Felt

 

46 minutes ago, Negita43 said:

Slightly off topic but I worked here legally for several years and did a tax return every year - then I "retired" (non O visa extension) currently I am over the Thai retirenment age and since then I have not submitted any tax returns. 2 Qs:

1. should I have?

2. will I have to or will (as I guess they will) use the banks to deduct any tax as money from abroad enters the country?

 

1. If you are asking should you have submitted a Thai tax return, the answer is no unless you were transferring in passive or active income in the same year it was earned or had income from Thai sources. 

 

2. If you will be newly bringing in passive or earned income that is not exempt under the terms of a DTA between Thailand and your home country then to my reading yes, you'll be  legally required to file.  If you will  bring in funds exempt under the terms of a DTA then I would say no, unless it becomes a requirement to show a tax return for visa extension purpoes (not currently the case).  If bringing in savings it is less clear cut at this time.

3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

You cannot be subject to double taxation on pension or anything else if there is a tax treaty between your country and Thailand.

 

The big problem is for people who  ard non resident for tax purposes in their home countey and have income which is assessable under thd Thai Revenue code. 

 

We have actually heard from some who prefer to be subject to taxes in Thailand because rates are lower than in their home country. For others the opposite might apply in which case they might want to consider whether they can legally claim tax residency in their home country (assuming there is a DTA). 

 

 

 

In Thailand you "can not be sure" that you will not pay taxes on any income from abroad.You can file an appeal after the "verdict".Of course it is against treaty of double taxation if tax is already payed,but You need to see all the items of the each contract.I hope they will rethink before make any move about expat taxation.And what about savings???Many people live from savings on which thay pay all taxes before?

2 minutes ago, Felt 35 said:

I pay tax here and in my home country, which has a tax agreement with Thailand, but the tax I pay here is on what is annually transferred of the pension the amount I not transfer is taxed in home country, but does this new regulation possible also mean that we have to pay tax on interest of savings placed in the home country and are savings that have never been near Thailand and will never come near Thailand? 

Thanks

Felt

 

The new rule applies only to funds brought into Thailand. 

well those who said it will curb investments in this country.. i can confirm, at least in my case, even the uncertainty will. 

 

after a long talk with my wife we've just shelved 2 property projects worth 15M baht until things are (much) clearer. i know its small beans to some but if we're doing this others are certainly considering it.

 

now looking at european property instead.

 

 

34 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

Yep ever since the first crackdown on the monthly visia runners to Cambodia this forum has had plenty of members that gloated and mocked anyone who had a lesser visa than them....But its gotten more quiet as the Non-O started to recive a few adjustments........lol

I can't imagine AN's "good" falangs will have any objection to paying their taxes.

1 hour ago, DudleySquat said:

Not one person here has asked the proper question: What is a tax resident?

it has been asked an answered here many times, more than 180 days in country in the calendar year

Just now, flexomike said:

it has been asked an answered here many times, more than 180 days in country in the calendar year

Someone who stays on after this is implemented.

7 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

The new rule applies only to funds brought into Thailand. 

Thanks Sheryl. I hope you are absolutely right and that interest on savings (inherited many moons ago) that has never been touched and as mentioned placed in the home country will not be affected, but the tax man is IMO a trickster so I will keep myself updated in the coming months.

Felt

11 minutes ago, mokwit said:

I can't imagine AN's "good" falangs will have any objection to paying their taxes.

paying taxes isn't a problem, most on here i suppose do or are prepared to pay somewhere.

 

but getting double taxed, withheld on remittances, buried under piles of paperwork or blackmailed on exit certainly are.

 

all are currently in the air until shrodingers (srettas?) tax box is opened.

Don't know if this has already been posted but a useful site for tax info - https://sherrings.com/assessable-income-foreign-sources-thailand.html

 

Sheryl - I believe you mentioned in an earlier post a Tax Ruling in 2003. The above also covers that.

21 minutes ago, RupertIII said:

Don't know if this has already been posted but a useful site for tax info - https://sherrings.com/assessable-income-foreign-sources-thailand.html

 

Sheryl - I believe you mentioned in an earlier post a Tax Ruling in 2003. The above also covers that.

YEAH,That is important rule!So,it seems they change rules already without new law !!!!

10 hours ago, mokwit said:

They did this before.

 

 

It is against the forum rules to distort the context and misquote other members.

Surely gathering all the documents and furnishing proofs with all the dates lining up with your extension is a small price to pay for keeping the riff raff from getting one year extensions?

 

People here have been calling for tighter visa requirements to keep the riff raf out and it seems their wish has been granted.

1 minute ago, sandyf said:

It is against the forum rules to distort the context and misquote other members.

I was just making a point that they did this before. I am not sure I am misquoting or distorting the context, I just replied to you.

On 9/18/2023 at 10:46 AM, doctormann said:

I believe that there is also a tax treaty between UK and Thailand.

Indeed there is:-

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/507424/uk-thailand-dtc180281_-_in_force.pdf

 

UK property rental income is covered by Article 7, as are public sector occupational pensions (Civil Service, police, military, NHS, local government, teachers, etc) by Article 19(2)(a).

 

On the other hand, private sector occupational pensions are not covered, so will almost certainly be affected by this measure. And those of us in receipt of the State Pension, which is not covered either, will also, in theory, be affected. As I see things, this could mean us State Pensioners having to file annual tax returns with both HMRC (even if we haven't needed to do this previously) and the Thai RD.

 

But good luck to the RD if they really seriously believe that they will be able to raise significant amounts to swell Thai exchequer coffers through taxation on our perpetually frozen State Pensions!

 

Apologies if I'm repeating anything which has already been stated in the intervening 40 pages of this thread!

 

10 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

The difference is that they have made people frantic wondering how they are going to survive in Thailand with their overseas savings taxed as income by some greedy boneheads trying to make others pay for their vote buying, so they can stay in power enriching themselves with corruption.

You are wrong.

"They" have not made people frantic, some people have made themselves frantic.

The issue has been blown out of proportion.

7 minutes ago, mokwit said:

I was just making a point that they did this before. I am not sure I am misquoting or distorting the context, I just replied to you.

What you posted didn't come from me.

9 hours ago, transam said:

I don't know if this has been mentioned here or elsewhere, but there is even more cr@p for some in the pipeline with a Barklays Bank account, unless you have 100,000 quid to stash............????

 

https://uk.yahoo.com/style/barclays-debank-british-expats-134809331.html

If you don't have 100k you can opt to pay 40 pounds a month and keep your account - not quite the same thing as being forced to close the account

10 minutes ago, mokwit said:

People here have been calling for tighter visa requirements to keep the riff raf out and it seems their wish has been granted.

I'll go further. What of the people who were celebrating getting rid of Prayuth--at any price?

12 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

...If you claim for an operation in Thailand on your overseas insurance policy, will the remittance either to you directly or the hospital trigger off a tax demand due to income receive from overseas?...

No, it won't. 

6 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

There is a long letter in the Bangkok Post on this today which I am not allowed to post or link here. Among other things it implies that decreeing a new meaning of an existing law other than what was intended by parliament, rather than amending it in parliament is dubious legally. But I wonder if anyone would challenge it in court. On the other hand I would doubt that Srettha would feel confident about getting this through parliament. His “pro-dictatorship” friends have more seats than PT and many are likely to have accumulated substantial offshore funds through various mechanisms while in power. Also many PT MPs will not like it.

Indeed, many people seem to be referring to this as a 'loophole' as if it's an accidental / unintended consequence of a vaguely worded regulation.

 

The current year thing is not and never has been a loophole - it's by design and enshrined in law.

 

I have a feeling this whole incident will amount to nothing in the end and the talk of people having their '67k' taxed is absolute hysterical nonsense - I think they did say that would be a worst case scenario though.

 

 

5 minutes ago, ukrules said:

I have a feeling this whole incident will amount to nothing in the end and the talk of people having their '67k' taxed is absolute hysterical nonsense - I think they did say that would be a worst case scenario though.

There seem to be a few people posting "worst case scenarios" over and over. Starting to wonder if there are some vested interests at work. People leaving links to tax firms' advertisements already popping up too. I certainly don't know how this will play out. Whichever way it goes, it's not a ringing endorsement for the new government, which looks haphazard and desperate.

6 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

7 hours ago, James105 said:

Expand  

I also think I'll be caught up on this as I do the same with Dividend Income in that as a Non-UK Resident it is treated as Disregarded/Excluded Income on my Tax Return so I do not have to pay anything (above the already Withheld Tax) on it...

The withholding tax is the income tax, correctly assessed and collected from you under the double tax agreement between the UK and Thailand.