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

[K2938]

21 minutes ago, moogradod said:

It is actually @TroubleandGrumpy who said this, but lets assume that you really did not pay tax for lets say a few years, 4, 5. Do you then think it is better before December 31, 2023 to approach the RD to declare that instead of occasionally get caught in 8 years if this seriously worries you ? It could well be that many are in this situation. I have even heard the story (nothing but rumour of course) of someone who wanted to declare this pension but was sent home by RD. They said at the time it was too complicated for them to verify when what was paid when and did not even provide him with a tax ID. But this may be just a story (which I can hardly really believe I must admit).

Do not do anything like this before there is full clarity on what is going to happen and what the detailed implementation rules will be.  Otherwise you might seriously hurt yourself.  Also doubt that this information will be available before the new year.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

26 minutes ago, moogradod said:

It is actually @TroubleandGrumpy who said this, but lets assume that you really did not pay tax for lets say a few years, 4, 5. Do you then think it is better before December 31, 2023 to approach the RD to declare that instead of occasionally get caught in 8 years if this seriously worries you ? It could well be that many are in this situation. I have even heard the story (nothing but rumour of course) of someone who wanted to declare this pension but was sent home by RD. They said at the time it was too complicated for them to verify when what was paid when and did not even provide him with a tax ID. But this may be just a story (which I can hardly really believe I must admit).

Yes that was me.  

And that is the issue - should we tell them we have income but it is not taxable (IMO).

Or should be keep our heads down for a while - at least until all the initial trouble starts.

You know it aint gonna be good - I pity the first Expat nailed over this and hope it is not me.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

10 minutes ago, K2938 said:

Very strange about declaring ALL income if it is not remitted and not sure what the purpose of that should be.  If you do not mind the question, may I ask if this was from a highly reputable tax firm, like one of the Big 4?

No - it was from a legal/tax firm in Isaan. 

I too am not sure they have got it right - hence why I put all those caveats.

But having been in Thailand (on/off) since 2012 I would not be surprised if Somchai in the local RD Office tries to nail me/others for not reporting money sent into our bqank accounts as taxable income. 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

10 minutes ago, K2938 said:

Do not do anything like this before there is full clarity on what is going to happen and what the detailed implementation rules will be.  Otherwise you might seriously hurt yourself.  Also doubt that this information will be available before the new year.

I agree 100%.  I/you/we do not need to do anything until end June 2024 - that is when the deadline hits and those in Thailand since Jan 1 will become tax residents for 2024 calendar year.

Hopefully our issues and concerns will be answered well before then - obviously not directly - but that the Thai RD will have advised the tax experts and public about how they will implement this new rule.

Meanwhile I am bringing in a little extra over the next few months - but not in any big lump.

[moogradod]

24 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

I just got another 'nightmare' scenario just sent to me by a legal/tax expert: ...........

you will be required to declare all of your foreign income, regardless of when it was earned or whether it was remitted to Thailand. 

Impossible. Must be a misinterpretation (or "misunderstanding" as they seem to call such mishaps), especially the part "whether it was remitted to Thailand". I rather believe that the earth is flat or the Orange One is an alien. What has Thailand to do with what I earned some years ago somewhere in this world when I was at the time neither resident nor tax resident here ? What is the next thing they "require"? Could be anything it seems. Ridiculous. I guess this could be safely disregarded.

[aldriglikvid]

Although I appreciate everyone's contributions in interpretating this upcoming tax law, there's little to none discussion on how they would practically implement and enforce these new law. As it stands now, Thailand is unable to automatically link a traffic ticket to a centralized database of driving licenses.

 

For this to be enforced properly they need to establish +180 days in the country i.e. tax subject

- Revenue Department links to Border Entry's?

 

Electronic monitoring of transactions

- If this would be implemented, it's quite unique in a global context. It's rare. Most countries have end-of-year balance sent to RD's and also dividends/capital gains as per CRS standards. 

 

I'll probably be heavily criticized here, but here's how I see this playing out: 

- Tax law postponed +6-12 months 

- First 2-3 years "the big fish" are targeted via KYC-like initiatives from Banks. Meaning, Banks are encouraged to investigate "large and recurring transactions". If these are not properly explained, they are sent to the RD for tax/further investigation. 

- +2-3 years everyone with a non-im (or similar) making yearly extensions are encouraged to show tax filing "back home" as per DTA, or be taxed in Thailand on the spot 

 

 

 

The idea that Thailand would be able, 4 months from now, to automatically monitor the bank accounts and transactions of approx. 80 million people (domestic + foreigner, non-TINs, TINs, Elite's, ED-visas, etc.) and smack a income tax on the aforementioned, just seems like a pipe dream. Send it by mail? IM knocking on the door? Deducted at the airport? 

[sathornlover]

6 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

Someone sent me Kittipong’s article in pdf format but it was published by Krungthep Thurakit here https://www.bangkokbiznews.com/finance/investment/1091100#

 

Krungthep Thurakit is part of The Nation. So perhaps they will publish it in English on their website (still miss the print edition).

 

 

Thanks for all the input???? and this text is very helpful to further discuss this matter as a basis in Thai acquaintances. The majority, at least outside of Bangkok, have hardly noticed anything about it or will probably not feel directly affected at first! It's more about whether the 10k baht will actually flow at the beginning of next year...

[Happy happy]

By Barry Kenyon

September 23, 2023

The fear that retirees and other non-working expats are about to be taxed on their overseas pension income has created a field-day for internet warriors, click baiters and nervous long-term visa holders. But calmer reality suggests it may be premature to start packing your bags in utter disgust.

The Thai revenue department has recently stipulated that, from the next calendar year, “earned income from overseas” will be liable for personal income tax for those (Thais or foreigners) spending up to 180 days a year in the country.

https://www.pattayamail.com/latestnews/news/moral-panic-takes-over-the-expats-and-thai-taxation-furor-441317

[mokwit]

24 minutes ago, aldriglikvid said:

The idea that Thailand would be able, 4 months from now, to automatically monitoring the bank accounts and transactions of approx. 80 million people (domestic + foreigner, non-TINs, TINs, Elite's, ED-visas, etc.) and smack a income tax on the aforementioned, just seems like a pipe dream. Send it by mail? IM knocking on the door? Deducted at the airport? 

Maybe an unlikely scenario but they could just throw the responsibility onto us by requiring us to have prof of "all taxes paid" at visa extension time. They could do this under the "anything else required by the competent official". We in turn would probably have to agree any number the RD threw at us due to time constraints..

[mokwit]

34 minutes ago, Happy happy said:

To pay personal income tax you need a TIN (tax identification number) issued by the revenue department. Without that there can be no income tax liability

Just pulling this as an example of how I would not put much weight on what he has written. You can be liable for tax and be required to pay tax and to do that you need to request a TIN. Not having a TIN does not make you non liable for tax.

[beammeup]

Perhaps they are just going to expect those who have stayed in the country for more than 180 days to get a TIN and fill in a tax form and pay tax they think is owed. If later on they get audited and it is wrong they may have to provide supporting documents etc... if correct happy days. I suspect there will be a fair few new tax accountants popping up. Just another headache to add to the list. and more hoops to jump through

[Puccini]

4 hours ago, mokwit said:

...SCB ALREADY requires a TIN to open a new account for foreigner apparently. There is always the risk that could be extended to existing accounts...

Does this mean, for example, that if an Italian tourist on a four-week vacation in Thailand applies to open a saving account at SCB, the bank will ask for a Thai TIN or is it his Italian TIN they want to see?

[mokwit]

7 minutes ago, Puccini said:

Does this mean, for example, that if an Italian tourist on a four-week vacation in Thailand applies to open a saving account at SCB, the bank will ask for a Thai TIN or is it his Italian TIN they want to see?

Thai TIN as I understand it and many banks won't open a bank account with a tourist type visa. They want to see Non Immigrant visa, maybe work permit.

[stat]

6 hours ago, redwood1 said:

Every single day they let this tax uncertainty drag on it pushes invester confidence lower and lower......The damage is now almost perminet and will take a very long time to fix if ever....

 

And yes I am sure they already know this...  

I think 90% of the people have yet not realized the potential danger they are in as they do not follow the news... So the repercussions will show only later... I would also be worried if I ever wanted to get money (condo sale 800K visa deposit  etc ) out of Thailand being profit or otherwise.

[SingAPorn]

They should start checking and putting tax on all those tailors of Sukhumvit and Bangkok who go all over europe on their "European tours" to take measurements and send tailor made clothes back to Europe by mail  and surely elsewhere in the world.

 

All at highly inflated prices. Just as their prices are getting out of control in Bangkok also.

[samtam]

3 hours ago, mokwit said:

Good point: Seems pointless when of the 40 million Thais many are not eligible for income tax.

 

Don't know what the Thai interpretation would be but in the UK, officially all UK citizens must be tax resident to have a UK bank account, no?

 

What we DO know is that one bank (SCB) are now requiring a tax ID for foreigners to open a bank account BUT: that may just be a way of screening out less profitable accounts. Contrary to popular belief Thai banks don't really want foreigner accounts because they don't make enough money from them.

No, as a UK citizen I have a non resident account(s). 

[mokwit]

2 hours ago, samtam said:

No, as a UK citizen I have a non resident account(s). 

Offshore account or onshore high street bank? - if so which bank allows this - i am sure former Barclays customers might be interested.

[JimGant]

3 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

"The new rules state that if you spend more than 180 days in Thailand per year, you will be required to declare all of your foreign income, regardless of when it was earned or whether it was remitted to Thailand. This is a significant change from the previous rules, which only required you to declare foreign income that was remitted to Thailand. 

Finally some common sense, at least as far as remittance goes -- as remittance has nothing to do with income, just cash flow. This remittance Thai tax rule was apparently incorporated to allow Thai fat cats a very convenient tax avoidance avenue, by just enabling that there is no income liability on income brought into Thailand in a later calendar year. Certainly, this has cost the Thai treasury a bunch.

 

Per DTA treaties -- and using the US-Thai treaty, as an example: Remittance doesn't determine income -- in fact, it's not even mentioned. The US tax treaty just says that my Air Force pension and Social Security income are taxable only by the US. Thus, not declarable as income on a Thai tax return. But per tax treaty, my Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) on my IRA *IS* taxable (when earned, not remitted) by Thailand, as the primary tax authority per the treaty. But, their own tax rules have prevented them from taxing it, since I remit it in in a later year. Thus, two incomes under the tax treaty, and one income under a Thai tax rule -- says I don't have to file a Thai tax return, as I have no taxable income. So, it's ludicrous to say, "you will be required to declare all of your foreign income," since some, like my Air Force and Social Security are exempt by treaty. And my historical IRA payments, which were remitted in a later year, were exempt by Thai law then in effect.

 

Anyway, if Thailand is getting away from remittances, and just adhering to the tax treaty -- I guess I'll need to declare my IRA RMD on a Thai tax return. As this will be the only income declared on the Thai tax return, it will be only slightly above the deduction and allowances, and thus a single digit effective tax rate. Now, I'll also have to declare this RMD on my US tax return -- due to the saving clause, which says all worldwide income is taxable, regardless of treaty language. But, as this will be in the 22% effective tax bracket, the tax credit allowed will mean my total tax bill, between both countries, will be the same as if I only paid taxes to the US. So, just a little more paperwork -- but no additional tax.

 

So, it makes a lot more sense if the new Thai tax rulings get away from remittances. Much cleaner, plus data from FATCA and CRS can show income -- but not necessarily remittances. Thus, an easier hammer to yield when demanding, "why didn't you declare your foreign income on your Thai tax return?"

 

Certainly the reason we're seeing remittances in the new tax structuring is because it will still give the fat cats an "out." How? Because, if the new rules say income is not taxable until remitted -- then CRS and FATCA data on income earned abroad will not trigger tax avoidance alarms, since this data is not accompanied with remittance data. And the fat cats? I'm sure they'll have many avenues to get their foreign earnings back to Thailand.

 

Not sure how eliminating the remittance requirement helps, or hurts, some expats over here..... For Yanks, as shown above, it may mean that, finally, Thailand will at last be coming after income that, per treaty, it has "first dibs" taxation rights on. But, again, so what -- Thailand either gets our tax dollars, or Uncle Sam does -- zero sum game with tax credits (with a few exceptions).

 

Anyway, just more fodder for discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[farmerjo]

Having had a 10 digit TIN for 15 years and never been asked to submit a tax return.

After changing this year to the 13 digit TIN i see no difference.

[Somjot]

18 hours ago, stat said:

Man you explictly talked about the pattaya motorway so why you talk then about other motorways!

Buddy, I never wrote explicitly about the Pattaya motorway.

 

I wrote about the adventurous drive from Don Muang to Pattaya in the pre-motorway era:

 

„Some of you might still remember the adventurous drive from Don Muang airport to Pattaya when there were no highways or motorways“.

 

Nevertheless, what difference does it make?

Any highway or motorway is at first financed by the government and built for the convenience of the people and it takes years for the return of investment.

 

18 hours ago, stat said:

In absolute terms expats pay vat like 10 or 20 thais as you spend that amount more then average thais.

Do you have any source to confirm this?

AFAIK everybody pays the same VAT.

If expats really spent 10 to 20 times more compared to the average Thai, as you write, it also means, that they have 10 to 20 times more money.

I can only hope, you are wrong, as if not, that would put expats to shame for having so much money and yet refusing to pay a little tax.

 

18 hours ago, stat said:

You seen to have a lot of time on your hands to write so much

Truth to be told, I don't, I'm just trying to contribute to this forum, by sharing valuable information, giving some advice or in this case, when I see that everybody is sharing the same viewpoint, I apply the 10th man principle by playing the devil's advocate and offering another viewpoint.

 

That's a very good way to widen one's horizon and thinking out-of-the-box, but only if one is willing to.

 

18 hours ago, stat said:

 

 

... BTW if you enjoy paying tax move to Germany ! A whooping 70% answered they want higher taxes in a poll 2 years ago.

Can't remember that poll but last year I left Germany for good, as it is not the country, I grew up in anymore.

[freeworld]

8 hours ago, beammeup said:

Some have suggested that you may need a TIN in order to maintain a Thai bank account. Does that include the 40 or so million Thais that don't have a TIN but have bank accounts?

Every Thai has a TIN.

 

It is their ID number and the bank has that.

[freeworld]

8 hours ago, K2938 said:

Very strange about declaring ALL income if it is not remitted and not sure what the purpose of that should be.  If you do not mind the question, may I ask if this was from a highly reputable tax firm, like one of the Big 4?

Not strange at all. Some countries require worldwide income to be declared if one is tax resident.

[freeworld]

2 hours ago, farmerjo said:

Having had a 10 digit TIN for 15 years and never been asked to submit a tax return.

After changing this year to the 13 digit TIN i see no difference.

Why would they ask? The onus is on the individual to understand the tax and to declare any earned or passive income if it was remitted to Thailand. If the tax people find out later then they just apply penalties and interest.

[stat]

1 hour ago, Somjot said:

Buddy, I never wrote explicitly about the Pattaya motorway.

 

I wrote about the adventurous drive from Don Muang to Pattaya in the pre-motorway era:

 

„Some of you might still remember the adventurous drive from Don Muang airport to Pattaya when there were no highways or motorways“.

 

Nevertheless, what difference does it make?

Any highway or motorway is at first financed by the government and built for the convenience of the people and it takes years for the return of investment.

 

Do you have any source to confirm this?

AFAIK everybody pays the same VAT.

If expats really spent 10 to 20 times more compared to the average Thai, as you write, it also means, that they have 10 to 20 times more money.

I can only hope, you are wrong, as if not, that would put expats to shame for having so much money and yet refusing to pay a little tax.

 

Truth to be told, I don't, I'm just trying to contribute to this forum, by sharing valuable information, giving some advice or in this case, when I see that everybody is sharing the same viewpoint, I apply the 10th man principle by playing the devil's advocate and offering another viewpoint.

 

That's a very good way to widen one's horizon and thinking out-of-the-box, but only if one is willing to.

 

Can't remember that poll but last year I left Germany for good, as it is not the country, I grew up in anymore.

Socialist you are if you think someone with more money should pay more. You pay more vat in absolute terms if you spend more. But then again you are German and therefore have no common understanding of money as anyting about it was never teached in Germany and Germans love to be taxed as a form of debt for starting WW2. No one here cares what you think about that the people should pay a "little tax", amounting to an additional millions of baht per year... Me for sure I have paid enough in my lifetime.

[ballpoint]

I live off of totally legal overseas tax free investments, and transfer a fair amount here every year.  I get around the current laws by transferring my money to an offshore holding account prior to the end of the year, then remitting it to Thailand at the start of the next year.  I am thus able to show that the money was in the holding account on January 1st, and no further money was deposited into that account prior to my Thailand remittance.  They don't care what happens to the holding account after the last transfer to Thailand that year, but every single cent deposited into that account between January 1st and the date of the remittance (or last remittance if multiple ones are done) that year must be accounted for.  I previously posted this on another topic, but I was selected for audit a few years ago.  (I only found out about this when a 90 day report was rejected because the Revenue Department had flagged my passport, and I had to go to the local immigration office where they informed me of this, and then had to call the local Revenue Department office to arrange the audit).  The method I have described satisfied the auditors, but my understanding of the new directive is that it will no longer do so - as long as you are a tax resident here, every deposit made after January 1st 2024 to the overseas account you remit your money from will need to be accounted for, no matter what year it is made.

 

When I worked here (I'm now retired), the company I worked for used a multinational tax accountancy firm to handle its expat taxes.  I contacted them regarding this, as I would be liable for the maximum 35% rate if I carry on the same way as now, and their advice is:

 

Top up the overseas holding account and transfer next year's money before the end of this year.  IF this scheme goes ahead, (which they doubt it will), my tax filing for 2024 (in early 2025), will show no income at all that year - no tax. 

Only spend 179, or fewer, days in Thailand in 2025.  Transfer enough money for the half of that year I'll be here, and for all of 2026, from any source.  No need to file a tax return for 2025 (in early 2026), as I won't be a tax resident that year. 

My tax return for 2026, filed early 2027 will again show no income at all that year - no tax.

Rinse and repeat.

 

Learnings from this are:

The Revenue Department can, and do, link your tax situation to your immigration status here - until I had the audit done I would not have been able to leave the country.

They don't care if you have a TIN or not.  I obviously do, as I worked here for some years, but those who spend over 180 days a year here (not necessarily consecutive) and say the new directive (again, I stress, IF it goes ahead), doesn't affect them because they don't have a TIN, might just as well argue that they don't have to follow the road laws because they don't have a driver's licence.

The accountant pointed out that it is compulsory in most, if not all, Western countries to file a tax return if you are a tax resident - I even have to file one in Australia because I have a bank account and some non taxable Australian property there, even though I'm not a tax resident, and should this scheme go ahead they'd expect Thailand to issue the same demand, so be prepared to start doing one.

 

[K2938]

45 minutes ago, freeworld said:

Not strange at all. Some countries require worldwide income to be declared if one is tax resident.

But NOT if they only tax REMITTED foreign income as is the case in Thailand

[Misty]

9 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

I just got another 'nightmare' scenario just sent to me by a legal/tax expert:

Quote: "The new rules state that if you spend more than 180 days in Thailand per year, you will be required to declare all of your foreign income, regardless of when it was earned or whether it was remitted to Thailand. This is a significant change from the previous rules, which only required you to declare foreign income that was remitted to Thailand. The Thai Revenue Department is still working out the details of the new rules, so it is not yet clear what additional paperwork or translations will be required. However, it is important to be aware of the new rules and to start planning for how you will comply with them."

Please note that this is advice and may not be pertinent or correct or apply to everyone. 

But if I/we are now legally required to report/declare all of my 'foreign income' to the Thai RD (meaning all my transfers into my Thai bank account) this is going to be a nightmare. 

 

 

Interesting. Could you post a link to the new rules stating this please?

[freeworld]

1 minute ago, Misty said:

Interesting. Could you post a link to the new rules stating this please?

Did you see this part?

 

The Thai Revenue Department is still working out the details of the new rules, so it is not yet clear what additional paperwork or translations will be required

[Misty]

Just now, freeworld said:

Did you see this part?

 

The Thai Revenue Department is still working out the details of the new rules, so it is not yet clear what additional paperwork or translations will be required

Yes, I'm interested in the link to the new rules that state this:

 

Quote: "The new rules state that if you spend more than 180 days in Thailand per year, you will be required to declare all of your foreign income, regardless of when it was earned or whether it was remitted to Thailand.

 

Where and how was this stated?

 

 

[K2938]

40 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

I get around the current laws by transferring my money to an offshore holding account prior to the end of the year, then remitting it to Thailand at the start of the next year.  I am thus able to show that the money was in the holding account on January 1st, and no further money was deposited into that account prior to my Thailand remittance. 

Thank you for sharing the excellent advice you got from your tax advisors.  Now separately from this, just in case the current system remains, why for your remittances do you take the intermediate step via the "offshore holding account" and not just transfer directly whatever you want to transfer from abroad on Dec 31, meaning that the money will arrive in the following year then anyway without the "offshore holding account"?