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

[JimGant]

1 hour ago, Happy happy said:

Nothing in the proposed new regulations say anything about changing the current practice towards retirees living here long time  in Thailand.

Oh, the new proposed regulation says it will only apply to Thai citizens, but not expat tax residents? I must of missed that....

[TheCowboy]

Complicated!

[hondoelsinore]

Opinion: Thailand’s new tax directive risks alienating investors and the digital workforce

https://www.thaienquirer.com/50842/opinion-thailands-new-tax-directive-risks-alienating-investors-and-the-digital-workforce/

[likerdup1]

"must factor this into their personal income tax for the year."

 

Who knows any expat that files an income tax return as it's specifically says in most all non employment VISA's that working is forbidden.

 

Alot of worry about nothing I expect.

 

They would have to start making all expats file tax returns I expect. If this actually happens I'll be considering other countries for retirement living as this will be the last straw in the ever evolving difficulty in qualifying for long term permission to stay in the Kingdom.

[Arkady]

14 minutes ago, hondoelsinore said:

Opinion: Thailand’s new tax directive risks alienating investors and the digital workforce

https://www.thaienquirer.com/50842/opinion-thailands-new-tax-directive-risks-alienating-investors-and-the-digital-workforce/

Interesting but no mention of the potential impact on the condo market, particularly in resort areas where there are hardly any Thai buyers and the developers have to cook up dubious schemes to sell foreigners the 51% that is supposed to be owned by Thais.  Surely there are a number of foreign condo buyers who actually live in Thailand most of the year?  They are obligated to remit the money for the purchases which could be taxable at 35% now. I am surprised the condo developers remain silent, as their train speeds on towards a brick wall.

[Dogmatix]

10 hours ago, retiree said:

Thank you for locating and posting this article. 

 

a) I think we all know how to form plurals in Thai.  However, translating 41(2) as below does not require a plural.  Afaik it can -- and I'm certainly willing to be corrected -- reasonably be read as: 

 

A resident of Thailand who in a [not the] previous tax year derived assessable income under Section 40 from an employment or from business carried on abroad or from a property situated abroad shall, upon bringing such assessable income into Thailand, pay tax in accordance with the provisions of this Part.

 

b) the explanation you cited is consistent with the pre-September interpretation of 41(2), and may offer some insight into the reasoning behind 2/2528.    It appear to address a specific framing of the question:

 - a foreigner has just become a tax resident of Thailand.  He lives on prior years' income, remitted to Thailand this year.  Is this taxable?  No, those are savings. 

- a foreigner has just become a tax resident of Thailand.  He lives on his current pension, remitted to Thailand as it accrues.  Is this taxable.?   Yes, this is income.

 

c) It does not address the framing that the RD is surely asking, or will ultimately present to, the Tax Court: 

- a Thai national has been an overseas consultant for many years.  Each year he is careful to remit only the prior year's income.  He lives in Thailand at least 180 days per year, but he has never paid Thai taxes.  This would appear to be a unique and unfair treatment vis a vis the ordinary Thai taxpayer. 

 

   Is it the intent of Section 41 paragraph 2 that each prior year's income never be taxed, and that he will never pay Thai taxes, even though he is a Thai tax resident the entire time?   Or is the legislative intent that the tax is only deferred until the assessable income is finally remitted, and then allowed credits or exemptions derived from any double-taxation agreement?  

 

Me, I'd sorely d'ruther the first version stood.  But I can't help thinking that the second phrasing holds more water. 

 

I think, if the RD wants to build a case based on your example c) it ought to show how much tax is lost through this and I suspect it is not much.  A more frequent situation used to arise with multinationals giving expat staff and some senior Thais in Thailand two contracts: for their work in Thailand and for their work outside Thailand.  The outside salary was paid somewhere that doesn't tax foreign source income like HK or Singapore, claiming of course that none of the work was performed in that jurisdiction or it would have been taxable there. It's been over 20 years since the last major multinationals (much longer for US multinationals) ceased offering this perk which they had used to save themselves money, as they later had to pay higher salaries to compensate for the higher local taxes on fully onshore packages. Remember that Thailand had a top tax rate of 60% from, I think, only about 2 million baht until the early 90s when it was reduced to 35% and the argument for dual contracts became less compelling. Countries like Malaysia helped stamp it out by establishing its own salary scale for expats in various jobs, eg foreign bank branch manager, and charging them tax on that, if it was more than their declared salary.  No need for any investigations, evidence or tax evasion trials.  I remember a junior expat colleague posted to KL complaining that he was being charged income tax on a salary significantly higher than the salary he actually received from our firm  which was being paid to him entirely in Malaysia.  I think most of these people who still have dual contracts are working for businesses that are fairly small but earn income offshore and don't have to worry about their international reputations (unlicensed expat financial advisors who earn commissions from offshore funds and hire expat staff without WPs spring to mind).  There may be some Thai consultants working part of the year offshore and earning fees in jurisdictions that don't charge withholding tax but I guess it is a pretty small number.  The problem with most of these deals is that the work is usually done largely in Thailand and is therefore taxable anyway.  The RD can go after these cases without reinterpreting the existing law by making the taxpayer show his travel record to justify that he spent enough time in the countries where he earned the fees.  If just a few days a year, it would not justify earning most of his remuneration outside Thailand.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

20 hours ago, Lemsta69 said:

Those type of calculators will give you the wrong answer as they don't include the start date as 1 day.

You either need to subtract one day from the final result, or subtract 1 from the number of days you wish to add. 

Me, I use Excel and the formula is always =StartDt + NoOfDays - 1.

Simple example: add one day to 1-Jan-2024 and that website will return 2-Jan-2024. But that is two complete days, not one.

You are right - I counted them myself and 1Jan to 30June is 182 days.

Thanks for the advice - never knew they did that.

Therefore 180 days is 28th June 2024 

Also noted that February 2024 is 29 days - Leap Year.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

19 hours ago, Lorry said:

Somewhere else it said "180 days or more", I can't find the link,  but I think it was also from the RD. Leaving on day 179 (day 1 being the day of arrival) is probably safer than on day 180.

As I just found out - Day 180 is 28th June 2024.

Therefore if anyones leaves to avoid this tax khrapp they have to leave on or before 27th June 2024.

 

[redwood1]

4 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

You are right - I counted them myself and 1Jan to 30June is 182 days.

Thanks for the advice - never knew they did that.

Therefore 180 days is 28th June 2024 

Also noted that February 2024 is 29 days - Leap Year.

Dont be surprised if on June 27th 2024 we still have no updates to this tax thing.....After the tax bomb they set off....I think they are frightened to say any thing else...

[Ricardo]

19 hours ago, Ricardo said:

When you say "most other countries", I rather doubt that the list includes places like the BVI or Panama or Channel-Islands. or Thai-elites and past-politicians would not be banking there.  ????

 

People of that ilk dislike having their finances on display  ...  period !  ???? 

Actually, I may have to take that back, as I just saw a recent list of countries which say they're reporting under CRS, but I would still take that with a very large pinch-of-salt ! 

 

Offshore banking-centres would IMO only give the most sketchy/basic information, that they can get away with.  It's simply not in their interest to do more.  And how much time/expertise/desire the RD would have, to deal with such a mass of information, well I still have my doubts.

 

Colour me cynical.  ????

 

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

18 hours ago, aldriglikvid said:

What you're saying here are the main bulletpoints of the fear-mongering that has been going on in the last 60 threads back. And I don't argue that indiscriminate random taxation on the spot is impossible, but it's not probable in my base case scenario. The essence of my post was, if Thailand is to enforce the law in the way that most people are presenting it here on the forums, the following is needed: 
- Banks sharing not only year-end balances as per Fatca/CRS standards but sharing all transactions throughout a year

- Flat income tax % on all transactions throughout a year

- Automatic border entry/exit communication with RD (land, sea and air)  

- IF +180 days in country, RD automatically prints a TIN and send it (via mail?). TIN is granted without prior request or underlying documents. 

- Access to international card issuers banks and requesting Mastercard and Visa transaction details breaking all banking standards developed since WW2 

- Flat income tax % on aforementioned Visa and Mastercard transactions

- Banks in Europe, MENA, Singapore and the US sharing capital gains, transaction details and dividends to Thailand RD in an elaborate new system 

Everything implemented 4 months from now. 

Yes, of course I'm overdoing it here - but hopefully you get the point: it will take a long time before this is implemented. If you have a very cynical view of Thailand, you might buy into the idea that RD personell will bang on your door demanding QR payment on the spot. Personally, I'm not in that camp. 

I stand my ground and saying that the first transition years will almost only be 1) "chasing the big fish" via LARGE transactions from self reporting banks (similar to KYC reporting) and 2) Self declaring income that is rightly to be taxed 

IF I'm being flat taxed on all international transfers in to Thailand this coming February, I'm willing to repost this very post and give you all a "you were right!" 

I have absolutely no argument with what you have said - and it is your right to view this matter in anyway that you decide.  But I/we are certainly not 'fearmongering' - we are discussing the issues involved, saying what we believe they mean, and sharing thoughts on what might happen, and giving our ideas on how to manage the probable scenarios that might develop.  There is absolutely no certainties in this matter at this time - there is only possibilities and probabilities - and both informed and uninformed opinions.

 

Having said that I will respond a little to those listed items that you said the Thai RD will need to have in order to 'come knocking on the door'.  The Thai RD (any Tax Dept) does not do that as a matter of course, and then send you a detailed summary of your tax bill. How it works, in varying degrees, is that the Tax Dept is informed or finds out or notices (large bank deposit/s over a year etc etc etc) that someone might be avoiding their taxation obligations.

First Step - are they liable to pay taxation. In Thailand that means resident for 180 days and if you are a non-immigrant Visa holder then it will be assumed you are - you will have to prove you were not in Thailand for 180 days or more - you will have to prove that - they will only have to prove you are a tax resident if goes to a Court as step one of the formal/legal process.

Second Step - check if the person has they lodged an annual taxation return (for this exercise the answer is no).  If they have, then check that return against whatever information they have that instigated the check.

Third Step - if there appears to be a problem, do more detailed checking (what that is in Thailand we have no idea - it will probably be just check out your bank details over the year - maybe more).

Fourth Step - decide whether to send you a letter asking why you did not file a tax return (or did it incorrectly), and maybe ask you to come and visit them. That is what the term 'knocking on your door' means - sorry if you thought that was meant literally.  Although that might happen if they get no response from you.

 

[spidermike007]

17 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

CRS (Common Reporting Standards) has been in place in most developed countries since 2018 and in Thailand only since 2023. It is a an agreement that banks and other financial service providers (mainly stockbrokers) will provide information to other jurisdictions on their tax residents.  Since Thailand joined this year it is eligible to be sent information on any tax residents that have accounts in any of the other signatory countries and vice versa. The information provided year end balances and any payments received during the year. It is something the financial service provider are obliged to do by their national laws at their own expense.  In the case of FATCA, which is imposed unilaterally by the US under threats, this has become so burdensome that many financial services providers have responded by axing all American owned accounts, eg Thai asset management companies and many Swiss private banks.  However, CRS is an international agreement and companies don't have the option to axe foreign accounts for that.

 

The Thai RD, being under pressure to increase tax revenue in permanently sluggish economic conditions due to appalling Thai economic management, took an opportunist view that it could use CRS as a means to increase revenue, while blaming it on international pressure. 

Yes, forget about going after the millions who do not pay tax here, let's go after the foreigners. They can afford it, and Thailand has such infinite appeal, it will have no bearing on anyone's decision to stay here. After all, we are the center of the universe!

[TroubleandGrumpy]

5 hours ago, BaanOz said:

Australian superannuation, if you have stopped work, over 60 and converted your superannuation to Retirement phase (formerly called pension phase) you pay zero tax.
So I'd assume that money brought into Thailand would be taxed but as you mentioned in your post, good luck working that out!

I have stopped work, but I have not converted my Super to Retirement Phase. Therefore all earnings made by my Super Fund are taxed at 15%, before distribution to its members who like me have their money in the Accumulation Phase. I did not convert my Super Funds to the Retirement Phase for two reasons.

 

Number One - both the Government, the Super Funds, and a lot of 'Advisers' were saying that people should convert to Retirement Phase because their money in Super does not then get taxed.   I have been in and around Government and large corporate organisations for a long time, and they never do anything that is not in their own best interests - especially the Government - so I checked out the details and once I had done that the decision I made was not to do it (see 2).

 

Number Two - once you 'convert' your Super to Retirement Phase, it is classified as an income - by Centrelink, ATO and all other Govt Depts.  Additionally, once it is converted, you cannot go back to Accumulation Phase. 

 

I can stay in Accumulation Phase until I am 75 - and that is my plan. And (of course) I have a few plans for what to do after that time - but it is quite a few years away yet - things will change and meanhile I am staying across all the changes in Super rules. 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

17 hours ago, aldriglikvid said:

1) Yes, and if that's the case it means they will honor the DTA's (which they are trying to communicate now already, but is downvoted here in the forums). Non issue for 95% in this thread. Probably a issue for those evading tax entirely. 

I agree that due to DTAs it should be a non-issue for many people.

But that does not mean that it will not become and issue.

There is a legal brief vid on youtube where an American lawyer explains that a DTA is an agreement, and both side to that agreement may and do often have a different interpretation of what the words therein mean.

There are no guarantees either way.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

14 hours ago, swissie said:

Many open questions. But one thing we already know. Next to the visa situation, one more worry for Farang residents has been created.

- It will turn out to be a complicated nightmare, that the individual Farang can not sort out without the help of Thai Tax experts, specialising in this new field.

- Next to existing "Visa Agencies", a new branch of legal services will mushroom into existance. Agencies specialising in "International Taxation for foreighn residents in Thailand". A new branch within the Thai legal system was just created. Needless to say, the Farang will have to pay for those sevices.

With individual experts who are specialists in the DTA for each home country. They are all very different.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

4 hours ago, Middle Aged Grouch said:

Why all the bother ? Just start looking to move to Vietnam or Cambodia or Malaysia, the Philippines, or even India...

Because some of us are 'dug in' and some have a Thai partner and some with kids etc etc etc.

[quake]

Pattaya and Bangkok real-estate agents are scratching there heads,  as to why

1000 expats have just canceled there new condos. 

this morning. 

 

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

32 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

There are no guarantees either way.

Maybe. But this is what the Thais say:

 

.    What is the method for elimination of double taxation provided in the agreement?  

- In a double taxation agreement, there are credit and exemption methods.  

 

https://www.rd.go.th/english/23520.html

 

And the official word is 'Convention' not Agreement:

 

TAXATION CONVENTION WITH THAILAND

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe. But this is what the Thais say:

.    What is the method for elimination of double taxation provided in the agreement?  

- In a double taxation agreement, there are credit and exemption methods.  

https://www.rd.go.th/english/23520.html

Yes that is true - I have read most of those articles and the DTA between Thai and Aust.

However it might come down to how Somchai the Thai RD 'officer' views the situation.

How many times have the IOs done things that are not in the rules - and how often does this Immi Office and that Immi Office view things differently.

I am assuming that the Thai RD as an organisation would be more 'centralised' than the Thai Immigration organisation, but I have no idea how they operate. They certainly do have Offices across the country, but do they, like Thai Immigration, also have a lot of autonomy in each Province?

The big question I have about this matter in regards to this matter is - What documents would I have to provide to prove I have already paid taxes on any earnings in Australia/ Having a DTA is one thing - the issue is how do I use that to avoid being taxed in Thailand.  I have contacted the Aust Tax Dept (ATO) and they have not yet responded (probably will not - or they will say go see a lawyer).

[beammeup]

To many uncertainties, the only certainty is you are not tax resident if you are out of Thailand for 180 days. I think many who don't like uncertainty will choose this path. Not good for real estate or new vehicle market.

[Dogmatix]

14 hours ago, Guavaman said:

Please see this ข้อหารือภาษีอากร – Consultation on Tax regarding Article 4 Section 56 from 2003.

 

The key issue that you raised regarding Thai language comes down to this:

 

What does ๆ mean? It’s called ไม้ยมก (mai-ya-mok), a symbol to use for repeating the word before it. For example, จริงๆ (read จริงจริง), the ๆ in this context is จริง.  In this case, เงินได้ของปีก่อน ๆ means income from previous year, previous year = previous years.

 

ข้อหารือภาษีอากร – Consultation on Tax regarding Article 4 Section 56

 

GOOGLE TRANSLATION

Book number:  Kor Khor 0811/7454

Date:  1 August 2003

Subject:  Personal income tax In the case of foreign tourists coming to stay for a long period of time in Thailand

Legal matters:  Section 4 bis, Section 56

Discussion:  In the case of elderly tourists or retirees who are 50 years of age or older coming to travel in Thailand and can stay in Thailand for 1 year, which such tourists cannot do career or earning money in Thailand.  Instead, they will come to use the savings and pensions they receive from their home country.

Therefore discussed that –

1. Long-stay tourists and retirees who come to stay in the country for 1 year by not working or earning income in Thailand will they have to pay personal income tax?

2. In the case of paying tax, what type of tax must be paid and where?

Diagnostic guidelines

Tourists have no income from sources in Thailand but has assessable income from the source income abroad by bringing savings or pensions received from abroad to spend in Thailand.

There are tax burdens as follows:

1. In the case where tourists use their accumulated savings, which is income from previous years, to spend in Thailand is not subject to personal income tax at all.

2. In the case of tourists bringing pensions received from their home country come to spend in Thailand, the pension is income received in that tax year (calendar year) and brought into Thailand in that tax year.

The same if the tourist comes to reside or stay in Thailand for a period of time or several periods in total, total time up to one hundred and eighty days in the tax year.  Income received and imported into Thailand is mandatory to pay personal income tax by submitting the P.N.D.91 form at the office Area Revenue Branch within March of the following year. In the case of tourists leaving Thailand before deadline for filing returns according to Section 56 of the Revenue Code. Submit the P.N.D.93 form, payment of taxes (if any) must be completed before departure according to Section 4 bis of the Revenue Code.

Cabinet number:  66/32602

 

เลขที่หนังสือ	: กค 0811/7454
วันที่	: 1 สิงหาคม 2546
เรื่อง	: ภาษีเงินได้บุคคลธรรมดา กรณีนักท่องเที่ยวต่างประเทศเข้ามาพำนักระยะยาวในประเทศไทย
ข้อกฎหมาย	: มาตรา 4 ทวิ, มาตรา 56
ข้อหารือ	: กรณีนักท่องเที่ยวที่เป็นผู้สูงอายุหรือผู้เกษียณอายุที่มีอายุตั้งแต่ 50 ปีขึ้นไปเดินทางมาท่องเที่ยว ในประเทศไทย และพำนักในประเทศไทยได้เป็นเวลา 1 ปี ซึ่งนักท่องเที่ยวดังกล่าวไม่สามารถประกอบ อาชีพ หรือหารายได้ในประเทศไทย แต่จะเข้ามาใช้จ่ายเงินออมและบำนาญที่ได้รับจากประเทศของตน จึงหารือว่า 1. นักท่องเที่ยวพำนักระยะยาวผู้เกษียณอายุซึ่งมาพำนักอยู่ในประเทศเป็นเวลา 1 ปี โดย ไม่ได้ประกอบอาชีพหรือหารายได้ในประเทศไทย จะต้องเสียภาษีรายได้ส่วนบุคคลหรือไม่ 2. กรณีต้องเสียภาษีจะต้องเสียภาษีประเภทใด และที่ใด
แนววินิจฉัย	: นักท่องเที่ยวไม่มีเงินได้จากแหล่งเงินได้ในประเทศไทย แต่มีเงินได้พึงประเมินจากแหล่ง เงินได้ในต่างประเทศ โดยนำเงินออมหรือเงินบำนาญที่ได้จากต่างประเทศเข้ามาใช้จ่ายในประเทศไทย มีภาระภาษีดังนี้ 1. กรณีนักท่องเที่ยวนำเงินออมที่เก็บสะสมไว้ซึ่งเป็นเงินได้ของปีก่อน ๆ เข้ามาใช้จ่ายใน ประเทศไทย ไม่อยู่ในบังคับต้องเสียภาษีเงินได้บุคคลธรรมดาแต่อย่างใด 2. กรณีนักท่องเที่ยวนำเงินบำนาญที่ได้รับจากประเทศของตน เข้ามาใช้จ่ายในประเทศไทย โดยเงินบำนาญนั้นเป็นเงินได้ที่ได้รับในปีภาษี (ปีประดิทิน) นั้น และนำเข้ามาในประเทศไทยในปีภาษี เดียวกัน หากนักท่องเที่ยวนั้นเข้ามาพำนักหรืออยู่ในประเทศไทยชั่วระยะเวลาหนึ่ง หรือหลายระยะรวม เวลาทั้งหมดถึงหนึ่งร้อยแปดสิบวันในปีภาษี เงินได้ที่ได้รับและนำเข้ามาในประเทศไทยดังกล่าว อยู่ใน บังคับต้องเสียภาษีเงินได้บุคคลธรรมดา โดยให้ยื่นแบบแสดงรายการ ภ.ง.ด.91 ณ สำนักงาน สรรพากรพื้นที่สาขาภายในเดือนมีนาคมของปีถัดไป กรณีนักท่องเที่ยวออกจากประเทศไทยก่อน กำหนดเวลายื่นรายการตามมาตรา 56 แห่งประมวลรัษฎากร ให้ยื่นแบบแสดงรายการ ภ.ง.ด.93 ชำระภาษีอากร (ถ้ามี) ให้เสร็จสิ้นก่อนออกเดินทางตามมาตรา 4 ทวิ แห่งประมวลรัษฎากร
เลขตู้	: 66/32602

 

It appears that in 2003, foreign source income that was earned and neither spent nor remitted in the same calendar/tax year was deemed to be accumulated savings while it remained offshore prior to remittance.

 

 

Good stuff. It occurs to me that this only became an issue for the RD after the police order to allow 1 year retirement extensions which I believe was in mid 80s. Prior to that there wasn't any visa more than 3 months apart from PR and NON-B for those with WPs.  So the concept of foreigners becoming tax residents and living off foreign source income didn't arise that much.

[jerrymahoney]

17 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

The big question I have about this matter in regards to this matter is - What documents would I have to provide to prove I have already paid taxes on any earnings in Australia

Yes, I am only interested in Article 20.2 of the US-Thailand Convention. And in my case I will presume a hard-copy of my annual Social Security statement showing my 65K+ baht monthly distribution will suffice.

 

(Article 20) 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, social security benefits and other similar public  pensions paid by a Contracting State to a resident of the other Contracting State or a citizen of the United States shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

For those interested I have received a reply from that legal/tax firm about their statement saying:

 

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.

 

They are getting a lot of enquiries about the matter, and they have backtracked a little on their statement and advised that 'Nobody knows exactly how it’s gonna work.' They also stated that it will probably not be clear until some time in 2024 - if this does go ahead - it might be 'delayed'.  They also advised that this step was meant to catch people who were using a loophole to avoid avoid tax on their revenues made outside the country - such as crypto traders and overseas property investments. The Thai Govt has stirred up a hornets nest among Expats and Thais who invest overseas. 

 

This will probably end up in the Court, because for over 30 years the Thai RD has operated in a manner based on an interetation of the Act that has been ratified by several Court decisions in the past - it is likely that making such an arbitrary change (and in so short a period of time) will be challenged in Court.  Rather than allow that to happen (and lose political credibility) the Govt will probably delay the change - maybe.

[newnative]

    After slogging through 66 pages of this thread, I'm reminded of the famous quote by William Goldman, the successful, Oscar-winning screenwriter, on Hollywood: "Nobody knows anything."  Pretty much the case here, too, I'm thinking.

[Dogmatix]

Given that there has only been an order issued for RD staff to reinterpret the Revenue Code other than it has been interpreted with copious rulings and precedents for 38 years and there has been nothing with the force of law binding on taxpayers to follow that interpretation, it seems to follow that something more binding will be issued by the government itself, if it plans to go ahead with this.  In the worst case, that could be a Royal Decree amending the Revenue Code along the lines of 161/2566 but even that could not be effective by 1 Jan 2024 because announcements in the Royal Gazette need to give at least 90 days notice. It is a real mystery what Srettha as finance minister or his Phuea Thai masters plan to do with this.  Leave it as it is and risk a backlash from wealthy Thais filing a case in the Central Tax Court and potential humiliation?  Rethink it and at least flesh out the details with new tax rates, threshholds etc but that would probably need an Act of Parliament which might not pass, being a major revision, not emergency legislation.  

 

Note that PT has recently criticised MFP for its plan to introduce a capital gains tax on Thai stocks, which would incidentally be problematic because foreigners could still avoid it via DTAs) and a wealth tax and has just ditched the Prayut government's plan for a transactional tax on Thai stocks talking about the need to develop the Thai stock market and regional competitiveness. Nothing could be further from these objectives than 161/2566.  Srettha justified on ill thought out grounds of equality and fairness without thinking about the potential damage to the Thai economy and competitiveness.  He could still blame it on the RD like they have blamed the transactional tax on the Finance Ministry, if he goes no further than this, and pull out. Let's see.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

14 minutes ago, beammeup said:

To many uncertainties, the only certainty is you are not tax resident if you are out of Thailand for 180 days. I think many who don't like uncertainty will choose this path. Not good for real estate or new vehicle market.

Yes indeed.  My plans to buy a new car next year have been cancelled.  Likewise, any potential plan to buy a property in Thailand in the future (rather than rent) are now well and truly cancelled. I think MFP will probably win the next election, and I think that Thailand is moving towards a more progressive country - unless yet another coup crushes that change.  If/when Thailand becomes more 'modern', that will include more social welfare support, and that will mean more taxation.  Being able to leave to avoid new taxation regulations being introduced in the future, is now a given in my forward planning. 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

12 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes, I am only interested in Article 20.2 of the US-Thailand Convention. And in my case I will presume a hard-copy of my annual Social Security statement showing my 65K+ baht monthly distribution will suffice.

I hope so - and I hope that Somchai will not demand that it be Notorised and Translated and signed by a Director of the Social Security Department ????

 

[jerrymahoney]

3 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

I hope so - and I hope that Somchai will not demand that it be Notorised and Translated and signed by a Director of the Social Security Department ????

 

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind.

[Lorry]

1 hour ago, quake said:

1000 expats have just canceled there new condos

They haven't.

 

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

They can afford it, and Thailand has such infinite appeal, it will have no bearing on anyone's decision to stay here. 

Another poster was asking why the developers don't react. I guess they know this. 

[quake]

2 minutes ago, Lorry said:

They haven't.

 

Another poster was asking why the developers don't react. I guess they know this. 

sorry you lost your sense of humor.

But more to the point,  you don't know.

So stop telling BS.

At this point in time. no one know anything of real substance.

including you.