Thai government to tax all income from abroad for tax residents starting 2024

[Mike Lister]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Let's be clear on this:

 

Tax avoidance = legal

 

Tax evasion = illegal.

 

Tax deferral schemes, such as deferring transmission of revenues into Thailand, are tax avoidance.

Yes of course, agreed completely. It's just that I view a tax exemption and a tax avoidance measure as dissimilar, although I concede it is almost semantics.....unsure. Tax avoidance is a slightly more aggressive and less obvious course of action than an exemption that would be openly listed in plain sight.

[JimTripper]

18 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Nail on the head HIT !! 

The elephant in the room !!

 

The use of a DTA is not automatic as some people seem to think. You can only use a DTA as a claim in your tax return and YOU must PROVE you have already been taxed to the satisfaction of the TRD.  How you can do that is not detailed or explained - and it will probably not be (there are 61) - it will be IMO decided based on 'legal precedent'.  Before I go into what legal precent is, IMO the best strategy to take going forward for the vast majority of Expats is to avoid TRD at all costs - at least for a few years while this all sorts itself out.  Gather your own personal information and calculate why you do not (IYO) have to lodge a tax return (eg. My country DTA states Pension not taxed, etc etc).  Keep records of all of that information you based that decision upon - reasons, pension payments, bank statements, etc etc etc.  IF you are ever asked by TRD to explain why you have not lodged a tax return, immediately go see a tax accountant/lawyer and provide them with your documents and information. IMO very very few Expats will ever be asked to explain. However, if you are earning money from overseas (investments, rentals, etc) and are a Thai tax resident, then IMO you should go and see a tax accountant/lawyer and ask what they think you should do. 

 

Legal Precedent is how a lot of issues are resolved in the Thai taxation system (and the vast majority of those are by businesses and wealthy individuals). TRD makes a decision - the tax payers disagrees and lodges an appeal - TRD accepts or rejects the appeal - if rejected the taxpayer takes the matter to Court - the Court listens to both sides and decides - that becomes the 'legal precedent' for this particualr issue - unless the TRD lodges a higher Court Appeal in which case it goes a few steps further.  TRD rarely appeals - the matter is handled very amicably (not confrontational like in western Court) with both sides politely asking the Court to help them settle a misunderstanding and/or something that they both are not sure of how it should be decided. 

Another point, if you don't know the language or are not familiar with the system, most everybody would just pay what is billed, or have it taken from their retirement account. I think most foreigners would just do that anyway without even bothering to file a return and keep track of it all.

Edited March 30 by JimTripper

[TroubleandGrumpy]

1 minute ago, JimTripper said:

Another point, if you don't know the language or are not familiar with the system, most everybody would just pay what is billed, or have it taken from their retirement account. I think most foreigners would just do that anyway without even bothering filing a return and keep track of it all.

Good point - words to the wise.

[Danderman123]

2 hours ago, JimTripper said:

Another point, if you don't know the language or are not familiar with the system, most everybody would just pay what is billed, or have it taken from their retirement account. I think most foreigners would just do that anyway without even bothering to file a return and keep track of it all.

Except, in Real Life, no one living in the village is ever going to billed anything. More likely, they never know about having to file a tax return.

 

IF a catastrophe happens, and their visa is denied, due to their not having filed a return, the remedy would be providing a tax return. In no case, would the RD provide them with a tax bill.

 

Of course, their return might be checked by the RD, and compared to their transmitted amounts from their home country, but now we are talking about a one in million event.

[BillStrangeOgre]

On 9/18/2023 at 11:19 AM, NoDisplayName said:

Okay, fine. 

 

There is no minimum time spent in Thailand required to maintain a "retirement" visa extension.  I can keep my 800K in the bank, spend 181 days in other countries, and send my Wise transfers to a Cambodian bank account.  Can carry my Thai spending money in my wallet on frequent visits.

 

No, wait........why AM I going to all this trouble?

There's still an opportunity to avoid tax back home in the UK as well as here.

An account can be opened in Thailand with a 'retirement visa' then deposit funds from UK in a local sterling account but make sure to spend less than 180 days in Thailand and no tax payable anywhere.

[stat]

13 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

I think this may be the difference between investing in an overseas investment fund, overseas, and investing in an overseas fund from within Thailand. It is very clear that any Thai tax resident who invests in a "foreign investment fund or Depositary Receipt", overseas and later remits the income from that profit, to Thailand, is liable to Thai tax. That scenario is the key driver for the new tax rule change, to capture people who have previously avoided tax in that way. I think we can say with great certainty there is no tax exemption associated with that, agreed?

 

What that leaves is the possibility that investing in a "foreign investment fund or Depositary Receipt" from within Thailand, say via a Thai bank or investment house, is exempt. If that was the case, it will be the first  time in over six months of thousands of posts that anyone in all these tax threads has heard of it and it would also make little sense. What that would mean is that making the investment via a Thai bank was a more cost effective way to make the investing, rather than investing offshore directly, but that the Revenue would relinquish any opportunity at tax, on the income. That would also mean that investors are incentivised not to invest in Thai companies but instead to invest in foreign companies. On the upside, such a measure would benefit the SET trading and Thai banks.

 

A depository receipt is designed to promote domestic trading of international companies thus avoiding the need to invest overseas. 

 

"A depositary receipt (DR) is a negotiable certificate issued by a bank. It represents shares in a foreign company traded on a local stock exchange and gives investors the opportunity to hold shares in the equity of foreign countries. It gives them an alternative to trading on an international market".

 

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/depositaryreceipt.asp

 

The following link is from the SET which shows the tax on domestic equities acquired in Thailand. Whilst it is possible to escape capital gains, it is not possible to escape with holding tax on interest or dividends. If it is true that  investing in a "foreign investment fund or Depositary Receipt" inside Thailand, escapes all tax, I'm left asking, why?

 

https://www.set.or.th/en/market/information/tax

 

There is a final possibility that I can imagine and that is that the article is not complete and isn't adequately specific about what that exemption might involve. I can imagine there might be some classes of DR or investment funds that might be made tax exempt, BOI related companies is one. But the idea that all foreign funds are exempt, doesn't seem credible. 

 

If anyone can see any other likely options, I will be interested to hear them.

 

 

 

 

Apparently you are not willing to understand the implications of the article (if the article is correct, big if I agree) Just admit that you your statement was wrong would be a start, but no you just state it again.

 

It is very clear that any Thai tax resident who invests in a "foreign investment fund or Depositary Receipt", overseas and later remits the income from that profit, to Thailand, is liable to Thai tax.

 

Still dead wrong according to the article. Either they guys from Sherrings know something because they have inside information or they misunderstood something. No one knows. 

 

Thanks for the PWC link where I found the following:

 

"Capital losses may not be offset against capital gains". That is a real problem for active traders.

 

 

[TheAppletons]

1 hour ago, stat said:

Glad that an open discussion now again is possible in this thread for everyone. That is why a lot of people came back to this thread.

 

  And many of us wish "they" wouldn't have come back.

 

  By "they", I don't mean you, of course.  

 

  

[Mike Lister]

23 minutes ago, stat said:

Apparently you are not willing to understand the implications of the article (if the article is correct, big if I agree) Just admit that you your statement was wrong would be a start, but no you just state it again.

 

It is very clear that any Thai tax resident who invests in a "foreign investment fund or Depositary Receipt", overseas and later remits the income from that profit, to Thailand, is liable to Thai tax.

 

Still dead wrong according to the article. Either they guys from Sherrings know something because they have inside information or they misunderstood something. No one knows. 

 

Thanks for the PWC link where I found the following:

 

"Capital losses may not be offset against capital gains". That is a real problem for active traders.

 

Glad that an open discussion now again is possible in this thread for everyone. That is why a lot of people came back to this thread.

Perhaps if you were to focus more on the debate being discussed than on attacking me, the thread would do even better and all members would benefit! 

[Rimmer]

A personal attack / Baiting post and a reply have been removed

[Mike Lister]

10 hours ago, stat said:

Thanks for the PWC link where I found the following:

 

"Capital losses may not be offset against capital gains". That is a real problem for active traders.

 

 

Para 37 of the Simple Tax Guide has contained that statement for several months.

 

37) Capital losses may not be offset against capital gains.

[jacko45k]

On 3/27/2024 at 9:17 PM, MartinBangkok said:

Tell the freaking bank you are looking for a bank, not a tax office, and leave!

Yeah great, leave a bank where you have your money deposited without even an ATM card!

[cdnvic]

Had to remove several posts. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but pedantic nitpicking that derails the useful conversation of helpful content is not. If it persists we will need to take further action to prevent it.

[Mike Lister]

Somebody posted the following in the Simple Tax Guide thread which I've now had closed hence I don't have an opportunity to correct what was said, in that thread. But for anyone who is interested, and somebody certainly was, the following is not true:

 

"Thailand does not tax inheritences valued under 100 Million Baht (about 2.2 million pounds)".

 

The Simple Tax Guide says:

 

INHERITANCE TAX

 

48) "Heirs are subject to the inheritance tax only on the value of a legacy that exceeds THB 100 million obtained from each testator together either once or on several occasions. The inheritance tax rate is 10%, except in the case of heirs who are ascendants or descendants of the testator, where the rate is 5%. Legacies received by the spouse of a testator are exempt from the tax".

 

49) https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/other-taxes#:~:text=The inheritance tax rate is,are exempt from the tax. 

 

As you can see, the conditions vary based on the relationship and the amounts involved. More information exists in the link above.

 

[stat]

12 hours ago, cdnvic said:

Had to remove several posts. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but pedantic nitpicking that derails the useful conversation of helpful content is not. If it persists we will need to take further action to prevent it.

I pointed out a mistake in the "simple tax guide" I do not understand why this is not helpful. It seems to me like any criticism or pointing out mistakes is no longer welcome here. So when will the mistake be corrected?

Edited April 1 by stat

[Mike Lister]

1 minute ago, stat said:

I pointed out a mistake in the "simple tax guide" I do not understand why this is not helpful. It seems to me like any criticism or pointing out mistakes is no longer welcome here.

The issues you describe does not exist inside the actual tax guide, only in the link after a cut and paste of the link is made....if you were to look inside the guide you would understand this. Several people, including some techie types, have attempted to understand why the link displays that way but have been unable to. However, you know all these things and have known about them for some time because this has been explained to you previously, that is why your comments are not helpful. 

[stat]

13 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

The issues you describe does not exist inside the actual tax guide, only in the link after a cut and paste of the link is made....if you were to look inside the guide you would understand this. Several people, including some techie types, have attempted to understand why the link displays that way but have been unable to. However, you know all these things and have known about them for some time because this has been explained to you previously, that is why your comments are not helpful. 

It is therefore not clear if the whole tax guide only is about income from employment. Documents you referred to from Thai RD before also state clearly for income from employment only. This has been pointed out to you before several times. Any dicussion about open/unclear points get suppressed right away.

030265guide91.pdf

Edited April 1 by stat

[Mike Lister]

4 minutes ago, stat said:

It is therefore not clear if the whole tax guide only is about income from employment. Documents you referred to from Thai RD before also state clearly for income from employment only. This has been pointed out to you before several times. Any dicussion about open/unclear points get suppressed right away.

030265guide91.pdf 338.59 kB · 1 download

Sorry I can't help you in that case, nobody else seems to have this issue or lack of understanding and you are the only one to have complained out of the thousands who have read it. My suggestion is that you don't use it, if it is not clear. 

[RupertIII]

51 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

49) https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/other-taxes#:~:text=The inheritance tax rate is,are exempt from the tax. 

 

As you can see, the conditions vary based on the relationship and the amounts involved. More information exists in the link above.

 

The above link goes to the top of this page and not to pwc.com

[UKresonant]

Looked like it picked up a bit in the link

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/other-taxes

 

[Mike Lister]

Just now, RupertIII said:

The above link goes to the top of this page and not to pwc.com

Thanks, I found another one like that this morning when I was checking other links. 

 

There's something very odd with the links generally here, one day they are correct and later they direct elsewhere. I have closed the Simple Tax Guide thread and will spend some time soon, going through the document and intend to look at the links once again, at that time. 

 

I just tried that PWC link you posted, when I used Google Chrome the link came back to AN forum but when I loaded Firefox it went to PWC!!! Clearly, something in forum software is not quite right so I'll forward the issue to Admin. @george please note the foregoing.

 

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/other-taxes#:~:text=The inheritance tax rate is,are exempt from the tax.

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, UKresonant said:

Looked like it picked up a bit in the link

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/other-taxes

 

Thanks, how odd.

[OJAS]

57 minutes ago, stat said:

I pointed out a mistake in the "simple tax guide" I do not understand why this is not helpful. It seems to me like any criticism or pointing out mistakes is no longer welcome here. So when will the mistake be corrected?

 

Yep, easy to carp negatively from the sidelines, isn't it?

Not quite to easy to single-handedly pen a 73-para document, though.

 

[Mike Lister]

13 hours ago, stat said:

It is therefore not clear if the whole tax guide only is about income from employment. Documents you referred to from Thai RD before also state clearly for income from employment only. This has been pointed out to you before several times. Any dicussion about open/unclear points get suppressed right away.

030265guide91.pdf 338.59 kB · 5 downloads

I was going through the Simple Tax Guide this morning, trying to understand what the problems are with various links. In doing so, I realised that I didn't see the document you linked in your post. Can you please tell us why you linked that document and where it came from and when you saved it? 

 

You wrote, "Documents you referred to from Thai RD before also state clearly for income from employment only". The current Tax Guide is Version 8, Rev. A, each version has been revised many times meaning there have been as many as 50 different version of the document, since it was first started. At one stage, particularly in the early days, I used some documents to explain different aspects of tax, simply because a particular document explained one aspect well, eg the end to end tax filing process, TEDA, Tax Tables etc, all of which are generic to tax, regardless of the source of income. 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

I was going through the Simple Tax Guide this morning, trying to understand what the problems are with various links. In doing so, I realised that I didn't see the document you linked in your post. Can you please tell us why you linked that document and where it came from and when you saved it? 

 

You wrote, "Documents you referred to from Thai RD before also state clearly for income from employment only". The current Tax Guide is Version 8, Rev. A, each version has been revised many times meaning there have been as many as 50 different version of the document, since it was first started. At one stage, particularly in the early days, I used some documents to explain different aspects of tax, simply because a particular document explained one aspect well, eg the end to end tax filing process, TEDA, Tax Tables etc, all of which are generic to tax, regardless of the source of income. 

 

It comes from the TRD website - 030265guide91.pdf (rd.go.th)

 

There is also one for the 2022 year on the TRD website - it says PDF buy it is actually a Word doc. - https://www.rd.go.th/fileadmin/download/english_form/2022/GUIDE_90_65_Complete.docx

 

TRD have also created a 2023 list of linked documents. - Year 2023 | The Revenue Department (English Site) (rd.go.th)

 

Edited April 2 by TroubleandGrumpy

[TroubleandGrumpy]

For those Aussies interested in open discussions about Taxation issues - below is the thread to post in.

 

 

[Mike Lister]

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

 

It comes from the TRD website - 030265guide91.pdf (rd.go.th)

 

There is also one for the 2022 year on the TRD website - it says PDF buy it is actually a Word doc. - https://www.rd.go.th/fileadmin/download/english_form/2022/GUIDE_90_65_Complete.docx

 

TRD have also created a 2023 list of linked documents. - Year 2023 | The Revenue Department (English Site) (rd.go.th)

 

I know where the revenue document comes from, it says so in the document. My question is which version of the simple tax guide was the link taken from, dated when.

[OJAS]

2 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

For those Aussies interested in open discussions about Taxation issues - below is the thread to post in.

 

 

 

And I see that this thread was started on 18 February. So even more inexcusable, I think, for you and @aussienam to hijack the PI thread in the way that you did, in flagrant and blatant defiance of @Mike Lister's express wishes and resulting in its closure.🤬

[Mike Lister]

let's move forward, life's too short.

 

 

20 minutes ago, OJAS said:

 

[Mike Lister]

FWIW I'm going to take some time with the Simple Tax Guide offline, and without the irritation that one or two posters bring with them, and try to update it alone. I will also sort out the links problems. Afterwards, I'll start a new thread and post the updated version but probably in a locked thread. If anyone needs help with anything I can be PM'd and will happily try and help. 

[Dogmatix]

I just noticed that the director-general of the RD only joined the RD in October just after the previous D-G lumbered us with P. 161/2566 as his swan song and possibly the last order he signed.  The new D-G, who was completely new to the RD, signed P. 162/2566 as damage limitation soon after her arrival on 20 November.  That may not make any difference to us but, at least, it provides her with a let out to blame her predecessor for not thinking it through, if she decides to amend it or scrap it in the event that it proves unworkable or faces legal challenges.  

 

There is something else of interest about the new D-G here.  https://www.thaipbsworld.com/two-senior-finance-ministry-officials-under-suspicion-for-insider-trading/ . Of course this tiny soupçon of impropriety is not considered an obstacle to promotion to head up one of the most important and most lucrative departments in the Finance Ministry.  In fact, it may be considered a positive qualification by her direct boss, who is, of course, Khun Srettha.  

 

https://www.rd.go.th/english/34772.ht