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

[topt]

11 minutes ago, stat said:

There is zero! indication that Thailand plans to introduce a ww income tax on unremitted income. ZERO!

I don't disagree with you but there was also zero indication, as far as I was aware, that before Srettha's announcement that they were going to change a 35 year old interpretation of the tax regulations.......

 

Saying that I do agree it does seem unlikely.

[UKresonant]

Gifted / transferred, no  initial purchase as point of reference 100% gain? 

 

To get tax credits the preferred tax authority paperwork will show all (tax applicable) in that State.... so they may have certification of all, but only tax the proportion remitted whilst only allowing proportional credit relief (maybe). 

[stat]

23 hours ago, topt said:

I don't disagree with you but there was also zero indication, as far as I was aware, that before Srettha's announcement that they were going to change a 35 year old interpretation of the tax regulations.......

 

Saying that I do agree it does seem unlikely.

Thanks man! This whole tax on remitted funds saga reminds of my tax professor at business school who only half jokingly said: "Any long term tax planing is futile as the laws will be changing every year"🙂

 

 

[stat]

Just reading the heading, a question to the admins: Is it possible and does it make sense to change the heading of this thread? IMHO it shoud read "Thai government to tax all remitted income from abroad for tax residents starting 2024"

Edited May 12 by stat

[Mike Lister]

Below are the three outstanding issues on my list, some of which have flip flopped a number of times....just to keep them visible:

 

 - How are remitted funds from commingled fund accounts viewed by the TRD.

 

- When CG are remitted, how is their composition assessed.

 

- Is overseas income that is earned whilst tax resident but remitted whilst not, free of Thai tax.

 

 k) - how does the TRD distinguish between principal (funds from legacy investments, inheritance, original investment principal) versus earnings (interest, dividends, remuneration) from commingled funds, determination of applicable foreign currency exchange rates for tax assessment, etc.

 

O) - when capital gains are remitted from overseas, how does the TRD regard the composition of partial remittances, as gain first, capital second or each as pro-rata?

 

P) - Returned to the list: The issue of whether income earned in a year when tax resident but remitted to Thailand in a year when not tax resident………….is it taxable? Many contradictory reports on this, even from within TRD and tax consultants themselves.

[Mike Teavee]

9 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

- When CG are remitted, how is their composition assessed.

Capital Gains is calculated as the difference between the purchase costs & sales proceeds & whilst some countries will then apply Tapered Relief depending on how long you have held the asset, Thailand does not so it's the Original cost with no relief for inflation etc... 

 

Once you've done this calculation you can split the proceeds into a percentage that's the original cost & a percentage that is the Gain, you then use this Gain percentage to calculate the Capital Gains liability based on how much of the proceeds you remit. 

 

E.g. Buy some shares at a cost of £12,000 & sell these for £15,000 for a gain of £3,000 which gives 80% (£12,000) for the Original Costs & 20% (£3,000) for the Gain

1. Remit £3,000 & the assessable gain is £600
2. Remit £12,000 & the assessable gain is £2,400 
3. Remit £15,000 & the assessable gain is £3,000 

Any assessable gain is treated as income tax so taxed on the sliding scale up to 35%.

[Mike Lister]

4 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

Capital Gains is calculated as the difference between the purchase costs & sales proceeds & whilst some countries will then apply Tapered Relief depending on how long you have held the asset, Thailand does not so it's the Original cost with no relief for inflation etc... 

 

Once you've done this calculation you can split the proceeds into a percentage that's the original cost & a percentage that is the Gain, you then use this Gain percentage to calculate the Capital Gains liability based on how much of the proceeds you remit. 

 

E.g. Buy some shares at a cost of £12,000 & sell these for £15,000 for a gain of £3,000 which gives 80% (£12,000) for the Original Costs & 20% (£3,000) for the Gain

1. Remit £3,000 & the assessable gain is £600
2. Remit £12,000 & the assessable gain is £2,400 
3. Remit £15,000 & the assessable gain is £3,000 

Any assessable gain is treated as income tax so taxed on the sliding scale up to 35%.

Thanks. That's pretty much what I had in my mind also but I put the issue back on the list some time ag as a result of discussions that didn't conclude. Let's see if there any challenges that arise, if not, I'll be inclined to go with that.

[Mike Teavee]

31 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Thanks. That's pretty much what I had in my mind also but I put the issue back on the list some time ag as a result of discussions that didn't conclude. Let's see if there any challenges that arise, if not, I'll be inclined to go with that.

One thing that could be different depending on the country of the asset is how original costs are calculated & in particular how to calculate the cost of an asset when it was bought in "Chunks" at different cost points - I.e. do you use FIFO, LIFO, Average Cost etc...

 

E.g. Let's say the £12,000 example is made up of 1,000 units of an Asset bought as:-

1. 300 @ £100 = £3,000 
2. 250 @ £110 = £2,750 
3. 250 @ £130 = £3,250
4. 200 @ £150 = £3,000 

Selling 200 units at £2 would give proceeds of £4,000 and a gain of:-

• FIFO - £2,000 (Units cost £100 each) - Gain = 50%
• LIFO - £1,000 (Units cost £150 each) - Gain = 25%
• AVG - £1,600 (Average cost of each Unit is £120) - Gain = 40%

[Ignoring 30 day Bed & Breakfast transactions], I'm pretty sure UK uses Average Cost (AKA "Section 104 Holding") so in this example the assessable gain would be £1,600 or 40%.

 

Edited May 12 by Mike Teavee
Hopefully Fixed the Maths

[tomkenet]

12 hours ago, stat said:

Just reading the heading, a question to the admins: Is it possible and does it make sense to change the heading of this thread? IMHO it shoud read "Thai government to tax all remitted income from abroad for tax residents starting 2024"

It is not only the heading of this thread, It is the initial news-article from Thai enquirer, 

https://www.thaienquirer.com/50744/thai-government-to-tax-all-income-from-abroad-for-tax-residents-starting-2024/

 

"Thailand’s revenue departments has released new guidelines which will see all income from abroad taxed as personal income tax regardless of whether it was earned income or savings."

 

No wonder many panicked when they saw this. Luckily the truth is much less dramatic.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

5 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Thanks. That's pretty much what I had in my mind also but I put the issue back on the list some time ag as a result of discussions that didn't conclude. Let's see if there any challenges that arise, if not, I'll be inclined to go with that.

No challenge - but pointing out that the current TRD method for treating CGT is based on the current in country system, and is probably one of the many things they are reviewing when the CGT is overseas generated. That would include what they will do when the CGT is taxed already overseas. I know the standard tax credits apply under DTAs, but they may take the approach that if the CGT has already been taxed overseas then the TRD will not apply Thai taxes (that would be a lot simpler for them to do).  If I recall correctly it is Malaysia (or Philipinnes?) that under their implementation of this new rule has excluded any remitted income that has already been taxed in the source country. 

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

No challenge - but pointing out that the current TRD method for treating CGT is based on the current in country system, and is probably one of the many things they are reviewing when the CGT is overseas generated. That would include what they will do when the CGT is taxed already overseas. I know the standard tax credits apply under DTAs, but they may take the approach that if the CGT has already been taxed overseas then the TRD will not apply Thai taxes (that would be a lot simpler for them to do).  If I recall correctly it is Malaysia (or Philipinnes?) that under their implementation of this new rule has excluded any remitted income that has already been taxed in the source country. 

Yes agreed. The only thing I would add is that there will already have been plenty of overseas CG's remitted to Thailand by Thai nationals so the process will already be understood, it's just that it hasn't been widely shared. It's not as if this is brand new ground that's never been covered before and we're all Guinea pigs.

[Mike Teavee]

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

No challenge - but pointing out that the current TRD method for treating CGT is based on the current in country system, and is probably one of the many things they are reviewing when the CGT is overseas generated. That would include what they will do when the CGT is taxed already overseas. I know the standard tax credits apply under DTAs, but they may take the approach that if the CGT has already been taxed overseas then the TRD will not apply Thai taxes (that would be a lot simpler for them to do).  If I recall correctly it is Malaysia (or Philipinnes?) that under their implementation of this new rule has excluded any remitted income that has already been taxed in the source country. 

 

Not 100% sure about CGT paid on Property Sales (Most people don't need to) but for other asset sales there are no tax credits as UK Expats don't pay Capital Gains on the sale of (Non-Property) assets.

 

See #4 of Article 14 from the DTA...

 

Article 14 - Capital Gains

(1) Capital gains from the alienation of immovable property, as defined in paragraph (2)
Article 7, may be taxed in the Contracting State in which such property is situated.

 

(2) Capital gains from the alienation of movable property forming part of the business
property of a permanent establishment which an enterprise of a Contracting State has
in the other Contracting State or of movable property pertaining to a fixed base
available to a resident of a Contracting State in the other Contracting State for the
purpose of performing professional services, including such gains from the alienation of
such a permanent establishment (alone or together with the whole enterprise) or of
such a fixed base, may be taxed in the other State.

 

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of this Article, capital gains derived
by a resident of a Contracting State from the alienation of ships and aircraft operated in
international traffic and movable property pertaining to the operation of such ships and
aircraft shall be taxable only in that Contracting State.

 

(4) Capital gains from the alienation of any property other than those mentioned in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this Article shall be taxable only in the Contracting State of
which the alienator is a resident.

 

(5) The provisions of paragraph (4) of this Article shall not affect the right of a
Contracting State to levy, according to its own law, a tax on capital gains from the
alienation of any property derived by an individual who is a resident of the other
Contracting State and has been a resident of the first-mentioned Contracting State at
any time during the five years immediately preceding the alienation of the property. 

 

  

NB. Point #5 is the UK "5 Year Rule" which stops people becoming Non-Resident for less than 5 years to avoid paying CGT, if Thailand were to implement something similar then it would scupper a lot of plans to do a Hotblack Desiato

 

 

Edit: This explains the 5 year rule much better than I can 🙂

 

An individual needs to be non-resident for more than five years to escape UK CGT on assets owned at the time of departure (other than UK land and property) of which he or she disposes after leaving the UK. This five-year period is from when the individual’s sole UK tax residence ceases.

 

If a non-resident becomes resident again in the UK during this five-year period, any assets sold after leaving

the UK will be taxed in the UK when the individual returns. If he or she becomes resident again after this five-year period, any assets disposed of while non-resident will not be subject to UK CGT.

 

If the individual purchases assets during a period of temporary non-residence, these assets will not be subject to UK CGT if sold while not resident, even if the individual returns before the end of this five-year period.

 

Complications can arise in respect of the purchase during this temporary non-residence period of a further shareholding in a company that was already in existence at the time the individual left the UK, and the pooling rules that apply (see CG26600). As with everything, there are exceptions to this rule, which are explained in CG26610. Examples of such exceptions are:

• the transfer of assets between spouses or civil partners and the transferee then subsequently selling the asset during a period of temporary non-residence; and
• certain gains that have been rolled over into another asset, which is subsequently disposed of during a period of temporary non-residence.

 

https://library.croneri.co.uk/cch_uk/gcabe/7-2

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 13 by Mike Teavee
Added link to 5 year rule explanation

[Dogmatix]

As far as we know, the application of DTAs in Thailand, apart from some odd PIT cases of which only one is recorded on the RD website which very straightforward, has been mainly related to corporate income tax. Large Thai companies do business overseas through subsidiaries which are taxed in the countries they are domiciled and not subject to Thai tax.  Cases where Thai tax arises for a Thai corporate would be, amongst other things, capital gains realised on the sale of shares in an overseas affiliate, dividends from an overseas affiliate, capital gains or rental income from overseas property, although they are more likely to own property through overseas subsidiaries.   Most of these situations are likely to be isolated tax events where is quite clear how much has been paid and needs to be credited under a DTA.  For example Thai company A sells a building in the the UK and pays capital gains tax on the gain.  It also receives dividends from portfolio investments in the US.  Withholding tax is likely to have been deducted from the US dividends and and UK capital gains tax (payable on UK property owned by offshore companies since 2016) has to be filed and paid before the normal tax year end AFAIK.  So it is very clear how much overseas tax has already been paid in these too cases. 

 

Contrast someone with various sources of income from the UK, pensions,. rental income, dividends etc.  They can show how much UK PIT they paid in the tax year but they can't show how much tax they paid on the individual income sources they might want to remit to Thailand because their income is taxed as a whole after deduction of allowances. So if that person remits his UK state pension only, the RD could argue that it wasn't taxed at all because the UK allowance was applied to it. I have a feeling the senior RD staff would want to do that in cases where someone doesn't remit their total annual foreign income in one Thai tax year.  The RD could argue that you remit income against your allowances and lowest marginal rates of tax first to be taxed at your highest Thai marginal rates of tax.  But how are individual RD officers in the sticks going to figure all this out when most of them have no knowledge of foreign tax codes or DTAs and can hardly write their own names in English and the RD is unwilling or unable to issue any regulations about it, while the Revenue Code doesn't even acknowledge the DTAs exist, let alone stipulate how they should be applied.  

Edited May 13 by Dogmatix

[TroubleandGrumpy]

3 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Yes agreed. The only thing I would add is that there will already have been plenty of overseas CG's remitted to Thailand by Thai nationals so the process will already be understood, it's just that it hasn't been widely shared. It's not as if this is brand new ground that's never been covered before and we're all Guinea pigs.

Yes indeed there will be some CGT managed by TRD before, but IMO the vast majority of CGT will have been 'seasoned' for 12 months and then brought into Thailand tax free. Only someone with a close first hand knowledge woud know how much - but I estimate it will be a lot more under the new rule intepretation. 

[redwood1]

Do you guys have any idea how very very complicated all this tax talk must be to most people...

 

I maybe no genius but I am also not dumb....And without doing some involved research I understand maybe 50% on a good day and maybe 25% or less on a bad day....

 

And I read write and speak English perfect....

 

 

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

Do you guys have any idea how very very complicated all this tax talk must be to most people...

 

I maybe no genius but I am also not dumb....And without doing some involved research I understand maybe 50% on a good day and maybe 25% or less on a bad day....

 

And I read write and speak English perfect....

 

 

Which is exactly why I am working to translate the useful parts of these threads, into a tax guide that people can understand. 

 

It's really no different from any other complex topic, people who have studied it or worked with it before, understand, those who haven't often will struggle.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

1 hour ago, Mike Teavee said:

 

Not 100% sure about CGT paid on Property Sales (Most people don't need to) but for other asset sales there are no tax credits as UK Expats don't pay Capital Gains on the sale of (Non-Property) assets.

 

See #4 of Article 14 from the DTA...

 

Article 14 - Capital Gains

(1) Capital gains from the alienation of immovable property, as defined in paragraph (2)
Article 7, may be taxed in the Contracting State in which such property is situated.

 

(2) Capital gains from the alienation of movable property forming part of the business
property of a permanent establishment which an enterprise of a Contracting State has
in the other Contracting State or of movable property pertaining to a fixed base
available to a resident of a Contracting State in the other Contracting State for the
purpose of performing professional services, including such gains from the alienation of
such a permanent establishment (alone or together with the whole enterprise) or of
such a fixed base, may be taxed in the other State.

 

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of this Article, capital gains derived
by a resident of a Contracting State from the alienation of ships and aircraft operated in
international traffic and movable property pertaining to the operation of such ships and
aircraft shall be taxable only in that Contracting State.

 

(4) Capital gains from the alienation of any property other than those mentioned in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this Article shall be taxable only in the Contracting State of
which the alienator is a resident.

 

(5) The provisions of paragraph (4) of this Article shall not affect the right of a
Contracting State to levy, according to its own law, a tax on capital gains from the
alienation of any property derived by an individual who is a resident of the other
Contracting State and has been a resident of the first-mentioned Contracting State at
any time during the five years immediately preceding the alienation of the property. 

 

  

NB. Point #5 is the UK "5 Year Rule" which stops people becoming Non-Resident for less than 5 years to avoid paying CGT, if Thailand were to implement something similar then it would scupper a lot of plans to do a Hotblack Desiato

 

 

Edit: This explains the 5 year rule much better than I can 🙂

 

An individual needs to be non-resident for more than five years to escape UK CGT on assets owned at the time of departure (other than UK land and property) of which he or she disposes after leaving the UK. This five-year period is from when the individual’s sole UK tax residence ceases.

 

If a non-resident becomes resident again in the UK during this five-year period, any assets sold after leaving

the UK will be taxed in the UK when the individual returns. If he or she becomes resident again after this five-year period, any assets disposed of while non-resident will not be subject to UK CGT.

 

If the individual purchases assets during a period of temporary non-residence, these assets will not be subject to UK CGT if sold while not resident, even if the individual returns before the end of this five-year period.

 

Complications can arise in respect of the purchase during this temporary non-residence period of a further shareholding in a company that was already in existence at the time the individual left the UK, and the pooling rules that apply (see CG26600). As with everything, there are exceptions to this rule, which are explained in CG26610. Examples of such exceptions are:

• the transfer of assets between spouses or civil partners and the transferee then subsequently selling the asset during a period of temporary non-residence; and
• certain gains that have been rolled over into another asset, which is subsequently disposed of during a period of temporary non-residence.

https://library.croneri.co.uk/cch_uk/gcabe/7-2

 

Thanks - that is very useful information for some and it goes to the fact that all DTAs are different. In the AUS DTA it is section 13 and there are a lot of differences to the one you quoted.  I wont bore you/anyone with the details, but there are a lot.  australia : article 11-15 | The Revenue Department (English Site) (rd.go.th)

 

Which brings me to the earlier raised point that TRD is not at all 'comfortable' with the use of DTAs for exemptions and exceptions. There are too many for them to learn and understand - and that aint gonna happen in every Provincial TRD Office for a long timwe (if it ever does).  IMO until they centralise taxation returns into Bangkok, especially those involving DTAs, it will be a potential diaster in the boondocks trying to convince a local TRD tax official that he cannot tax something that he thinks he can. Quite frankly I think until they TRD as a whole works through a lot of the issues during the first few years, IMO it would be best for any Expat to avoid the TRD if they have any tax issue that involves a DTA - unless they want to and can afford to use a registered Tax Agenti. Quoting the rules at any Thai Official is never a good thing, and when it comes to the TRD I cannot see them being any more accepting of an Expat 'correcting' or 'questioning' them, than Immigration is currently. 

[Mike Lister]

3 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Thanks - that is very useful information for some and it goes to the fact that all DTAs are different. In the AUS DTA it is section 13 and there are a lot of differences to the one you quoted.  I wont bore you/anyone with the details, but there are a lot.  australia : article 11-15 | The Revenue Department (English Site) (rd.go.th)

 

Which brings me to the earlier raised point that TRD is not at all 'comfortable' with the use of DTAs for exemptions and exceptions. There are too many for them to learn and understand - and that aint gonna happen in every Provincial TRD Office for a long timwe (if it ever does).  IMO until they centralise taxation returns into Bangkok, especially those involving DTAs, it will be a potential diaster in the boondocks trying to convince a local TRD tax official that he cannot tax something that he thinks he can. Quite frankly I think until they TRD as a whole works through a lot of the issues during the first few years, IMO it would be best for any Expat to avoid the TRD if they have any tax issue that involves a DTA - unless they want to and can afford to use a registered Tax Agenti. Quoting the rules at any Thai Official is never a good thing, and when it comes to the TRD I cannot see them being any more accepting of an Expat 'correcting' or 'questioning' them, than Immigration is currently. 

The number of people that will have to do that is likely to be very small, it will only be those who are audited, not everyone. It's good to prepare for the worst but don't lose sight of the fact the worst may only be 1 in 100.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

2 hours ago, redwood1 said:

Do you guys have any idea how very very complicated all this tax talk must be to most people...

 

I maybe no genius but I am also not dumb....And without doing some involved research I understand maybe 50% on a good day and maybe 25% or less on a bad day....

 

And I read write and speak English perfect....

 

 

If the topic was fixing the gearbox from a 1957 Chevy I would know most of the terms being used, but I would not have a clue either.

 

Quite frankly most of the current discussions here are 'hypothetical' - and most of the the rest is debate about the interpretation of certain parts and sections of the Tax Code, and how they may and may not be applied to Expats.  Moderator removed baiting flame that is untrue.

 

Until the TRD provides their much promised 'clarifications', and be assured there are a lot more issues for the Thais than for us Expats that they are looking at right now, then and only then can any certainty be applied to the matter.

 

IMO TRD has not provided those 'clarfications' because when they started looking at all the feedback and criticism, they realised they had no idea what was really involved, nor how complicated it will be, and only now do they realise why for over 30 years the TRD never applied the new interpretation before (the original decision makers in the decision to not apply it have all probably retired by now).

 

IMO the TRD are now also very aware of the high likihood that once they provide those clarifications, they will be taken to the Tribunal and Courts for doing it, so they are being very 'careful'.

 

IMO the TRD are extremely aware that the PM wants them to get this additional taxation revenue ASAP, and the new Boss of TRD is desperate not to have it all blow up in her face. This is especially so if it was her that told the PM's Office that they could increase taxation revenues by XYZ Billion Baht by making this change in the rule interpretation. 

 

I was involved in Canberra (The Washington of Australia) for over 20 years, and I have never seen a Government policy change implementation with so many 'hairs' on it before. 

Edited May 13 by Mike Lister
Removed untrue baiting flame

[TroubleandGrumpy]

14 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

The number of people that will have to do that is likely to be very small, it will only be those who are audited, not everyone. It's good to prepare for the worst but don't lose sight of the fact the worst may only be 1 in 100.

True - but that depends on whether TRD decides to tax home country Govt age Pension payments remitted into Thailand - or if they give them a blanket exception.  We have had the debate before as to whether it applies in all cases or not under DTAs, so lets not go there again.  Suffice to say that Expats will try their country's DTA if possibly gives them any chance of not paying income taxes on their Govt Pension payments remitted into Thailand. 

[Mike Lister]

6 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

If the topic was fixing the gearbox from a 1957 Chevy I would know most of the terms being used, but I would not have a clue either.

 

Quite frankly most of the current discussions here are 'hypothetical' - and most of the the rest is debate about the interpretation of certain parts and sections of the Tax Code, and how they may and may not be applied to Expats.  The 'guide' has a lot more 'unknowns' than 'knowns', and anyone seeking certainty aside from the basics, will be disappointed. 

 

Until the TRD provides their much promised 'clarifications', and be assured there are a lot more issues for the Thais than for us Expats that they are looking at right now, then and only then can any certainty be applied to the matter.

 

IMO TRD has not provided those 'clarfications' because when they started looking at all the feedback and criticism, they realised they had no idea what was really involved, nor how complicated it will be, and only now do they realise why for over 30 years the TRD never applied the new interpretation before (the original decision makers in the decision to not apply it have all probably retired by now).

 

IMO the TRD are now also very aware of the high likihood that once they provide those clarifications, they will be taken to the Tribunal and Courts for doing it, so they are being very 'careful'.

 

IMO the TRD are extremely aware that the PM wants them to get this additional taxation revenue ASAP, and the new Boss of TRD is desperate not to have it all blow up in her face. This is especially so if it was her that told the PM's Office that they could increase taxation revenues by XYZ Billion Baht by making this change in the rule interpretation. 

 

I was involved in Canberra (The Washington of Australia) for over 20 years, and I have never seen a Government policy change implementation with so many 'hairs' on it before. 

Your statement in bold is untrue. 

 

There are more people seeking to understand the basics than there are trying to understand the nuances of Capital Gains and Gift Tax et al.

[stat]

@Mike Teavee Regarding the calculation of CGT: what makes you think the TRD calculation is based on tax laws of other countries? Which country laws should be used (asset sitiu i.e. bank, nationality of owner, tax residence of owner, jurisdiction of management of the company) ? This would be an absolute first for any country tax I ever heard of.

 

I am pretty sure TRD will (and have every right) to use their own calculation independant of other laws. If they codify their MO is another big question. My gut feeling tells me they will use Fifo but no one knows, however I am pretty sure the "tax laws of the asset" will not play into the calculation.

 

 

[Mike Lister]

15 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

True - but that depends on whether TRD decides to tax home country Govt age Pension payments remitted into Thailand - or if they give them a blanket exception.  We have had the debate before as to whether it applies in all cases or not under DTAs, so lets not go there again.  Suffice to say that Expats will try their country's DTA if possibly gives them any chance of not paying income taxes on their Govt Pension payments remitted into Thailand. 

Every recipient of US Social Security pensions will invoke the US/THAI DTA and I don't expect one to fail. Ditto every UK government pension will invoke the UK/THAI DTA and I do not expect a single one to fail. You paint a picture as though there is massive doubt those things will be allowed by the TRD.....you are scaremongering and it needs to stop, now.

[stat]

15 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Every recipient of US Social Security pensions will invoke the US/THAI DTA and I don't expect one to fail. Ditto every UK government pension will invoke the UK/THAI DTA and I do not expect a single one to fail. You paint a picture as though there is massive doubt those things will be allowed by the TRD.....you are scaremongering and it needs to stop, now.

German pensions are 100% taxable by the Thai government according to the T/GER DTA.  So there is no scaremongering here, at least not for Germans who represent a sizeable proportion of the expat community.

[Mike Lister]

1 minute ago, stat said:

This is why there is the document to introduction to PIT and this thread. People in this thread should be free to discuss every nuance of this new directive. BTW Trouble never claimed to know what people are seeking to understand.

 

Trouble is in the right claiming that some vital parts are unclear (not the fault of you or the document). ANY remittance is dependant on CGT calculation and could be liable for PIT as for example german pensions include an officially recognised capital gains part.

 

As you are well aware, members are free to discuss every nuance of the new directive, within the limits of the rules and what is sensible. 

 

We are all aware there are several areas of Thai tax that are unclear, most of us understand that. But let's not paint such a harsh picture that suggests a majority is not clear, for pensioners with simple needs, almost everything is clear.

 

I realise this is thread contains lots of opinions, which is fine, but we're not going to allow the core base of information that has been accrued thus far to be destroyed, just because a small handful of members have concerns in two or three every specific areas. I will remind everyone here of the rules, particular the following:

 

5. Topics or posts deemed to be scaremongering, deliberately misleading or which deliberately distort information will be removed. In factual areas such as news forums and current affairs topics member content that is claimed or portrayed as a fact should be supported by a link to a relevant reputable source.

[Mike Lister]

4 minutes ago, stat said:

German pensions are 100% taxable by the Thai government according to the T/GER DTA.  So there is no scaremongering here, at least not for Germans who represent a sizeable proportion of the expat community.

The earlier post referred to Government age pensions and was not country specific. I imagine there will be some country DTA's that allow their government pensions to be taxed here but lets not suggest that is true of every country or even the majority.....that's what is scaremongering.

[stat]

1 hour ago, redwood1 said:

Do you guys have any idea how very very complicated all this tax talk must be to most people...

 

I maybe no genius but I am also not dumb....And without doing some involved research I understand maybe 50% on a good day and maybe 25% or less on a bad day....

 

And I read write and speak English perfect....

 

 

That is because the topic is very complicated. That is why Mike Lister has written the introduction to PIT for, to help people who do not want the deep dive. The thread should be for the deep dive. Cheers!

[TroubleandGrumpy]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

Every recipient of US Social Security pensions will invoke the US/THAI DTA and I don't expect one to fail. Ditto every UK government pension will invoke the UK/THAI DTA and I do not expect a single one to fail. You paint a picture as though there is massive doubt those things will be allowed by the TRD.....you are scaremongering and it needs to stop, now.

I have no intention of scaremongering - I am sure most people realise that.

 

I am pointing out that the TRD and every Office of the TRD is unlikely to have a complete knowledge and undersdtanding of DTAs and how they apply to Expat's govt pension payments - which a lot of Expats here in Thailand either totally or partially rely apon to live here.  I am therefore stating that IMO the TRD will not be as easy and smooth to deal with for any country's DTA  Statement removed by Moderator, untrue.

 

I am not scaremongering - I am disagreeing with your claims that TRD will be easy to deal with  Statement removed by Moderator, untrue.

 

Sorry Mike but my histpory of living in Thailand on/off since 2010, is that there is no guarantees when it comes to dealing with the Thai bureacracy - the ony certainty is uncertainty - and IMO that will not change in my lifetime.

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

4 minutes ago, stat said:

That is because the topic is very complicated. That is why Mike Lister has written the introduction to PIT for, to help people who do not want the deep dive. The thread should be for the deep dive. Cheers!

Well said stat - I think that perhaps that is how this open and broad discussions about the issue should progress. Those wishing to deep dive and discuss hypotheticals are gioven free rein, and Mike can sit and watch and take what he sees as any 'certainties' and adds them to the guide, and add any unresolved issues (like Gift taxing and CGT taxing) to the list of unknowns if there is no resolution or agreement reached. 

[Mike Lister]

18 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

I have no intention of scaremongering - I am sure most people realise that.

 

I am pointing out that the TRD and every Office of the TRD is unlikely to have a complete knowledge and undersdtanding of DTAs and how they apply to Expat's govt pension payments - which a lot of Expats here in Thailand either totally or partially rely apon to live here.  I am therefore stating that IMO the TRD will not be as easy and smooth to deal with for any country's DTA (especially if Govt pensions are to be taxed) as you think seem to think that they will be. 

 

I am not scaremongering - Removed by moderator, untrue statement

 

Sorry Mike but my histpory of living in Thailand on/off since 2010, is that there is no guarantees when it comes to dealing with the Thai bureacracy - the ony certainty is uncertainty - and IMO that will not change in my lifetime.

 

Whilst I have said that the TRD staff are easy to deal with, I have never said anything remotely similar to the second part of what you wrote which is a wholly untrue and will be edited out.