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

[Mike Lister]

31 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I am posting this to you as a member, and not a moderator, so I am not questioning moderation. 

 

The thread is 286 pages long.  Many members, including myself, will not / have not read every post on every page.  Those entering discussion on the thread at a later stage, or coming and going from the thread, are not trying to reinvent the wheel. 

 

Thread focus shifts.  New discussions start and evolve.  New information in the media comes to light which starts, or restarts new or old discussion.  Some latitude is needed on hot topics. 

 

Also, the more members that comment, the bigger the pool of collective thinking, which is basically, collaboration.  So an old discussion can attract a new idea.  

 

I agree certain parts of the current policy are doomed to fail, but where I differ from you is you seem to think because there is a "zero chance of being implemented" therefore the Thai government won't implement it.  I disagree.  They can, and may / will implement things that have a "zero chance of being implement"  and that's because I have little to no confidence in the Thai government to implement a comprehensive tax policy framework which incorporates the remitted funds of foreigners, with transparent legislation in which foreigners can legally navigate.  

 

Let's be honest, the Thai government tells foreigners to jump, and we ask how high.  They have us by the b*lls, and at the cost of no votes.  They can implement whatever shambles they like, when they want, how they want, whether it works, or not. 

 

Long queues, different interpretations from office to office, "tea money" and photo copies of the photo copies, agents advertising to "fix" it for a fee etc etc etc all exists now.  This policy may just be another layer of bureaucracy and earner for the Thai government from foreigners, with some "tea money" for RD staff.  Maybe they are seeking to nothing more than create another industry and revenue stream.

 

You are looking at it from the point it will not work.  I am looking at it from the point that they don't care if if doesn't work.  They will make it up on the fly, and if it turns only 1 baht, that's 1 baht more than they had before. 

 

Like I said in another post, they may have something up their sleeve, whether it works or not, but be prepared for a laugh early 2025, but there very well maybe some frustration, possibly anger, but that has to be discussed when the time comes. 

You use the term, "Thai Government" and "they", both of which are rather nebulous imprecise terms. I tend to think of those things as components that comprise a more lasting and permanent infrastructure that is fit for purpose. This includes the Central Bank infrastructure, the Civil Service Mandarins, the wealthy elite and others. They are the entities who fully understand the importance of having an infrastructure that is durable and acceptable. Governments come and go, the next layer down is in place for the long haul.

 

Nobody is going to implement a system that interrupts the money trail or one that has the potential to do so. Nobody is going to implement a system that potential interrupts the inward flow of funds and without doubt, a with holding tax on remittances does exactly that. Thailand may not care a lot about foreign residents but they definitely don't want to develop an international reputation for not being foreigners friendly that is easy to do business with because that would cost them inbound FDI, international tourists and large amounts of face. Imagine how it would be if international property buyers suddenly found themselves subject to a withholding tax on that Phuket villa they intended to buy, the market would stop dead and there would be an uproar. Imagine how the general population would react is Soi 6 Suzy suddenly found she was receiving 2k baht less each month, because the government was taxing her monthly stipend, they'd be up in arms.

 

 

 

[KhunHeineken]

10 hours ago, stat said:

I agree, highly unlikely that a withholding will be implemented on short notice.

As I just said in another post, basically, expect the unexpected, because TIT. 

 

We should consider and prepare for anything and everything, whether it is likely, or unlikely. 

[KhunHeineken]

8 hours ago, SingAPorn said:

After reading all the comments, to make things simple, don't chose Thailand for your retirement unless you want to run back and fort between embassies, banks, translators, accountant offices, immigration for the last part of your life.

Tax is just another bill to pay. 

 

Depending on eventual compliance / enforcement, some may no longer be able to afford to live in Thailand. 

 

Maybe that's another motive for this policy.  Getting rid of the low hanging farang. 

[Mike Lister]

21 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

So why would overseas banks request Thai TINs from their Thai resident customers? 

 

They are bound by CRS to disclose any information on request by the authorities  of the country of residence.

 

I have been requested to provide a TIN by UBS, and some members here have been requested to do so by their UK bank. 

Sorry, I understood you to refer solely to credit card issuers rather than overseas bank accounts. I agree CRS requires the potential for information sharing but credit card issuing banks alone, I don't believe so. If I live in the UK for example and obtain a stand alone Barclaycard for use overseas, I wouldn't expect Barclaycard to report any of my spending to Thai BOT but would expect the network that operates in Thailand to report it.

[KhunHeineken]

5 hours ago, Lorry said:

2. bring cash USD and keep it under your mattress, exchange it when the rate is better

You have to show your passport to exchange the US cash to Baht cash.  What will happen at that point enters into the compliance / enforcement discussion, which has to be discussed at a later date. 

Edited May 18 by KhunHeineken

[Presnock]

8 hours ago, SingAPorn said:

After reading all the comments, to make things simple, don't chose Thailand for your retirement unless you want to run back and fort between embassies, banks, translators, accountant offices, immigration for the last part of your life.

you forgot AGENTS.

[CharlesHolzhauer]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

Thai banks are agents of the BOT, they report vast amounts of information to them regularly, loans, balance sheets, NPL's foreign currency transactions etc etc etc, BOT sees it all.

This is my understanding also.
The bank I am dealing with in Australia sent out a Tax Status Declaration form due to AML/CTF and FATCA regulations which most likely have a reporting component to the BOT. The bank is merely a third party that acts as an agent between relevant authorities.

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

Thai banks are agents of the BOT, they report vast amounts of information to them regularly, loans, balance sheets, NPL's foreign currency transactions etc etc etc, BOT sees it all. Whether or not BOT makes that information accessible to other government departments is debatable, but would you think on this point!

Banks around the world, including Thai banks, already report on possible money laundering, funding terrorism, drug trafficking / dealing etc.  There is infrastructure already in place for this.  

 

Long story short, the Thai tax payer with an average salary who has 100 million baht in the bank triggers an investigation. 

 

This could easily be tweaked to report the total of remitted funds of the accounts of foreigners. 

 

 

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Banks around the world, including Thai banks, already report on possible money laundering, funding terrorism, drug trafficking / dealing etc.  There is infrastructure already in place for this.  

 

Long story short, the Thai tax payer with an average salary who has 100 million baht in the bank triggers an investigation. 

 

This could easily be tweaked to report the total of remitted funds of the accounts of foreigners. 

 

 

Most Western countries have reporting thresholds that are activated when certain levels of deposits are made. In the US this was previously known as the 10K rule where bank reporting was initiated. In the UK the level is even lower, if the deposit is in cash, it's very low. Of course Thailand has similar, this is one of the reasons why remiters are required to state the purpose of the transfer. That process is already active and has been for many many years. I bought a condo here in 2004 and remitted 6 mill and was called by the BOT to ask what I intended. I explained I was retired etc etc and that was the end of it.

[CharlesHolzhauer]

8 hours ago, SingAPorn said:

After reading all the comments, to make things simple, don't chose Thailand for your retirement unless you want to run back and fort between embassies, banks, translators, accountant offices, immigration for the last part of your life.

This maybe true for some individuals considering that, contrary to common belief, Thailand is not a retirement destination per se. That's why they don't and never have issued a retirement visa. .

Edited May 18 by CharlesHolzhauer
wording

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

SWIFT is an optional subscription based messaging system, members report ALL SWIFT or international transfer activity to BOT but SWIFT is not required to report.

I need to supply a SWIFT code if transferring out of Australia.  This is Kasikorn's SWIFT code.  KASITHBKXXX  This code is attached to my transfer.  I am not entirely sure what information is contained, or can be used, within a SWIFT code transfer, but perhaps the meta data in it could be used to indicate the amount of remitted funds.  

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, Ben Zioner said:

I meant the overseas bank, the obe who issued the credit card.

There is a record of you transferring money off that card within Thailand.  How would you propose getting around that, unless using an ATM, but like I said, I was referring to larger over the counter cash advances, where a passport must be produced. 

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I need to supply a SWIFT code if transferring out of Australia.  This is Kasikorn's SWIFT code.  KASITHBKXXX  This code is attached to my transfer.  I am not entirely sure what information is contained, or can be used, within a SWIFT code transfer, but perhaps the meta data in it could be used to indicate the amount of remitted funds.  

That SWIFT code denotes Kasikorn Bangkok, the head office, from their the HO will identify the branch and account number. Kasi HO will report that transfer to BOT as part of its regular reporting.

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

The change, enforcement of incoming funds isn't to target expats specifically.   If they wanted to do that, they could have done that a long time ago, by requiring a Thai tax statement at visa extension time.

 

It's targeted toward Thais, and the more well to do Thais, who do vote, and have influence.  If they are going to change anything in the future, I would expect it to create loopholes, for those HISo influential folks, to avoid paying taxes.  

I agree, but they are well aware that a Thai HiSo can use a foreign proxy, so it's across the board. 

 

I can't see any loopholes for farang.  We are easy targets.  The topic of producing a document at extension time is not allowed to be discussed at this point in time, but if we have thought of it as a compliance / enforcement mechanism, you can bet the Thai government has as well. 

 

We will see how it unfolds early 2025, after a full reporting Thai tax year. 

[KhunLA]

10 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I agree, but they are well aware that a Thai HiSo can use a foreign proxy, so it's across the board. 

 

I can't see any loopholes for farang.  We are easy targets.  The topic of producing a document at extension time is not allowed to be discussed at this point in time, but if we have thought of it as a compliance / enforcement mechanism, you can bet the Thai government has as well. 

 

We will see how it unfolds early 2025, after a full reporting Thai tax year. 

Really ... haven't seen that rule yet.   I've stated it many times on AN.

 

I actually wish they would do that, and announce it ASAP, as at present, I don't plan on doing anything, and simply wait & see, which may be a bit inconvenient, if & when they do require such a statement at extension time.

Edited May 18 by KhunLA

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I agree, but they are well aware that a Thai HiSo can use a foreign proxy, so it's across the board. 

 

I can't see any loopholes for farang.  We are easy targets.  The topic of producing a document at extension time is not allowed to be discussed at this point in time, but if we have thought of it as a compliance / enforcement mechanism, you can bet the Thai government has as well. 

 

We will see how it unfolds early 2025, after a full reporting Thai tax year. 

KH: you seem to constantly mention the things that you believe you are not allowed to discuss rather than opening a dedicated thread that discuss such things. I've already opened one for you on Tax Avoidance, because you complained constantly. Please don't tell me I need to open one for you on Tax Clearance Certificates also! If and when you do decide to open a thread on that subject, be certain to caveat the opening post by stating that there is no requirement at present for the general expat population to acquire them, nor has there been any news or even the slightest indication that they will be in the future.

[Mike Lister]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

Really ... haven't seen that rule yet.   I've stated it many times on AN

There is no such rule. Although I did ask that poster not to debate the topic in the long thread because it was regarded as scaremongering and many members told us that. It's fine to mention them, as many of us have, but having a full scale debate in the tax thread is not in anyone's bests interests, especially since there is no indication they will ever be widely adopted.

[KhunLA]

4 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

There is no such rule. Although I did ask that poster not to debate the topic in the long thread because it was regarded as scaremongering and many members told us that. It's fine to mention them, as many of us have, but having a full scale debate in the tax thread is not in anyone's bests interests, especially since there is no indication they will ever be widely adopted.

I don't read or follow too many threads, especially after the first few replies, unless the topic actually interests me.   Do catch the last post of threads, sometimes very long threads, and occasionally reply, as I did earlier.  Now regret that 

[KhunHeineken]

53 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

You use the term, "Thai Government" and "they", both of which are rather nebulous imprecise terms. I tend to think of those things as components that comprise a more lasting and permanent infrastructure that is fit for purpose. This includes the Central Bank infrastructure, the Civil Service Mandarins, the wealthy elite and others. They are the entities who fully understand the importance of having an infrastructure that is durable and acceptable. Governments come and go, the next layer down is in place for the long haul.

 

Nobody is going to implement a system that interrupts the money trail or one that has the potential to do so. Nobody is going to implement a system that potential interrupts the inward flow of funds and without doubt, a with holding tax on remittances does exactly that. Thailand may not care a lot about foreign residents but they definitely don't want to develop an international reputation for not being foreigners friendly that is easy to do business with because that would cost them inbound FDI, international tourists and large amounts of face. Imagine how it would be if international property buyers suddenly found themselves subject to a withholding tax on that Phuket villa they intended to buy, the market would stop dead and there would be an uproar. Imagine how the general population would react is Soi 6 Suzy suddenly found she was receiving 2k baht less each month, because the government was taxing her monthly stipend, they'd be up in arms.

 

 

 

Interesting post, Mike.

 

I read they won't do this and they won't do that.  A lot of people said that about legalizing cannabis, and look what happened.  A huge industry grew overnight, and what's happening now, pressure to backflip. 

 

I have always said Thailand will have casinos in the future.  Most disagreed with me, but I stand by my prediction.  Anything is possible here, at anytime.  TIT.

 

Once again, I have no confidence in the Thai government to implement anything, in a sustainable way, as you describe in the first paragraph of your post. 

 

You mention the money flow.  Maybe it's about Thailand keeping the bigger money flow foreigners and the low hanging farang ship out to Cambodia.  Who knows?

 

I can't see this effecting tourism, as they are not tax residents with their two or three short holidays a year in Thailand.  

 

The Thai property market already has a massive oversupply.  HiSo's probably wouldn't mind a slow down to raise the value of their portfolios.  

 

As I said, you are looking at it from the point of view why they will not do certain things, yet the policy is in place.  It's already here.  They have already done it. 

 

287 pages to this thread shows foreigners are concerned, or there's an "uproar" or are "up in arms" but the tax on remitted funds policy is up and running.  Are you suggesting they will repeal it, or it will somehow collapse under its own weight of failure?  I think they will make up the rules on the fly and make it another earner from farang.

 

At what stage to you start to deal with the very real prospect it's here to stay, and start considering its impact, rather than still looking at the past as to why they will not do it, after they have already done it? 

 

We are not allowed to discuss compliance / enforcement because it's scaremongering, but eventually we will have to be able to discuss not why they won't do something, but why they are actually doing it, and that's because, they are already actually doing it.  

[KhunHeineken]

59 minutes ago, Presnock said:

you forgot AGENTS.

Sure to be another flourishing industry in the 2025. 

 

"Thai Tax Agent.  No tax number.  Don't know the new rules.  Remitted too much money. Need a tax certificate for extension. - We fix for you." 

[KhunHeineken]

46 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Most Western countries have reporting thresholds that are activated when certain levels of deposits are made. In the US this was previously known as the 10K rule where bank reporting was initiated. In the UK the level is even lower, if the deposit is in cash, it's very low. Of course Thailand has similar, this is one of the reasons why remiters are required to state the purpose of the transfer. That process is already active and has been for many many years. I bought a condo here in 2004 and remitted 6 mill and was called by the BOT to ask what I intended. I explained I was retired etc etc and that was the end of it.

Yes.  Like I said, the infrastructure is already in place, and has been for years. 

 

All I suggested is they can tweak it and include all remitted funds.  Their problem will not be knowing who remitted what amount of funds.  This is easy. 

[KhunHeineken]

42 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

That SWIFT code denotes Kasikorn Bangkok, the head office, from their the HO will identify the branch and account number. Kasi HO will report that transfer to BOT as part of its regular reporting.

Yes, so they know who is remitting funds, and how much.  Easy.  Right? 

[Mike Lister]

4 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Interesting post, Mike.

 

I read they won't do this and they won't do that.  A lot of people said that about legalizing cannabis, and look what happened.  A huge industry grew overnight, and what's happening now, pressure to backflip. 

 

I have always said Thailand will have casinos in the future.  Most disagreed with me, but I stand by my prediction.  Anything is possible here, at anytime.  TIT.

 

Once again, I have no confidence in the Thai government to implement anything, in a sustainable way, as you describe in the first paragraph of your post. 

 

You mention the money flow.  Maybe it's about Thailand keeping the bigger money flow foreigners and the low hanging farang ship out to Cambodia.  Who knows?

 

I can't see this effecting tourism, as they are not tax residents with their two or three short holidays a year in Thailand.  

 

The Thai property market already has a massive oversupply.  HiSo's probably wouldn't mind a slow down to raise the value of their portfolios.  

 

As I said, you are looking at it from the point of view why they will not do certain things, yet the policy is in place.  It's already here.  They have already done it. 

 

287 pages to this thread shows foreigners are concerned, or there's an "uproar" or are "up in arms" but the tax on remitted funds policy is up and running.  Are you suggesting they will repeal it, or it will somehow collapse under its own weight of failure?  I think they will make up the rules on the fly and make it another earner from farang.

 

At what stage to you start to deal with the very real prospect it's here to stay, and start considering its impact, rather than still looking at the past as to why they will not do it, after they have already done it? 

 

We are not allowed to discuss compliance / enforcement because it's scaremongering, but eventually we will have to be able to discuss not why they won't do something, but why they are actually doing it, and that's because, they are already actually doing it.  

If you want to start a thread about any subject your heart desires, go for it. Just be absolutely certain it's with in the rules, doesn't overlap with existing threads, is legal, isn't scaremongering and if it's whatifery, that the opening post states that very clearly and also, exactly what its focus is. There is a huge difference between discussing Thai tax, which requires as much as possible to be based on fact, and discussing future what if topics such as Tax Clearance Certificates and enforcement rules that nobody is aware of.  I have asked you in the past not to discuss some aspects of tax for the reasons I have explained to you at the time. We look for members to use common sense in these things but since you seem to want to push every boundary, start opening those dedicated threads and begin the discussions. 

[Mike Lister]

3 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Since you've posted in the open forum, I'll ask in the open forum, and be very clear about it.

 

Here's the question:

 

"Mike, will you allow me to start a threat about what methods the Thai government might implement in order to ensure compliance / enforcement of their new tax on remitted funds into Thailand.?" 

 

I will not name the moderator that told me in a PM that such a discussion would be scaremongering, and might upset our more vulnerable members, but this is why I have mention in posts we are unable to discuss compliance / enforcement. 

 

There is no point me starting such a thread if then moderator Rimmer, for example, closes it. 

 

There's certainly a demand for this topic to be discussed, especially in light of no information forthcoming from the Thai government about it, and it goes way past just a clearance certificate for an annual extension.  It could go into the realms of fines, freezing bank accounts, airport warnings, seizing of property, garnisheeing bank deposits, deportation, black listing etc etc etc etc.  All the things that happen in the west, and more.   Are you, and the other moderators, prepared to allow such a thread? 

 

It's your call. 

I asked you not to post for the reason you mentioned, that was a request, it was not an edict and I know you understand that.

 

You now also understand that you are able to start the threads you say you want because my post above confirms that.

 

This is the last post in this exchange, either open new threads or don't, the choice is yours but there will be no further back and forth on this subject. If there's anything further you don't understand, PM me Admin or Support..

[Ben Zioner]

1 hour ago, KhunHeineken said:

There is a record of you transferring money off that card within Thailand.  How would you propose getting around that, unless using an ATM, but like I said, I was referring to larger over the counter cash advances, where a passport must be produced. 

Wasn't suggesting to get around it, I was saying that it is/will be very easy to trace ATM withdrawals made by Thai residents.

[Rimmer]

An off topic post has been removed.

 

 

 

[Ben Zioner]

2 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Sorry, I understood you to refer solely to credit card issuers rather than overseas bank accounts. I agree CRS requires the potential for information sharing but credit card issuing banks alone, I don't believe so. If I live in the UK for example and obtain a stand alone Barclaycard for use overseas, I wouldn't expect Barclaycard to report any of my spending to Thai BOT but would expect the network that operates in Thailand to report it.

Is this a prepaid card?

 

But I am afraid that even large cash withdrawals in an overseas bank might come to the attention to Thai RD, if they really want know. Don't forget it is a declarative system, where penalties can be inhuman when someone gets caught.

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Is this a prepaid card?

 

But I am afraid that even large cash withdrawals in an overseas bank might come to the attention to Thai RD, if they really want know. Don't forget it is a declarative system, where penalties can be inhuman when someone gets caught.

No, a regular cc.

 

Can't help but feel some of this thread attempt to fine tune the engine before the car hasr been built 

[Ben Zioner]

14 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

No, a regular cc.

 

Can't help but feel some of this thread attempt to fine tune the engine before the car hasr been built 

We need a thread on tax agents.

[Mike Lister]

Just now, Ben Zioner said:

We need a thread on tax agents.

Go start one.