Thailand reviews taxes and launches digital wallet to tackle income disparity

[webfact]

 

The Finance Ministry of Thailand is set to review the new land and building tax and the inheritance tax, following an order from Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin. The move aims to mitigate income disparity in the nation. Srettha, who also holds the Finance Minister post, gave the directive subsequent to the appointment of a new director-general of the Revenue Department.

 

It was noted that the inheritance tax only rakes in an annual total of around 200 million baht, a figure Srettha deemed as minimal and symbolic. He acknowledged potential dissatisfaction from the public due to the recurrent discussion of inheritance tax during political shifts in the country.

 

Nonetheless, he emphasised that despite the source of income, be it through inheritance or otherwise, tax payment remains a requirement. This is in line with the ongoing effort to address income disparity.

 

In a related development, the Revenue Department has modified its notification on tax imposition on certain foreign-sourced income. This change will be effective from January 1, 2024.

Moreover, the government’s plan to impose a 20-baht train fare within a span of three months is considered ambitious and complex. It involves a 60 billion baht compensation to the private sector, seamless connectivity, and a single-ticket system.

 

by Alex Morgan

Image by marla66 from pixabay

 

Full story: The Thaiger 2023-09-19

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[Ben Zioner]

There's a lot to fear for the Thai middle class from a  billionaire populist Prime Minister. Buy the  masses and don't offend your peers will be his motto.

[lordgrinz]

I thought Prayut was the only village idiot, welcome the new PM, even dumber than the last.

[mikebell]

36 minutes ago, webfact said:

The move aims to mitigate income disparity in the nation.

I think Prawit will have something to say about that!

[hotchilli]

Raise VAT that's fair, the more you spend the more tax you pay.

Yes it hits the poor, proportionally to what they spend, but the rich spend much more so therefore will contribute more.

[Ben Zioner]

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

Raise VAT that's fair, the more you spend the more tax you pay.

Yes it hits the poor, proportionally to what they spend, but the rich spend much more so therefore will contribute more.

I think  the  base   VAT at 7% to 9% is just fine. Shouldn't go to double digit IMHO. A separate "luxury" tax might be politically attractive, but the definition of luxury always leads to sterile debates, so forget it. The Thai income tax rates from 0% to 35% aren't too bad, but the thresholds seem outdated, 35%, max rate, at 55000 USD is plain ridiculous. Also I don't think that a 0% rate is a good thing,  the minimum should be 5%, too many people think there is no income tax, while it should be a fact of life for everyone.

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

Raise VAT that's fair, the more you spend the more tax you pay.

Yes it hits the poor, proportionally to what they spend, but the rich spend much more so therefore will contribute more.

Basically true, but many rich folks have very easy access to knowledge and methods to bypass VAT etc.

Poor folks don't.

[daveAustin]

23 hours ago, lordgrinz said:

I thought Prayut was the only village idiot, welcome the new PM, even dumber than the last.

They are all the same. All these unelected dinosaurs need eviscerating. Anyone anywhere over 50 should not be allowed to hold office. 

[cjinchiangrai]

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

Raise VAT that's fair, the more you spend the more tax you pay.

Yes it hits the poor, proportionally to what they spend, but the rich spend much more so therefore will contribute more.

It is inherently unfair actually. The poorest people that are forced to spend 100% of their income pay the highest effective rate. The super rich might spend more but since the percentage of income spent is much lower, the effective tax rate is also much lower. The rich have been pushing for consumption taxes for decades and you just bought into the lies.

[Henryford]

19 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

I think  the  base   VAT at 7% to 9% is just fine. Shouldn't go to double digit IMHO. A separate "luxury" tax might be politically attractive, but the definition of luxury always leads to sterile debates, so forget it. The Thai income tax rates from 0% to 35% aren't too bad, but the thresholds seem outdated, 35%, max rate, at 55000 USD is plain ridiculous. Also I don't think that a 0% rate is a good thing,  the minimum should be 5%, too many people think there is no income tax, while it should be a fact of life for everyone.

Most countries have a minimum earnings where no tax is payable. I think that's fair. Not worth the effort to collect tax from someone earning a low wage. They pay the 7% VAT on their spending.

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

It is inherently unfair actually. The poorest people that are forced to spend 100% of their income pay the highest effective rate. The super rich might spend more but since the percentage of income spent is much lower, the effective tax rate is also much lower. The rich have been pushing for consumption taxes for decades and you just bought into the lies.

Perhaps some balance with higher tax on luxury or high value items, gold included... essentials like food zero rated?

[Metapod]

The solution isn't more taxes, it's smaller government. 

 

Taxes are theft and governments will always want to spend more and more. Politicians basically win elections promising to steal your money to give you things back. 

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, Metapod said:

The solution isn't more taxes, it's smaller government. 

 

Taxes are theft and governments will always want to spend more and more. Politicians basically win elections promising to steal your money to give you things back. 

Someone dig up Che Guevara?

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

Perhaps some balance with higher tax on luxury or high value items, gold included... essentials like food zero rated?

That could go further using imposed maximum pricing for food products and items essential for decent lving standards. 

[connda]

On 9/19/2023 at 8:05 AM, webfact said:

This is in line with the ongoing effort to address income disparity.

Any time a wealthy, elitist PM talks about narrowing income disparity in the name of equality - Run!  In the long run they will make life a living hell for everyone but the upper 1% to 3% of the citizenry.
 

On 9/19/2023 at 8:05 AM, webfact said:

In a related development, the Revenue Department has modified its notification on tax imposition on certain foreign-sourced income. This change will be effective from January 1, 2024.

This entire edict was clear as mud and yet they'll shove it down the throats of the citizenry.
Yeah, and of course they'll implement digital currency - CBDCs - in order to put every satang of every Thai's earnings, income, and cash transactions under a microscope in the name of "equality." Then come the real taxes.  It has nothing to do with equality - it has to do with gleaning every satang from the 99%. It has to do with transferring as much of the nation's wealth to private corporations as the system can handle - all at the expense of the 99%.  The upper 1% live in rarified air and have ways to move funds without scrutiny as well as to use high-paid accountants to cover their tracks, legally and otherwise, to avoid taxation.  And along with CBDCs will come a nascent social credit system where access to bank funds will be the "carrot and the stick" for the 99%'s proper social behavior.

[sirineou]

3 hours ago, hotchilli said:

Raise VAT that's fair, the more you spend the more tax you pay.

Yes it hits the poor, proportionally to what they spend, but the rich spend much more so therefore will contribute more.

The poor spend 100% of their wealth , and with the national debt situation, perhaps 120$ and would pay tax on 100% of the income, where the rich only spend a small percentage of their income or can do some of  their shopping abroad and spend very little in Thailand .

How is this fair? 

[Dogmatix]

4 hours ago, hotchilli said:

Raise VAT that's fair, the more you spend the more tax you pay.

Yes it hits the poor, proportionally to what they spend, but the rich spend much more so therefore will contribute more.

They are going to have to do this anyway to fund all the populist vote buying garbage but they want to be seen pretending to tax the super rich, ie themselves first. The base rate of VAT is 10% but an order is issued to waive it to 7% every year..  It has just been extended to Sept 2024 maybe for the last time.  

[JonnyF]

He's certainly not wasting any time trying to extract every last Baht from the population. 

 

I'm guessing he had a bit of a shock when he was allowed to have a look at the books and saw how much has been stolen from the country since 2014. Now he's in a panic trying to make sure the place doesn't go down the pan. After 9 years with the snouts in the trough, the carcass has been stripped to the bone and tax payers are going to be fleeced to pay for it. 

[hotchilli]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

The poor spend 100% of their wealth , and with the national debt situation, perhaps 120$ and would pay tax on 100% of the income, where the rich only spend a small percentage of their income or can do some of  their shopping abroad and spend very little in Thailand .

How is this fair? 

Got to start somewhere.

[Callmeishmael]

He does sound like he is preparing to attack the middle class, as the poor don't have enough money to bother with and the rich can always hide their money!

 

This is right out the the Thaksin playbook and this is what lead to the popularity of the yellow shirt uprising in Bangkok!

[sirineou]

9 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

Got to start somewhere.

Sure I agree , but when Willie Sutton was asked why he stole from banks, answered: “Because that's where the money is." 

So, if it's going to start somewhere as you said, then it got to start where the money is . With wealth inequality in Thailand being where the richest 1% owned almost 67% of the country's wealth.(2018,  survey by Swiss bank Credit Suisse  ) So for max return Where do you go for  the money? Do you go to the bank that has 33% of the money, or do you go to the bank that has 67% of the money?

[lordgrinz]

3 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Sure I agree , but when Willie Sutton was asked why he stole from banks, answered: “Because that's where the money is." 

So, if it's going to start somewhere as you said, then it got to start where the money is . With wealth inequality in Thailand being where the richest 1% owned almost 67% of the country's wealth.(2018,  survey by Swiss bank Credit Suisse  ) So for max return Where do you go for  the money? Do you go to the bank that has 33% of the money, or do you go to the bank that has 67% of the money?

Nope.....You demonize foreigners, then sell this new tax to the voters as justified, then you take as much as possible from the evil foreigners while the HI-SO elites go untouched. Win-Win for everyone, hmmm...

[scorecard]

5 hours ago, daveAustin said:

They are all the same. All these unelected dinosaurs need eviscerating. Anyone anywhere over 50 should not be allowed to hold office. 

So that rules out 70+% of users of this weboard.