1 hour ago, dinga said:

it is contrary to my understanding of ETT's advice that the savings exemption is limited to Bank Account balances only.

My view is that since pre-1-Jan-2024 cash savings were used to procure the equity, that amount (but not the profit) was in fact pre-1-Jan-2024 savings and hence that part of the equity value falls under the PAW.161/162 cash saving criteria - making that initial pre-Jan-2024 initial equity (cash) tax exempt if remitted.

Saying it differently, my view (in this hypothetical example) is that if the amount of cash was used to procure the equity, then in it self it was never post-1-Jan-2024 income. Rather its only the profit on the initial cash, that can be considered income (if such remitted to Thailand) - and of course all the other aspects (DTA, residency, ... ) need to be considered in regards to equity income.

IMHO its difficult to get a clear answer at present, as like some others, i am a bit suspicious of possible fear mongering by tax advisors who stand to earn money if one employs their services. They may offer services for a price, when no services needed. That IMHO is a bit of a difficult situation, as it is the same tax advisors that many must absolutely rely on to provide a balanced tax assessment. I concede I had bad experience with tax advisor/accountants in Canada many decades back that colours my view, and as I result I often try hard to judge my own situation without such alleged/purported advisors (I also note I had an EXCELLENT tax accountant/advisor in Germany for years).

I emphasize this is my view - i could be wrong. Everyone needs to look at their own situation and make their own judgement call. Maybe (or maybe not) this will be more clear as time goes by.

.

Edited June 2Jun 2 by oldcpu

2 hours ago, oldcpu said:

I emphasize this is my view - i could be wrong. Everyone needs to look at their own situation and make their own judgement call. Maybe (or maybe not) this will be more clear as time goes by.

Unless and until the TRD really start following up on larger remitted revenues with individuals and it then gets taken to court I am unfortunately not sure how it will ever be clear to most of us.

Especially if individual tax officers interpret individually - as was proven by many anecdotes from posters who rushed to their local office to try and file when the changes were announced.......

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told. Arguably that makes It difficult to challenge unless you were to get a different ruling from another office.

I doubt anyone will willingly stick their head over the parapet 🤔

1 hour ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

One would hope that the case. I have no tax dealings with Thailand, other than them refusing to grant me a TIN when I applied for such.

Decades ago, I have had Canadian tax advisor/account mess up my Canadian tax return so badly, I was audited. That was painful. A big lesson learned. Instead of saving me an evening by doing my tax return myself (which in hindsight I should have done), it cost me many nights & hours sorting the mess with the tax department, and hours with the tax advisor/accountant (they delegated my return to a junior person in the office who f*cked it up royally), and resulted in me paying some extra money in interest to the Revenue department, and still resulted in me paying the fee to a tax advisor/accountant, which IMHO was totally undeserved given the f*cked up return they submitted had me audited.

Frankly while one would hope for such companies, that all is based on dealings with a tax office/officers, but having been burned in a different country, I am from Missouri in terms of said expertise. That is not always the case. I think there is a risk of tax expert marketing of their services, that may overplay the actual expertise.

Still ... having typed that negative view - I hope that in fact my doom and gloom view is wrong there - I did well in Germany with tax advisor/accountant - and I send my very best wishes to all who decide to pay a tax advisor/accountant and I hope it works for you.

1 hour ago, topt said:

Arguably that makes It difficult to challenge unless you were to get a different ruling from another office.

I doubt anyone will willingly stick their head over the parapet 🤔

Indeed .

Edited June 2Jun 2 by oldcpu

13 hours ago, oldcpu said:

I think you will find the AI made a mistake.

There is no OECD membership requirement that every person (say above some age such as age-18 to age-99) in an OCED country is required to file a tax return to their OECD country of tax residency. None. Individual country requirements come into play instead.

I suspect if you pushed back to the AI, selectively challenging specific points in that AI assessment, the AI would produce a different assessment.

AI can be highly useful in quick research, but because of it constantly conflating, it can often give wrong answers.

Never-the-less, this is an area of interest and relevance to many of us.

the negative tax income was if I am not mistaken, a plan of the Shinawatra family. I don't know if it will come to pass or not but the note I saw said it will be implemented in 2027 but all the details have not yet been decided. Like I said, this was an AI compilation dealing with possible upcoming programs. This is a new government and they too will be looking for ways to increase the tax base and the only way would be something that required all the tax residents/citizens to get a tax id and to file tax forms with the possibility of getting some govt assistance if very low income. i only wrote those comments that I thought were of interest to folks on this forum but I also said I was no expert and who knows for sure that this government will do to broaden the tax base and hope to garner more tax money for the government.

1 hour ago, Presnock said:

This is a new government and they too will be looking for ways to increase the tax base and the only way would be something that required all the tax residents/citizens to get a tax id and to file tax forms with the possibility of getting some govt assistance if very low income.

That is not the only way. They could also raise tax rates on sales or financial transactions. That would be way more efficient to levy tax as it is systematic and targets everyone the same including the fat cats who are usually able to pass through the tax net.

11 hours ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

Based on extensive experience with another Thai Revenue Authority, my experience is that you cannot rely on single (or even multiple) source advice from Officials - expecially the technical folks. Whatever is informally advised by them may likely have zero effect/bearing/weight when/if an auditor reaches a different opinion. Unless you can convince the auditor otherwise, the only remedy is to pay any assessment before mounting a Court challenge which is an expensive and very time-consuming process with murky chances of final success.

Given the potential risks, I'm thinking applying for a formal ruling is the best protection.

2 hours ago, Presnock said:

the negative tax income was if I am not mistaken, a plan of the Shinawatra family. I don't know if it will come to pass or not but the note I saw said it will be implemented in 2027 but all the details have not yet been decided.

I do recall reading speculation in news about the negative tax possibility. I don't recall who was in power at that time.

2 hours ago, Presnock said:

i only wrote those comments that I thought were of interest to folks on this forum but I also said I was no expert and who knows for sure that this government will do to broaden the tax base and hope to garner more tax money for the government.

I also find these things of interest, although perhaps I tend to be more on the skeptical side.

Best wishes.

22 minutes ago, dinga said:

11 hours ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

Based on extensive experience with another Thai Revenue Authority, my experience is that you cannot rely on single (or even multiple) source advice from Officials - expecially the technical folks. Whatever is informally advised by them may likely have zero effect/bearing/weight when/if an auditor reaches a different opinion. Unless you can convince the auditor otherwise, the only remedy is to pay any assessment before mounting a Court challenge which is an expensive and very time-consuming process with murky chances of final success.

Given the potential risks, I'm thinking applying for a formal ruling is the best protection.

22 minutes ago, dinga said:

11 hours ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

Based on extensive experience with another Thai Revenue Authority, my experience is that you cannot rely on single (or even multiple) source advice from Officials - expecially the technical folks. Whatever is informally advised by them may likely have zero effect/bearing/weight when/if an auditor reaches a different opinion. Unless you can convince the auditor otherwise, the only remedy is to pay any assessment before mounting a Court challenge which is an expensive and very time-consuming process with murky chances of final success.

Given the potential risks, I'm thinking applying for a formal ruling is the best protection.

23 minutes ago, dinga said:

11 hours ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

Based on extensive experience with another Thai Revenue Authority, my experience is that you cannot rely on single (or even multiple) source advice from Officials - expecially the technical folks. Whatever is informally advised by them may likely have zero effect/bearing/weight when/if an auditor reaches a different opinion. Unless you can convince the auditor otherwise, the only remedy is to pay any assessment before mounting a Court challenge which is an expensive and very time-consuming process with murky chances of final success.

Given the potential risks, I'm thinking applying for a formal ruling is the best protection.

Exactly, that is why the LTR is the "only" guarantee right now to avoid taxation on one's foreign income plus fewer immigration visits but I do hope the best of all for everyone especially since we live in what i consider a paradise still.

25 minutes ago, dinga said:

11 hours ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

Based on extensive experience with another Thai Revenue Authority, my experience is that you cannot rely on single (or even multiple) source advice from Officials - expecially the technical folks. Whatever is informally advised by them may likely have zero effect/bearing/weight when/if an auditor reaches a different opinion. Unless you can convince the auditor otherwise, the only remedy is to pay any assessment before mounting a Court challenge which is an expensive and very time-consuming process with murky chances of final success.

Given the potential risks, I'm thinking applying for a formal ruling is the best protection.

This has been proven over and over...just like every immigration office can have different requirements and believe every office feels that way too no matter their official policy.

1 hour ago, Yumthai said:

That is not the only way. They could also raise tax rates on sales or financial transactions. That would be way more efficient to levy tax as it is systematic and targets everyone the same including the fat cats who are usually able to pass through the tax net.

problem is most of the people are in the poorer group so any increase in costs or rates of taxes on everyone hits them extremely hard but the rich no matter how high are never really punished since they don't pay what I would consider a "fair share", and this is not only in this country.

10 hours ago, oldcpu said:

Still ... having typed that negative view - I hope that in fact my doom and gloom view is wrong there

I think your view is realistic. The situation isnt helped by websites publishing wrong information as in the PWC statement that I posted yesterday.

I was looking at a Pattaya based law firms website. An article dated April 2025. Near the bottom of the page "This guide is just to help you understand-its not official tax advice. We are just sharing current information". Prior to that disclaimer...

"If you stayed 180 days or less, you're not a Thai tax resident"

Should it not say 179 days?

Further down the page it says "You might get a personal allowance ( like 60,000 baht if you're over 65 ).

When I read wrong info like that, the first thing that springs to mind is "What else do they get wrong?"

35 minutes ago, Presnock said:

problem is most of the people are in the poorer group so any increase in costs or rates of taxes on everyone hits them extremely hard but the rich no matter how high are never really punished since they don't pay what I would consider a "fair share", and this is not only in this country.

Progressive VAT rates will keep tax low on essential products and services for the poorer classes.

As you've figured out wealthy (the ones who make the law/rules btw) do not contribute "fairly" to the system, what's your realistic solution?

19 hours ago, 10000Baht said:

You become a Thai tax resident for a calendar year in Thailand by spending 180 days or more in Thailand.

Thanks. i'm bad. Specific reference: https://www.rd.go.th/english/37749.html

From section-41 of Thailand Revenue Department's "Revenue Code" :

Any person staying in Thailand for a period or periods aggregating 180 days or more in any tax year shall be deemed a resident of Thailand.

Edited June 3Jun 3 by oldcpu

23 hours ago, potless said:

I dont know if members are still following this thread.

However, I read the following on the PWC website, last reviewed 02 February 2026.

Under the heading "Thailand" "Individual-Income determination".

Then "Capital gains"

Quote: "Capital gains and investment income earned by a resident from sources outside Thailand are not taxable unless remitted to Thailand in the year of receipt".

Is that correct?

Reading your post again - note Thailand is currently a remitted taxation system. My post here assumes in all cases one is a Thailand tax resident.

So income earned from outside Thailand is only taxed when remitted to Thailand. Also currently any income earned after 31-Dec-2023 from outside of Thailand, if remitted to Thailand, is potentially taxable by Thailand (dependent on various factors). There is no more caveat re "year of receipt' ... PAW.161/162 did away with that.

Further to this, my understanding is that income listed under (17) of Section 42 of the Thai Revenue Code, nominally lists tax exempt income from Thailand taxation. Further to that (17) Section-42, Thai Ministerial Regulation/Directive No.126 provides a more detailed list of such exemptions of (17) of Section-42.

When reading No.126, I note Clause-2 of Ministerial Regulation/Directive No.126 more specifically lists such exemptions, including:

"(23) Income derived from sale of securities on the Stock Exchange of Thailand, but not including income derived from sale of securities which are debentures or bonds.” (Amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 187, (B.E. 2534), but the original provision as amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 180, (B.E. 2532) shall remain applicable to interests on government bonds and government bonds of which the sale started before 8 November B.E. 2534)" [I have not yet investigated if 180 and 187 affect sale of secuities - so there could be even more items I as of yet need to learn]

...

"(85) Income derived from sale of securities listed in the stock exchange market of an ASEAN member country, whereby the sale and purchase is done through the system developed by the Stock Exchange of Thailand as a linkage to the stock exchange market of the ASEAN member countries, but not including income derived from sale and purchase of securities which are treasury bills, bonds, bills or debentures.” (Amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 290, (B.E. 2555) which has come into force as from 6 July B.E. 2555)"

...

so (23) and (85) above list exemptions to Thailand taxation.

From the above I deduce the sale of securities (such as stocks) listed and sold on the Thailand stock exchange are tax exempt in Thailand. The companies need not be Thailand companies.

However Thai resident's income from stock sales on foreign brokerages are subject to the Thai-Foreign company Double Tax Agreement (DTA) if such income is remitted to Thailand - although other factors (such as selected LTR visa categories, per Thailand Royal Decree) may create exemptions.

I believe that nominally, aside from the USA-Thai DTA, it is common that for a Thailand tax resident, the taxation of such securities sales in a non-Thai brokerage, is taxable ONLY in Thailand, and not taxable in most foreign countries. Further only taxable in Thailand if remitted to Thailand in any year (if earned in a foreign country after 31-Dec-2023). The USA is different in that the USA may tax such. There may be more countries than just USA here - I don't have the inclination to check many more DTAs. One needs to check the DTA of their source income country with Thailand.

Again I note that my understanding is such foreign security income, if remitted to Thailand, is NOT tax exempt in Thailand under (17) of Section 42 of the Thai Revenue Code. And PAW.161/162 notes that anytime from 1-Jan-2024 on wards, such income is potentially taxable in Thailand. And again, selected LTR visa categories are an exception.

...

Again - I am no tax advisor. I tried to dig into the details of the Thai tax law, but frankly, I don't find such easy reading. Rather I find it hard reading.

So caveat emptor - not every expat's situation here is same - rather many expats are in a different situation.

If this means massive amounts of your money at risk, you could consider getting a good tax advisor - however I do not know of any to recommend. This is a rather unique area, and i for one, would be very very worried of those who advertise their tax advisory services, may not fully know all the ins-and-outs.

5 hours ago, dinga said:

11 hours ago, topt said:

Saying that, ETT have long published their view which is presumably based on their dealings with a tax office/officers and what they were told.

Based on extensive experience with another Thai Revenue Authority, my experience is that you cannot rely on single (or even multiple) source advice from Officials - expecially the technical folks. Whatever is informally advised by them may likely have zero effect/bearing/weight when/if an auditor reaches a different opinion. Unless you can convince the auditor otherwise, the only remedy is to pay any assessment before mounting a Court challenge which is an expensive and very time-consuming process with murky chances of final success.

Given the potential risks, I'm thinking applying for a formal ruling is the best protection.

If you are going to quote me at least add the rest of the context which agreed with what you say -

17 hours ago, topt said:

Especially if individual tax officers interpret individually - as was proven

blah blah blah.

But to get that ruling you are probably going to have to stick your whole body in the firing line so please let us know if you decide to go that route and the ensuing result.

6 hours ago, Yumthai said:

Progressive VAT rates will keep tax low on essential products and services for the poorer classes.

As you've figured out wealthy (the ones who make the law/rules btw) do not contribute "fairly" to the system, what's your realistic solution?

some countries are doing a billionaire tax but looks to me like that drives them and their business out of that country. I just think we need a fair tax from the rich and progressive taxes from the poor and middle class people. On top of that, being a receiver of an annuity for life, some kind of retirement income for people who work their whole adult lives but without the benefits of savings. Not a real economist so i can only speak for myself and my family that are doing well though definitely not in the rich category either.

4 hours ago, topt said:

If you are going to quote me at least add the rest of the context which agreed with what you say -

blah blah blah.

But to get that ruling you are probably going to have to stick your whole body in the firing line so please let us know if you decide to go that route and the ensuing result.

4 hours ago, topt said:

If you are going to quote me at least add the rest of the context which agreed with what you say -

blah blah blah.

But to get that ruling you are probably going to have to stick your whole body in the firing line so please let us know if you decide to go that route and the ensuing result.

That's really a valid concern - rather than from an individual, would make much more sense to have (say) a lawyer or Chamber of Commerce gather some of the most consequential & unclear matters and consolidate them into a single request for official clarification/rulings

15 hours ago, Presnock said:

some countries are doing a billionaire tax but looks to me like that drives them and their business out of that country. I just think we need a fair tax from the rich and progressive taxes from the poor and middle class people. On top of that, being a receiver of an annuity for life, some kind of retirement income for people who work their whole adult lives but without the benefits of savings. Not a real economist so i can only speak for myself and my family that are doing well though definitely not in the rich category either.

long article published yesterday by a US news company spelling out the demise of the US SS system funds due to the shrinking number of US births and increased numbers reaching retirement age and mentions this is common among the western OECD countries currently.

19 hours ago, oldcpu said:

Reading your post again - note Thailand is currently a remitted taxation system. My post here assumes in all cases one is a Thailand tax resident.

Due to annual visits of varying durations to the UK, as best as I can tell, I am tax resident in both jurisdictions.

19 hours ago, oldcpu said:

From the above I deduce the sale of securities (such as stocks) listed and sold on the Thailand stock exchange are tax exempt in Thailand. The companies need not be Thailand companies.

Yes, I was aware of that thanks. I prefer to keep my investments in the UK for as long as possible. One major reason being that those investments are in an ISA (tax free) and as such, there is no tax paid to offset against any tax payable here. If that makes sense. Higher returns etc.

19 hours ago, oldcpu said:

If this means massive amounts of your money at risk, you could consider getting a good tax advisor - however I do not know of any to recommend.

There it is. Two and a half years down the line and it is still difficult to have much confidence about certain aspects of tax law here, from either the TRD officials or the accountancy companies.

Anyway, thanks for your reply. You must have a great deal of patience to wade through tax treaties.

17 minutes ago, Presnock said:

long article published yesterday by a US news company spelling out the demise of the US SS system funds due to the shrinking number of US births and increased numbers reaching retirement age and mentions this is common among the western OECD countries currently.

Simply put, people are living too long. The welfare systems put in place many years ago are becoming unaffordable. UK steadily raising the retirement age. Protests and riots in France a while back when their government wanted to do the same. Large swathes of most countries populations just dont have enough spare cash to build up a decent pension pot. A ticking time bomb so to speak.

42 minutes ago, potless said:

Simply put, people are living too long. The welfare systems put in place many years ago are becoming unaffordable. UK steadily raising the retirement age. Protests and riots in France a while back when their government wanted to do the same. Large swathes of most countries populations just dont have enough spare cash to build up a decent pension pot. A ticking time bomb so to speak.

absolutely correct! Will only get worst as the birthrates in developed countries continue to shrink as standard of living hits hard!

2 hours ago, potless said:

Simply put, people are living too long.

There are solutions for that, they started implementing...

2 hours ago, Presnock said:

The welfare systems put in place many years ago are becoming unaffordable. UK steadily raising the retirement age. Protests and riots in France a while back when their government wanted to do the same. Large swathes of most countries populations just dont have enough spare cash to build up a decent pension pot. A ticking time bomb so to speak.

SS and welfare systems in US, UK and France rely on a "pay-as-you-go" funding structure. Taxes collected from today's working population are immediately used to fund the benefits and healthcare of today's retirees and dependents.

Ponzi Schemes do not last forever.

The wiseguys who designed and implemented such systems last century weren't really visionary to say the least.

4 hours ago, Yumthai said:

There are solutions for that, they started implementing...

SS and welfare systems in US, UK and France rely on a "pay-as-you-go" funding structure. Taxes collected from today's working population are immediately used to fund the benefits and healthcare of today's retirees and dependents.

Ponzi Schemes do not last forever.

The wiseguys who designed and implemented such systems last century weren't really visionary to say the least.

BTW if interested on what could be in discussions now google "OECD and Thailand's inclusion", interesting about possible worldwide income at some point even as they continue to look at ways to expand the income tax base and garner enough funds to keep things running. Social security was great for its time, my retirement annuity even better and great for those workers that actually got a retirement annuity. I also have met folks that paid for such an annuity only to find that by the time they retired, the fund no longer existed. Some really unhappy people and the govt's position on helping didn't meet what they finally had hoped for. Can only imagine something along those lines with my annuity and what the future might hold.

On 6/3/2026 at 8:37 AM, Yumthai said:

That is not the only way. They could also raise tax rates on sales or financial transactions. That would be way more efficient to levy tax as it is systematic and targets everyone the same including the fat cats who are usually able to pass through the tax net.

In addition they could reduce existing exemptions, deductions and allowances, some of which sound rather generous.

Edited June 4Jun 4 by OJAS

5 hours ago, Presnock said:

"OECD and Thailand's inclusion", interesting about possible worldwide income at some point even as they continue to look at ways to expand the income tax base and garner enough funds to keep things running.

You are doing it again. If you have a specific quote that is more recent than last Autumn please provide a link to it as I have not seen any more recent news or comments on worldwide taxation for individuals.

Most recent article on OECD/Thailand and objectives that I can find is here but in this, and other recent articles, I can find nothing about "taxation" other than the previously mooted ideas and minimum corporate tax which is not what this discussion is about......

nationthailand

Thailand must use OECD push to rebuild investor trust, An...

Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul says Thailand’s OECD accession drive is key to rebuilding global confidence, attracting strategic foreign investment and raising standards on transparency, regulatio

So if you have seen something specific please enlighten us.........

5 hours ago, topt said:

OECD/Thailand

nationthailand

Thailand must use OECD push to rebuild investor trust, An...

Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul says Thailand’s OECD accession drive is key to rebuilding global confidence, attracting strategic foreign investment and raising standards on transparency, regulatio

This will have the opposite effect on foreign investment.

11 hours ago, OJAS said:

In addition they could reduce existing exemptions, deductions and allowances, some of which sound rather generous.

so the on thing I have seen that was reported as definite was the BOI exemptions for the LTR. Googling Worldwide income taxation targeting all TAX RESIDENTs gives one an idea that they are currently "preparing a draft amendment to Section 41 of the Thai Revenue code". Also Thailand is already part of the OECD tax info exchange network. Just saying, as even if they come out with it, then the cabinet has to approve it and who knows what will be the final say. There is a Post article today indicating that revenues will likely fall short this year due to the Iran problem and its effect on Thailand.

12 hours ago, topt said:

You are doing it again. If you have a specific quote that is more recent than last Autumn please provide a link to it as I have not seen any more recent news or comments on worldwide taxation for individuals.

Most recent article on OECD/Thailand and objectives that I can find is here but in this, and other recent articles, I can find nothing about "taxation" other than the previously mooted ideas and minimum corporate tax which is not what this discussion is about......

nationthailand

Thailand must use OECD push to rebuild investor trust, An...

Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul says Thailand’s OECD accession drive is key to rebuilding global confidence, attracting strategic foreign investment and raising standards on transparency, regulatio

So if you have seen something specific please enlighten us.........

google " world wide income taxation status in Thailand:" Nothing specific only that they are preparing a draft amendment to Section 41 of the Revenue Code. Even if that comes to fruition, it will have to pass the cabinet and senior folks too.

7 minutes ago, Presnock said:

google " world wide income taxation status in Thailand:" Nothing specific only that they are preparing a draft amendment to Section 41 of the Revenue Code. Even if that comes to fruition, it will have to pass the cabinet and senior folks too.

That was from last year or even before. It seems there is no new news.

Since you cannot provide a link I can only presume there is nothing more recent?

Sorry to barge in, but have we heard of any foreigner that has been audited or summoned to file a Tax return? While I reckon that those who have filed aren't a majority. I am mostly speculating as I don't have facts, hence the question.