Thailand to tax residents’ foreign income irrespective of remittance

[theblether]

On the subject of insurance causing O-X to fail. What do you think the chances are of mandatory health insurance not being included in the upcoming review? 

[bristolgeoff]

Amercians have done for years, the red bull heir or the one who returned recently will be double taxed now.But somehow do they care.My amercian friend in cnx gave up his us passport for that reason.Does it work  I don,t know just another law to use again

[Mike Lister]

3 hours ago, theblether said:

On the subject of insurance causing O-X to fail. What do you think the chances are of mandatory health insurance not being included in the upcoming review? 

The retirement visa from overseas was the O-A, you are correct.

 

But since all visa's become equal once they have expired and the holder begins to use extensions, the only variable is the reason for the extension,  eg marriage, retirement etc. I think the impact may be quite different for new visa applicants versus extensions to existing permission to stay and also retirement versus marriage extensions.

 

I'm pretty sure that new retirement visa applications will require health insurance, it's also possible that new visa's for reasons of marriage may also require the same.

 

I'm uncertain what they may do regarding extensions, especially extensions based on marriage, the latter seems more protected. I would not be surprised however to see the financial requirements at least doubled for all categories. Whether or not grandfathering will be a feature is also unclear. What is clear is that a worst case scenario of increased financial requirements and mandatory health insurance, for all extensions/reasons, could be devastating for many.

 

 

[redwood1]

1 hour ago, Mike Lister said:

The retirement visa from overseas was the O-A, you are correct.

 

But since all visa's become equal once they have expired and the holder begins to use extensions, the only variable is the reason for the extension,  eg marriage, retirement etc. I think the impact may be quite different for new visa applicants versus extensions to existing permission to stay and also retirement versus marriage extensions.

 

I'm pretty sure that new retirement visa applications will require health insurance, it's also possible that new visa's for reasons of marriage may also require the same.

 

I'm uncertain what they may do regarding extensions, especially extensions based on marriage, the latter seems more protected. I would not be surprised however to see the financial requirements at least doubled for all categories. Whether or not grandfathering will be a feature is also unclear. What is clear is that a worst case scenario of increased financial requirements and mandatory health insurance, for all extensions/reasons, could be devastating for many.

 

 

 

Exactly.....How would a 80 year old retiree with a pre existing hart condition get insurance?.....Answer....He could not get health insurance at all....Or only by paying a premium so massive he could very well be bankrupt.

 

Health insurance is a catch 22 anyways....The older you get the more pre existing conditions you have which causes your rates to skyrocket....And the skyrocketing rates will not cover what you need health insurance for most.....Your pre existing conditions.....

Edited June 16 by redwood1

[Ben Zioner]

5 hours ago, theblether said:

 

You are correct. O-X failed partly due to the insurance requirement. Remind me of the retirement visa category apply from overseas, was that O-A? 

Yes, but I doubt there were 80000, most people here are under Non-O retirement or Thai Wife, which have no HI requirement. Absurd isn't?

[Ben Zioner]

31 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

Health insurance is a catch 22 anyways....The older you get the more pre existing conditions you have which causes your rates to skyrocket....And the skyrocketing rates will not cover what you need health insurance for most.....Your pre existing conditions.....

I beg to differ, HI is and essential aspect of everyday life, starting from our younger years until we die. Continuity is of the essence we must have a solid predictable cover by the time we retire. And if we plan expatriation this cover must be compatible with our plans. 

 

Anyway not the band aid type of Insurances the Thais want to force on the retirees.

[theblether]

26 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Yes, but I doubt there were 80000, most people here are under Non-O retirement or Thai Wife, which have no HI requirement. Absurd isn't?

 

There were 80000 people on O-A visas given a months notice to obtain insurance without grandfathering. 

 

I'.m a busy man, I apologise to forum members for mixing up O-X and O-A. 

 

I will not apologise for warning forum members that this review has the potential to be far more serious than avoidable taxation scenarios. 

 

ps - the 80,000 figure was announced by the Thai government. 

Edited June 16 by theblether

[Mike Teavee]

9 hours ago, theblether said:

Okay - you need to bookmark this link - this is critical to retirement planning, especially for people planning to retire soon. 

 

https://www.thaigov.go.th/news/contents/details/83599

 

This is the crucial passage: 

 

2.) Medium-term measures (consisting of 3 Measures starting from September - December 2024) include:
1. Grouping and reducing the code governing visas for temporary stays. (Non-Immigrant) from the original 17 codes, remaining 7 codes, which will begin operations within September 2024.
2. Adjust the criteria and conditions for receiving a Long Stay visa for the elderly who wish to spend their final days in Thailand. It will begin operations by September 2024.

 

 

Apologies if I've already posted this in this thread, I've certainly posted it somewhere on AN before.

 

Thailand considers the Non-IMM OA to be a "Long Stay" Visa & the Non-IMM O to be a "Short Stay" Visa, probably due to the fact that the Non-IMM OA gives you 1 year permission to stay on entry & the Non-IMM O only gives you 90 days (Even if you have a 1 year Multi-Entry Non-IMM O you are only given 90 days on each entry) - NB I'm talking about the Visa itself & not re-entry on an extension. 

 

So it's possible the statement in 2 above only applies to the Non-IMM OA Visa & as they've already announced the changes to Health Insurance requirements that might be it. 

 

 

Personally I'm hoping it means they soften the criteria for the LTR "Wealthy Retiree" Visa but am not getting my hopes up 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 16 by Mike Teavee

[Ben Zioner]

3 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

So it's possible that we might not see any changes to the Non-IMM O Visa.

Besides to the cancellation of 10 subtypes?..

[theblether]

9 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

 

Apologies if I've already posted this in this thread, I've certainly posted it somewhere on AN before.

 

Thailand considers the Non-IMM OA to be a "Long Stay" Visa & the Non-IMM O to be a "Short Stay" Visa, probably due to the fact that the Non-IMM OA gives you 1 year permission to stay on entry & the Non-IMM O only gives you 90 days (Even if you have a 1 year Multi-Entry Non-IMM O you are only given 90 days on each entry) - NB I'm talking about the Visa itself & not re-entry on an extension. 

 

So it's possible the statement in 2 above only applies to the Non-IMM OA Visa & as they've already announced the changes to Health Insurance requirements that might be it. 

 

 

Personally I'm hoping it means they soften the criteria for the LTR "Wealthy Retiree" Visa but am not getting my hopes up 

 

 

 

 

 

It's possible. 

 

Here's the problem. The last time there was a review it had a brutal outcome. 

 

I don't know, no one knows. 

[Mike Teavee]

Just now, Ben Zioner said:

Besides to the cancellation of 10 subtypes?..

I was answering to Point 2, but for Point 1 somebody in another thread (Sorry I can't find it now) posted a list of all the Non-Immigrant Visa types & some of them were so obscure/duplicated it would be very easy to lose 10 of them. 

 

[Mike Teavee]

4 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

It's possible. 

 

Here's the problem. The last time there was a review it had a brutal outcome. 

 

I don't know, no one knows. 

I 100% agree, what they did to existing Non-IMM OA holders about Health insurance was shocking & IIRC Phuket refused to implement it so NON-IMM OA holders there do not need to show Health Insurance when extending. 

 

Last time they uprated the financial requirements (twice) they "Grandfathered In" people who have been on the exact same Visa for 4 years, if they do change anything, let's hope they just "Grandfather In" everybody who already has a Visa.

 

Edited June 16 by Mike Teavee

[Mike Lister]

19 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

I 100% agree, what they did to existing Non-IMM OA holders about Health insurance was shocking & IIRC Phuket refused to implement it so NON-IMM OA holders there do not need to show Health Insurance when extending. 

 

Last time they uprated the financial requirements (twice) they "Grandfathered In" people who have been on the exact same Visa for 4 years, if they do change anything, let's hope they just "Grandfather In" everybody who already has a Visa.

 

Grandfathered in people who had been on the exact same visa for 4 years or the same reason for extending that visa...which? Lots of people on OA visa for retirement, switched their reason for stay to marriage, without changing the underlying or original visa since there was no need.

[Mike Lister]

57 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

I beg to differ, HI is and essential aspect of everyday life, starting from our younger years until we die. Continuity is of the essence we must have a solid predictable cover by the time we retire. And if we plan expatriation this cover must be compatible with our plans. 

 

 

It's too late in the day to remind 80 year old retirees who have lived here for the past 20 years that they should have bought insurance 20 years ago, it's also not very nice. 20 years ago the playing field looked very very different. Retirement visa applicants back then can be forgiven for acting very differently from the way new applicants should act today.

[theblether]

41 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

It's too late in the day to remind 80 year old retirees who have lived here for the past 20 years that they should have bought insurance 20 years ago, it's also not very nice. 20 years ago the playing field looked very very different. Retirement visa applicants back then can be forgiven for acting very differently from the way new applicants should act today.

 

People don't know that the drive for the

800,000 baht deposit was a foreign currency cash grab after 1997 financial crisis. 

 

The number of farangs that fell for it is off the scale. Name another financial deal where paying up front is more expensive than paying monthly? 

 

You really need to twist in the wind to justify that. 

 

[Mike Lister]

3 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

People don't know that the drive for the

800,000 baht deposit was a foreign currency cash grab after 1997 financial crisis. 

 

The number of farangs that fell for it is off the scale. Name another financial deal where paying up front is more expensive than paying monthly? 

 

You really need to twist in the wind to justify that. 

 

I'm unsure about that, I got my first OA in London in 2004 and they were happy enough that the 800K remained in HSBC London. It was only later at extension time that they started to get uppity. When I did finally transfer the money across it went into HSBC BKK, into a non-resident multi-currency account, in GBP and again they were happy enough.

[lordgrinz]

3 hours ago, redwood1 said:

 

Exactly.....How would a 80 year old retiree with a pre existing hart condition get insurance?.....Answer....He could not get health insurance at all....Or only by paying a premium so massive he could very well be bankrupt.

 

Health insurance is a catch 22 anyways....The older you get the more pre existing conditions you have which causes your rates to skyrocket....And the skyrocketing rates will not cover what you need health insurance for most.....Your pre existing conditions.....

 

Good thing my wife has me covered by the Hospital she works at for life, now lets hopes she continues to love me until and after I hit 80.....LOL

[Ben Zioner]

2 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

It's too late in the day to remind 80 year old retirees who have lived here for the past 20 years that they should have bought insurance 20 years ago, it's also not very nice. 20 years ago the playing field looked very very different. Retirement visa applicants back then can be forgiven for acting very differently from the way new applicants should act today.

To proceed with expatriation without a proper health was reckless 20 years ago just as it is today.  And should Thailand bear the burden of healthcare for a population of uninsured Geezers?  The least the Government can do will be make sure that all new arrivals have a proper long term health cover. Now what to do with the people who thought they were entitled to quality, low cost health care in Thailand? I have no idea, but the Thai authorities would have to admit that have been guilty of too much leniency with these visas issued in the past.

[JimGant]

5 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

But since all visa's become equal once they have expired and the holder begins to use extensions, the only variable is the reason for the extension,  eg marriage, retirement etc

Actually, not true. To extend for retirement off of a Non Imm O-A -- you still needed to meet the medical insurance requirement -- unlike extending off of a Non Imm O. And they would only accept one of the designated Thai insurance companies. Bummer. LTR visas, however, tho' requiring health insurance, would accept my US govt Tricare insurance. Thus, a main reason for switching.

[Mike Teavee]

4 hours ago, Mike Lister said:

Grandfathered in people who had been on the exact same visa for 4 years or the same reason for extending that visa...which? Lots of people on OA visa for retirement, switched their reason for stay to marriage, without changing the underlying or original visa since there was no need.

Non-IMM O & OA holders when they changed the financial requirements for money kept in the bank, can't recall the Marriage figures but for Retirement they 1st moved from 200K to 400K & then from 400K to 800K but people who were on the same Visa for at least 4 years at that time still only need 200K in the Bank today. 

 

They didn't Grandfather In the last changes to rules around money kept in the bank (i.e. having to have 800K for at least 5 months of the year & at least 400K for the remainder of the year) which meant that people who were spending down their 800K over the year & topping it up just before their extension had to bring extra money into Thailand for living expenses effectively raising how much money they needed in the Bank when the change took effect.

 

Also there was a subtle change for people who use the Income method, when Embassy letters were available you only needed 65K Gross Income, changing it so you had to bring 65K pm into Thailand means that this has to be net of tax & any expenses you have in your home country, again No Grandfathering for people impacted by this change.      

 

We all know that they didn't Grandfather in Health Insurance changes for Non-IMM OA retirement holders, most guys who couldn't/didn't want to switch to a Marriage Visa either went the agent route (I know a guy who pays an extra 2,500B for his extension as he cannot get health insurance) or left the country & came back to get a Non-IMM O 

 

Have to say, the recent history around "Grandfathering" isn't looking to good for us.

 

 

 

[Dogmatix]

On 6/14/2024 at 6:36 PM, Eudaimonia said:

I continue to be amazed by how the media operates. Thailand is about to be destroyed as a retirement destination, and many of the country's wealthiest residents are likely to move out if this goes through. Still, reporters have yet to ask for clarifications from the Finance Minister or Prime Minister. Is the Thai language media even reporting this?

If you google it in Thai, there is not much more than the jumbled up press releases.  There was more of a Thai reaction to the remittance tax announcement in September.  But there is still plenty of mention of the new visas the government is planning like the LTR digital nomads lite and overblown projections of sales of condos to foreigners without any mention that the government has already killed off these things with the remittance tax, let alone the announcement of global tax. It is amazing that they seem able to appreciate the obvious contradictions. 

[Ben Zioner]

30 minutes ago, Dogmatix said:

It is amazing that they seem able to appreciate the obvious contradictions. 

"able" or "unable" ?

[John Drake]

6 hours ago, Ben Zioner said:

To proceed with expatriation without a proper health was reckless 20 years ago just as it is today.  And should Thailand bear the burden of healthcare for a population of uninsured Geezers?  The least the Government can do will be make sure that all new arrivals have a proper long term health cover. Now what to do with the people who thought they were entitled to quality, low cost health care in Thailand? I have no idea, but the Thai authorities would have to admit that have been guilty of too much leniency with these visas issued in the past.

 

If it's an issue of leniency, it's not the "geezers" you're so eager to blame for running out on medical bills but the younger bunch. Just look who takes stupid risks on motorbikes, falls off balconies, gets involved in violent fights, and who takes to begging on gofundme and similar sites. Want to solve it? Well, why not increase the age for the "retirement visa" and extensions? The older you are, the less likely you are to cause trouble, get involved in criminal rackets, or run your helmetless head into a pole while riding a motorcycle. Remember, it was members of motorcycle gangs, guys in the lower to mid 50s, who kicked all this off many months ago when Big Joke said it was too easy for them to get retirement extensions. Solve the problem? Raise the age for the retirement visa and extensions to the same age as Thai retirement age, which is 60. 

[redwood1]

18 minutes ago, John Drake said:

 

If it's an issue of leniency, it's not the "geezers" you're so eager to blame for running out on medical bills but the younger bunch. Just look who takes stupid risks on motorbikes, falls off balconies, gets involved in violent fights, and who takes to begging on gofundme and similar sites. Want to solve it? Well, why not increase the age for the "retirement visa" and extensions? The older you are, the less likely you are to cause trouble, get involved in criminal rackets, or run your helmetless head into a pole while riding a motorcycle. Remember, it was members of motorcycle gangs, guys in the lower to mid 50s, who kicked all this off many months ago when Big Joke said it was too easy for them to get retirement extensions. Solve the problem? Raise the age for the retirement visa and extensions to the same age as Thai retirement age, which is 60. 

 

 

Yes almost all farang fights, motor cycle wrecks, drunken trouble makers, hospital bill skips etc are younger farang.......Must be at least 95% younger guys....

 

I still dont get why Thailand does not welcome older farang more?.....It seems some one that pays their bills and does not cause any trouble would be the ideal kind of person Thailand would want......

 

 

 

[Ben Zioner]

1 hour ago, John Drake said:

 

If it's an issue of leniency, it's not the "geezers" you're so eager to blame for running out on medical bills but the younger bunch. Just look who takes stupid risks on motorbikes, falls off balconies, gets involved in violent fights, and who takes to begging on gofundme and similar sites. Want to solve it? Well, why not increase the age for the "retirement visa" and extensions? The older you are, the less likely you are to cause trouble, get involved in criminal rackets, or run your helmetless head into a pole while riding a motorcycle. Remember, it was members of motorcycle gangs, guys in the lower to mid 50s, who kicked all this off many months ago when Big Joke said it was too easy for them to get retirement extensions. Solve the problem? Raise the age for the retirement visa and extensions to the same age as Thai retirement age, which is 60. 

 

51 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

 

 

Yes almost all farang fights, motor cycle wrecks, drunken trouble makers, hospital bill skips etc are younger farang.......Must be at least 95% younger guys....

 

I still dont get why Thailand does not welcome older farang more?.....It seems some one that pays their bills and does not cause any trouble would be the ideal kind of person Thailand would want......

 

 

 

Ok, young guys may have more fights and accidents. But how about Cancer, Strokes, Diabetes, Heart disease, Joint replacements, Cataract, and.. death ? 

 

[John Drake]

10 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

 

Ok, young guys may have more fights and accidents. But how about Cancer, Strokes, Diabetes, Heart disease, Joint replacements, Cataract, and.. death ? 

 

 

Everybody dies. And all I can tell you is that every time I go to the hospital, I pay before I leave. Never skipped out. Frankly, it would not be possible. At Thonburi 2, where I usually go, I am escorted in a wheelchair by at least one beefy guy to the payment desk. I'm pretty sure my experience is not rare. I would guess most of those of us on retirement extensions pay our way, one way or another. And I suspect a lot of the very old guys let nature take its course.

[Eudaimonia]

There is a free seminar on Friday in Hua Hin for those interested in income tax changes. Even in 2024, people apparently still gather in a physical space donning "business attire" to listen to speakers. This may be useful for someone.

https://www.huahintoday.com/local-news/free-event-in-hua-hin-to-address-major-changes-in-thai-tax-legislation/

Edited June 17 by Eudaimonia
Better link

[theblether]

On 6/17/2024 at 1:30 AM, Mike Lister said:

I'm unsure about that, I got my first OA in London in 2004 and they were happy enough that the 800K remained in HSBC London. It was only later at extension time that they started to get uppity. When I did finally transfer the money across it went into HSBC BKK, into a non-resident multi-currency account, in GBP and again they were happy enough.

 

100% a foreign currency grab, virtually all deposits were placed in Thai baht with Thai banks. You were the exception that does not disprove the rule.  

[CallumWK]

21 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

100% a foreign currency grab, virtually all deposits were placed in Thai baht with Thai banks. You were the exception that does not disprove the rule.  

 

When you apply for an O-A visa in your home country, not only funds in the home country bank are accepted, but you also get 2 years instead of 1.

 

At extension time, Thai immigration makes the rules. FCD's are accepted s proof of funds by Thai immigration

Edited June 18 by CallumWK

[theblether]

55 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

 

When you apply for an O-A visa in your home country, not only funds in the home country bank are accepted, but you also get 2 years instead of 1.

 

At extension time, Thai immigration makes the rules. FCD's are accepted s proof of funds by Thai immigration

 

All people need to know is that the requirement for mandatory insurance was sprung out of the blue on 0-A holders, with some people given as little as one months' notice to comply. 

 

And the vast majority of people using the 800,000 baht method are not 0-A holders and have their cash deposited in a Thai bank.