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

[oldcpu]

On 10/16/2024 at 1:39 PM, Thaindrew said:

 Thai RD data only comes from CRS, it tells them your remittances, it doesn't say which remittances are accessible or not (CRS doesn't know the detail of the funds behind every remittance, it knows income and remittance values), that will be the point of the tax return and any follow up that Thai RD conduct.  

 

A case in point - in some countries (Canada in particular) just because one does not have sufficient taxable income, does not mean one does not have to file a tax return.

 

In the case of Canada, as soon as one who is a resident to Canada earns income more than the 'personal exemption' that person has to file a Canadian income tax return.

 

Further, non-residents to Canada with Canadian income (such as pensions from Canada or small trivial amounts of interest from Canadian banks) are not entitled to 'personal exemption' and they also have to file a Canadian income tax return. 

 

My Thai wife has maintained a small bank account in Canada (kept from when she lived in Canada) , with interest less than $100 Cdn/year.  While she was living in Germany as a permanent resident, she went for some years without filing a Canadian tax return.  Revenue Canada subsequently contacted her in Germany and advised her she needed to file a Canadian tax return for all of the past years (where due to such low bank interest less than $100 Cdn she did not file a tax return).

 

Revenue Canada did not care if my wife claimed she did not earn enough money to pay Tax in Canada (as the withholding tax more than balanced out the small interest she obtained).

 

They didn't care.  They wanted the tax return !

 

Revenue Canada wanted to be THE organization that decided on Canadian tax - and not my wife's (accurate) assessment. And further they wanted to know all of her Global income and also as her spouse, know all of my Global income, as part of her Canadian tax return.  

 

I don't know the Thai RD view here (my hope is that the Thai RD view is more enlightened than Canada's) but I do know that there are countries (such as Canada) who want to make the decision as to whether one's income is taxable in a tax return EVERY YEAR and they do NOT want the non-resident individual (who has had some financial connection to Canada) , regardless of the amount earned in Canada, to make the decision whether to file a Canadian return or not file a return.

 

Edited October 17 by oldcpu

[chiang mai]

The UK wants a tax return from me every year, even though no tax is due and even though the assessable income level is below the Personal Allowance. Now we hear that Canada wants the same things, all of which is in line with what the Thai tax law says. But of course, this all flies in the face of common sense, or at least so we are told!

[Yumthai]

2 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

The UK wants a tax return from me every year, even though no tax is due and even though the assessable income level is below the Personal Allowance. Now we hear that Canada wants the same things, all of which is in line with what the Thai tax law says. But of course, this all flies in the face of common sense, or at least so we are told!

This is surely common sense for governments that crave to collect more and more information on cattle people in order to control and milk them, sadly not for individuals who struggle for freedom in this world.

 

Fortunately Thailand is far behind in term of coercive power and real willingness to go the globalist route compare to CAN/UK/AUS/NZ/EU.

[NoDisplayName]

6 hours ago, wordchild said:

Through business I have got to know quite a few wealthy Thais with assets outside country.

 I wouldn’t claim to know, in detail, what their plans are ,

 

I am not at all concerned about how the latest proposed tax law will affect wealthy Thais.  After all, the laws are written by wealthy Thais, and will surely benefit them and their acquaintances.

[stat]

On 10/16/2024 at 11:43 AM, Johno57 said:

 the one thing you have going for you is the 6 month rule which also could come under scrutiny in the future..

What makes you think so? There are barely any countries in the world that tax you from day 1 so I call BS, sorry mate. You cannot backup your claim with anything.

[stat]

On 10/16/2024 at 3:18 AM, EVENKEEL said:

You show that there is talk of it, talk of proposals. 

 

I'm sure there is a minority of (big money) tax refugees residing in Thailand who don't pay taxes in their home country. As well as those Thais working overseas and bringing money home to Thailand. 

 

For the rest of us poor schmucks residing in Thailand, do you really think Thailand has the resources to track us?  Immigration has enough trouble making sense of my bank records for my extension. How on earth would they figure out my tax return from home country? I would think before the tax man tracks down foreigners they will start with the millions of Thais who don't file.

FYI there is no home country taxwise if you reside in Thailand so perfectly normal and legal to not pay taxes anywhere as TH is currently not taxing any ww unremitted income. There are a lot of people in TH with above 200K USD investment income. Just because everyone (me included) lives in a bubble and assumes everyone has roughly the same income this is not the case. You can buy 5 Mio USD mansions in Phuket and prices are going up there like a rocket.

 

Me on the other hand I always wonder why there are so many YT videos or discussion about beerprice differences of 20 Baht.

[stat]

On 10/16/2024 at 7:50 AM, Thaindrew said:

remittances are part of the CRS data the TRD gets from every bank that has your Thai address listed, this is already happening.

Resounding NO. CRS is about account balance and gross income (sales volume) not about remittances.

[stat]

On 10/16/2024 at 9:29 AM, chiang mai said:

That video has been poo pooh'ed wide and far, some  of the information in it is simply unreliable, as is the so called tax expert.

Correct the "tax expert" is not really an expert. The one thing i learned from this video is that no one knows if ATM remittances will be taxed as there are some people who doubt it.

[chiang mai]

9 hours ago, stat said:

Correct the "tax expert" is not really an expert. The one thing i learned from this video is that no one knows if ATM remittances will be taxed as there are some people who doubt it.

There are people who doubt the moon landing or holocaust ever took place or that the earth is round, also! There will always be somebody somewhere who doubts anything that is said that is based on logic and precedent and balance of probability and anecdotes and consensus. Such people will only believe a statement if it is a direct quote from the TRD, we have such people in this forum.

[Celsius]

11 hours ago, oldcpu said:

Revenue Canada did not care if my wife claimed she did not earn enough money to pay Tax in Canada (as the withholding tax more than balanced out the small interest she obtained).

 

They didn't care.  They wanted the tax return !

 

I do not understand what are you complaining about. Your wife had income from Canadian sources that is why she needed to file a return....as you said it yourself.

 

She could have opened a non resident account and would not be bothered by CRA. I have RBC non resident account and have received $13,000 in interest last year. No witholding tax and Canada did not care about filing. I have a rental property in Toronto and have to file a non resident tax return.

[oldcpu]

3 hours ago, Celsius said:

 

I do not understand what are you complaining about. Your wife had income from Canadian sources that is why she needed to file a return....as you said it yourself.

 

Not a complaint.  Just an observation.

 

Now take Germany (in contrast).  I earn a small amount of income from Germany (larger than what I obtain from Canada).  Germany sent me a letter advising me to stop sending annual tax returns (unless my tax situation changes) because the amount I obtained from Germany was either covered by a DTA (with Thailand) or it was too small (ie interest) for them to want to process a tax return. 

 

Common sense prevailed there in Germany.   I can't say the same about Canada - .... but hey - if Canada wants to waste their tax payers money by processing a tax return from my wife (and from myself) which they required us to submit so to receive NO EXTRA tax (my wife's case) or a trivial amount of tax (my case - which does not pay enough for the labour to review my tax form) - then go to it !!  Sure !! By all means !! .  .... fill the beloved Canadian 'boots'.   A CLASSIC case of government inefficiency (dare I say over reach) to the determent of their tax paying citizens/residents.

 

3 hours ago, Celsius said:

She could have opened a non resident account and would not be bothered by CRA. I have RBC non resident account and have received $13,000 in interest last year. No witholding tax and Canada did not care about filing. I have a rental property in Toronto and have to file a non resident tax return.

$13,000 ?  Your case is VERY VERY VERY different.

 

In my wife's case (and my case) ?  Why transfer SIGNIFICANTLY small amounts that garner less than $100 Cdn/year interest?  Why ?  Why spend the time?  The amount of money was so small it was NOT WORTH THE EFFORT.  But Canada wants to waste their tax payers money paying civil servants to review tax forms where either NO MONEY or next to no money is collected.

 

Hopefully Thailand has more sense than Canada - and takes a good look at how Germany does such.

 

Edited October 18 by oldcpu

[Celsius]

12 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

Not a complaint.  Just an observation.

 

Now take Germany (in contrast).  I earn a small amount of income from Germany (larger than what I obtain from Canada).  Germany sent me a letter advising me to stop sending annual tax returns (unless my tax situation changes) because the amount I obtained from Germany was either covered by a DTA (with Thailand) or it was too small (ie interest) for them to want to process a tax return. 

 

Common sense prevailed there in Germany.   I can't say the same about Canada - .... but hey - if Canada wants to waste their tax payers money by processing a tax return from my wife (and from myself) which they required us to submit so to receive NO EXTRA tax (my wife's case) or a trivial amount of tax (my case - which does not pay enough for the labour to review my tax form) - then go to it !!  Sure !! By all means !! .  .... fill the beloved Canadian 'boots'.   A CLASSIC case of government inefficiency (dare I say over reach) to the determent of their tax paying citizens/residents.

 

$13,000 ?  Your case is VERY VERY VERY different.

 

In my wife's case (and my case) ?  Why transfer SIGNIFICANTLY small amounts that garner less than $100 Cdn/year interest?  Why ?  Why spend the time?  The amount of money was so small it was NOT WORTH THE EFFORT.  But Canada wants to waste their tax payers money paying civil servants to review tax forms where either NO MONEY or next to no money is collected.

 

Hopefully Thailand has more sense than Canada - and takes a good look at how Germany does such.

 

 

Thailand will make everything 100 times more difficult than Canada. Thailand loves paperwork and that paperwork will keep more people employed.

 

The thing is it is not about how small amount it is. It is about the residency issue and in my honest opinion Canada did a huge favor to your wife by informing the German government. Would you rather they kept quiet and then 10 years later CRA collecting thousands of dollars on fees and penalties for not filing on that small interest she was getting? They could have absolutely done that like IRS is doing. Your wife got a huge favor on taxpayer's dime.

 

 

 

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

On 10/16/2024 at 4:43 PM, Johno57 said:

I think we must realise that the thai treasury are going through the process of organising some very distastful rules at the moment that may come into law next year because they are  having major financial problems  because the country is broke & it does not concern them what any foreigners think & certainly not what the french think about it...at the moment it is a remittance tax as of January 24 but next year looks like moving to the world wide tax which would be devastating to foreigners.. the one thing you have going for you is the 6 month rule which also could come under scrutiny in the future..so every thing is irrelevent really as you do not matter to the Thais only your money does...and you should take relevence from the fact that they most probably will link your  history to  your visa renewals & they have stated that non compliance will lead to fines , double tax liability & even jail terms in some extreme cases..so getting professional advice is the way to go rather than just thinking this will all disappear into the sunset..

Agree - however, the 'professional' advisers here in Thailand are still in the dark too. Until TRD releases their '2024 tax guide' and details of how to lodge a tax return, then it is all speculation.  It would be foolish to think that any advice regarding DTAs given in Thailand is absolutely correct. Unless tested in a Tax Court, all interpretations are not definitive (including TRD) and under this system here, it is known that both TRD and Another Party will seek a Court's advice on an interpretation, rather than TRD deciding, the Party appealing, and the matter going on and on. 

 

If things do go pear-shaped, I would also seek advice from professionals in the home country regarding that DTA - it is a Inter-country Agreement - it is not 'owned' by Thailand. Therefore, what certain Clauses and Words may mean, is not at the sole discretion of TRD. If tax officials from the other Country believe it means A but TRD states it means B - then they have to sort that out (not us).

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

25 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

Not a complaint.  Just an observation.

 

Now take Germany (in contrast).  I earn a small amount of income from Germany (larger than what I obtain from Canada).  Germany sent me a letter advising me to stop sending annual tax returns (unless my tax situation changes) because the amount I obtained from Germany was either covered by a DTA (with Thailand) or it was too small (ie interest) for them to want to process a tax return. 

 

Common sense prevailed there in Germany.   I can't say the same about Canada - .... but hey - if Canada wants to waste their tax payers money by processing a tax return from my wife (and from myself) which they required us to submit so to receive NO EXTRA tax (my wife's case) or a trivial amount of tax (my case - which does not pay enough for the labour to review my tax form) - then go to it !!  Sure !! By all means !! .  .... fill the beloved Canadian 'boots'.   A CLASSIC case of government inefficiency (dare I say over reach) to the determent of their tax paying citizens/residents.

 

$13,000 ?  Your case is VERY VERY VERY different.

 

In my wife's case (and my case) ?  Why transfer SIGNIFICANTLY small amounts that garner less than $100 Cdn/year interest?  Why ?  Why spend the time?  The amount of money was so small it was NOT WORTH THE EFFORT.  But Canada wants to waste their tax payers money paying civil servants to review tax forms where either NO MONEY or next to no money is collected.

 

Hopefully Thailand has more sense than Canada - and takes a good look at how Germany does such.

 

Australia the same - I get an annual statement and advice that I do not need to lodge a tax return because I am below the tax free threshold.  However, I do on on-line for both myself and the Wife, so that I have an Annual Tax Return Statement that can be used for whatever purposes here in Thailand - they just love their paperwork here.

[oldcpu]

40 minutes ago, Celsius said:

 

Thailand will make everything 100 times more difficult than Canada. Thailand loves paperwork and that paperwork will keep more people employed.

 

Thats quite possible. We have to see.  But I do recommend not underestimating the Canadian government love for paperwork.

 

40 minutes ago, Celsius said:

The thing is it is not about how small amount it is. It is about the residency issue and in my honest opinion Canada did a huge favor to your wife by informing the German government. Would you rather they kept quiet and then 10 years later CRA collecting thousands of dollars on fees and penalties for not filing on that small interest she was getting? They could have absolutely done that like IRS is doing. Your wife got a huge favor on taxpayer's dime.

 

To set the record straight. Canada, to the best of my knowledge, did NOT contact the German government. Rather when in Germany I applied for a German pension, Germany contacted Canada to confirm my previous employment there.  At that point in time my German address at that time was shared between governments.

 

Second - with respect, and I do mean that ("with respect") , I do not believe (by your statement of "collecting thousands of dollars on fees and penalties" ) that you have ANY experience with delinquent tax accounts on the very VERY SMALL scale of my wife and myself.  That's not a bad thing. Its good that you likely were never delinquent for small amounts.

 

But your statement there is blatantly misinformed.

 

The total amount of fees for more than 5 years of not-submitted tax returns was less than $50 Cdn. Ok ??   It was small because no money to trivial amount was owed.

 

So I have no clue who has been telling you (nor where you have been reading) that fees of thousands of dollars (YOUR WORDS) are liable when one's subsequent tax return proves no tax owed (my wife's case) or trivial tax owed (my case), but I seriously recommend you take such misinformed information sources with a grain of salt.

 

Again - good on you for NOT being delinquent in tax submissions, but do take caution in the misinformation you clearly believed as to what happens in regards to fines with trivial delinquencies.  Your statement is totally in the WRONG BALLPARK there.

 

 

Edited October 18 by oldcpu

[oldcpu]

17 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Australia the same -  ...  I do on on-line for both myself and the Wife, so that I have an Annual Tax Return Statement that can be used for whatever purposes here in Thailand - they just love their paperwork here.

 

That, IMHO is an EXCELLENT point.

 

When I applied for my LTR visa in 2023, my Canadian tax submission (and the Canadian government reply with their assessment) was invaluable.

 

The Canadian government assessment reply to my tax returns, stated my income from Canada was VERY small, and yes it stated the tax I paid to Canada was accordingly MASSIVELY smaller (trivial really), ... but the Canadian government assessment reply to my Canadian tax return did list my GLOBAL INCOME (ie from outside of Canada) where that was adequate to qualify me for a Thailand LTR visa.

 

So for tax year 2021 and 2022 (for a Thailand year 2023 LTR visa application) my Canadian tax returns were very helpful as they 'proved' to BoI Thailand my Global Income (according to Canada). 

 

However the previous 2 decades of tax returns to Canada (while I lived and worked in Germany), which I had to submit in a lump sum when contacted by Canada,  were in truth a total waste of Canadian tax payer money to process my tax returns to Canada.  But the Canadian government is not about efficiency when it comes to spending tax payer's money.  I suspect many governments are like that.

Edited October 18 by oldcpu

[TroubleandGrumpy]

18 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

That, IMHO is an EXCELLENT point.

 

When I applied for my LTR visa in 2023, my Canadian tax submission (and the Canadian government reply with their assessment) was invaluable.

 

The Canadian government assessment reply to my tax returns, stated my income from Canada was VERY small, and yes it stated the tax I paid to Canada was accordingly MASSIVELY smaller (trivial really), ... but the Canadian government assessment reply to my Canadian tax return did list my GLOBAL INCOME (ie from outside of Canada) where that was adequate to qualify me for a Thailand LTR visa.

 

So for tax year 2021 and 2022 (for a Thailand year 2023 LTR visa application) my Canadian tax returns were very helpful. 

 

However the previous 2 decades of tax returns to Canada (while I lived and worked in Germany) were in truth a total waste of Canadian tax payer money to process my tax returns to Canada.  But the Canadian government is not about efficiency when it comes to spending tax payer's money.  I suspect many governments are like that.

Cheers - it is my intention to use those Annual Tax Statements if ever called upon by TRD to explain why I have not lodged any tax returns in Thailand.  TRD contacting me under the current revised tax rules is extremely unlikely (I would say a snowflake in Hell).  However, that becomes a whole new ball game when/if they move to a global tax system, and they decide my Pension and Superannuation is taxable income in Thailand - whether those amounts have already been subjected to Australian Taxation (as per the annual Australian Tax Returns). 

 

I believe that both The Philippines and Malaysia (and maybe Indonesia too) have made the money that Retired Expats bring into their countries, fully income tax exempt. Not income from employment (as supposed to be retired), but money brought into the country in the form of Pensions, as well as past earnings and retirement investment returns. But only as long as that money has been subjected to the taxation rules of their home country. I think and hope that Thailand will follow their approach - in which case those annual tax statements will also be very useful.  Plus many other reasons I cant even think of now.

[Celsius]

39 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

 

 

But your statement there is blatantly misinformed.

 

The total amount of fees for more than 5 years of not-submitted tax returns was less than $50 Cdn. Ok ??   It was small because no money to trivial amount was owed.

 

 

 

You are correct. I am mixing up the failure to report with balances owing. Yes, the amount in your case would be very small.

[stat]

8 hours ago, chiang mai said:

There are people who doubt the moon landing or holocaust ever took place or that the earth is round, also! There will always be somebody somewhere who doubts anything that is said that is based on logic and precedent and balance of probability and anecdotes and consensus. Such people will only believe a statement if it is a direct quote from the TRD, we have such people in this forum.

We are talking about a revenue service so there is no logic at all involved. Germany has a law on futures and options trading where the tax due was 10 times the amount you earned. Sometimes you paid even on losses. This law will hopefuly be repealed but it is currently law in Germany.

 

You however seem to be 100% sure that an ATM withdrawal is a remittance without ANY evidence (like a written statement by TRD) just your logical reasoning.

Edited October 18 by stat

[chiang mai]

1 minute ago, stat said:

We are talking about a revenue service so there is no logic at all involved. Germany had a law on futures and options trading where the tax due was 10 times the amount you earned. Sometimes you paid even on losses.

 

You however seem to be pretty sure that an ATM withdrawal is an remittance without ANY evidence just your logical reasoning.

I am more than pretty sure, I am certain in my own mind that is the case. The logical reasoning has been set out numerous times by various members, ATM withdrawals and electronic funds transfers are only the transport mechanism, just as carrying cash on a [lane is the transport mechanism. If TT remittances are potentially tax assessable, so is every other form of transport.

[Phulublub]

16 hours ago, stat said:

You however seem to be 100% sure that an ATM withdrawal is a remittance without ANY evidence (like a written statement by TRD) just your logical reasoning.

I have an account in the UK.  I withdraw £££ and come to Thailand where I exchange for THB.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the source of those funds.

 

I have an account in the UK.  I transfer to my Thai bank account electronically.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the source of those funds.

 

I have an account in the UK.  I use the debit card associated with that account to withdraw THB from a Thai ATM.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the soruce of those funds.

 

I have an account in the UK.  I use my UK CC to buy something in Thailand and settle the CC balance from my UK account.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the soruce of those funds.

 

ALL cases are, in tax remittance terms, identical.  Before anyone comments which can be tracked (easily or at all) by Tax authorities is totally not the point.  Legally, it is up to the individual to report their tax affairs accurately; what each individual chooses to do is up to them but should be totally outside any and all discussion here.

 

PH

[chiang mai]

17 hours ago, stat said:

We are talking about a revenue service so there is no logic at all involved. Germany has a law on futures and options trading where the tax due was 10 times the amount you earned. Sometimes you paid even on losses. This law will hopefuly be repealed but it is currently law in Germany.

 

You however seem to be 100% sure that an ATM withdrawal is a remittance without ANY evidence (like a written statement by TRD) just your logical reasoning.

 

17 hours ago, chiang mai said:

I am more than pretty sure, I am certain in my own mind that is the case. The logical reasoning has been set out numerous times by various members, ATM withdrawals and electronic funds transfers are only the transport mechanism, just as carrying cash on a [lane is the transport mechanism. If TT remittances are potentially tax assessable, so is every other form of transport.

If you post a challenge, you cannot read my reply and then go back and edit your challenge to negate my response, if you do that it's the fast track to my ignore list, I hope you understand that. 

 

We have all been painfully aware for almost a year that the existing TRD Code is very short on clarity and detail, as it relates to foreigners overseas remittances. It is not realistic or even remotely reasonable to state that something is unconfirmed or untrue, solely because there is no known TRD statement saying that something is true and confirmed. I recall from early posts about tax that some members refused to accept that assessable income was defined hence the new rule was not applicable to foreigners. 

 

Please let's not go back down that same path again because it's counter productive.

Edited October 19 by chiang mai

[Yumthai]

32 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

I have an account in the UK.  I use my UK CC to buy something in Thailand and settle the CC balance from my UK account.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the soruce of those funds.

In this case source of funds is a loan that may be refunded at any moment further in time (days, months, years, decades,...) or never.

Is a loan income under Thai Law?

[chiang mai]

1 minute ago, Yumthai said:

In this case source of funds is a loan that may be refunded at any moment further in time (days, months, years, decades,...) or never.

Is a loan income under Thai Law?

Revolving credit and a loan are different things. One is a line of credit that may be utilised for any purpose and without security or a fixed completion date. A loan has a specific purpose and is typically of fixed duration with fixed repayment schedules.

[Yumthai]

Just now, chiang mai said:

4 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

In this case source of funds is a loan that may be refunded at any moment further in time (days, months, years, decades,...) or never.

Is a loan income under Thai Law?

Revolving credit and a loan are different things. One is a line of credit that may be utilised for any purpose and without security or a fixed completion date. A loan has a specific purpose and is typically of fixed duration with fixed repayment schedules.

Sure but if the credit line is never paid back then the source of funds remains forever money that has been borrowed.

[anrcaccount]

3 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

6 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

10 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

In this case source of funds is a loan that may be refunded at any moment further in time (days, months, years, decades,...) or never.

Is a loan income under Thai Law?

Revolving credit and a loan are different things. One is a line of credit that may be utilised for any purpose and without security or a fixed completion date. A loan has a specific purpose and is typically of fixed duration with fixed repayment schedules.

Sure but if the credit line is never paid back then the source of funds remains forever money that has been borrowed.

 

Yes. correct, there's no certainty here. The definition provided doesn't answer the question of whether a loan is income under Thai law, and the TRD's interpretation. 

 

Here's another scenario, you pay off the credit card with a draw down on your mortgage ( i.e. using money that is in an 'offset' or a 'revolving credit' mortgage arrangement. Pretty common setup in many countries.  

 

Now how on earth, would that ever be considered 'income'? Implausible. 

[chiang mai]

5 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

Sure but if the credit line is never paid back then the source of funds remains forever money that has been borrowed.

Huh!

 

If I live in Bangkok and remit overseas funds to pay my rent, later I stop remitting funds and charge my rent to my UK Barclaycard and reduce my annual remittances by a corresponding amount, I just committed tax evasion, if I didn't declare the charges.

 

If I never paid my Barclaycard bill I'm an idiot because I was  declared UK bankrupt and I lost my credit rating.

[anrcaccount]

30 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

 

 

 

We have all been painfully aware for almost a year that the existing TRD Code is very short on clarity and detail, as it relates to foreigners overseas remittances. It is not realistic or even remotely reasonable to state that something is unconfirmed or untrue, solely because there is no known TRD statement saying that something is true and confirmed.

 

 

Hard disagree -it is perfectly reasonable to say something is unconfirmed, because....... it is unconfirmed!

 

It's also reasonable to state an opinion that something might be untrue, that's just as valid an opinion as stating 'you're certain' , in the absence of any confirmation. 

 

 

[chiang mai]

The TRD does not care about your financial activities in your home country, it only cares about the assessability of funds at the time of their remittance. If you remit assessable funds and subsequently make arrangements to alter the nature of their assessability...oh well, too late.

[anrcaccount]

1 hour ago, Phulublub said:

I have an account in the UK.  I withdraw £££ and come to Thailand where I exchange for THB.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the source of those funds.

 

I have an account in the UK.  I transfer to my Thai bank account electronically.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the source of those funds.

 

I have an account in the UK.  I use the debit card associated with that account to withdraw THB from a Thai ATM.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the soruce of those funds.

 

I have an account in the UK.  I use my UK CC to buy something in Thailand and settle the CC balance from my UK account.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the soruce of those funds.

 

ALL cases are, in tax remittance terms, identical.  Before anyone comments which can be tracked (easily or at all) by Tax authorities is totally not the point.  Legally, it is up to the individual to report their tax affairs accurately; what each individual chooses to do is up to them but should be totally outside any and all discussion here.

 

PH

 

They're not necessarily identical in terms of remittance. 

 

Let me ask you, about this one:

 

I have an account in the UK.  I use my UK CC to buy something in Thailand and settle the CC balance from my UK account.  I have remitted funds that may or may not be assessable depending ENTIRELY on the soruce of those funds.

 

What event constitutes the timing of the 'remittance' to Thailand?

Is it the purchase on the credit card, or the payment of the balance with assessable or non-assessable income?