Tax Filing Experience: Jomtien [March-2025]

[JimGant]

7 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

Unless you've converted your pre-tax contribution traditional IRA to a tax-free withdrawal Roth

That's why I said "traditional IRAs....." are subject to the saving clause found in the DTA -- and thereby taxable by the US.

[NoDisplayName]

10 minutes ago, JimGant said:

That's why I said "traditional IRAs....." are subject to the saving clause found in the DTA -- and thereby taxable by the US.

 

Please be careful when using acronyms that others may not understand, OK(*)?

 

 

(*)   OK

 

adverb or adjective

ō-ˈkā 

 

 in assenting or agreeing also  ˈō-ˌkā

variants or okay or less commonly ok

[khunPer]

21 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

 

Fully up to speed on the relevant DTA.

 

I think you missed the point of my question, which is unrelated to DTAs and quite simple...

 

 

If I have ZERO assessable income do I have to file a return?

According to the Thai revenue office, "ZERO assessable income" means no foreign transfers or foreign transfers of fund from before 1st January 2024, if you stay 180 days or longer in the nation within a calendar (tax) year.

 

 

 

Income that has already been taxed abroad might be tax-deductible, depending of a DTA.

 

[khunPer]

19 hours ago, atpeace said:

So if you are a tax resident with ample savings earned before 2024 then all this tax anxiety that many have is not a concern.  I personally have enough in my 401k( USA retirements account ) that I can access in two years that would last 30 years as well as other savings on top of that. I assume most tax residents here have at least enough in saving to last another 20 years.  Why all the anxiety? Am I missing something ? 🙂

Yes, you are correct, to my understanding of the rules...👍

 

 

In my view it might be a benefit, to use one's documented savings from earlier than 1st January 2024, before beginning to use gain; i.e. live of one's savings, instead of interest and capital gain.

 

If money-trail can be followed – which is what tax authorities normally wish to see – I presume that we ongoing can sell out of equity balance of 31st December 2023, transfer only the 2023-value, while keeping gain and reinvest that; i.e., one might need to sell bonds and equity and reinvest in some of them back again little later.

 

The importance is to keep good trail and documentation of everything that financially happens after the 31st December 2023 savings statement.

[Jingthing]

3 hours ago, JimGant said:

That's why I said "traditional IRAs....." are subject to the saving clause found in the DTA -- and thereby taxable by the US.

Neither type is taxable in the US for Thai tax residents.

What I don't know if that covers only the remitted part or all of it even if not remitted.

I'm looking into that.

[JimGant]

3 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

Please be careful when using acronyms that others may not understand, OK(*)?

The only acronym I've used recently is "IRA." So, what exactly are you talking about?

[samtam]

On 3/12/2025 at 10:02 PM, NoDisplayName said:

 

Rouge office.  Banking statements are not required to obtain a TIN.

 

You have no assessable remittances, and all your Thai income has had tax withheld at source.  You don't have to enter any of those numbers on a tax filing, which would leave nothing but your name and TIN.

 

You 'probably' don't even need to obtain a TIN or file, but you could to calm your nerves and to apply for a rather substantial refund.

 

What is your agent charging for that service?

 

At this point, since your rouge office is being particularly snotty, I'd consider filing this year, AND late filings for the past two years for those refunds as well.

 

 

 

I want to file for WHT refunds for 2023 & 2022. I have the tax certificates for those years. Is that all I need to complete on the PND90 one each for 2023 & 2022? (For 2024 I will attach the WHT tax certificate plus the assessable income, which after TEDA means no tax.) I just want to be clear no need to file anything else for 2023 & 2022, (as these years are pre Por 161 & 162). Frankly I wouldn't have bothered for 2023 & 2022, but as I'm now going into the system, I might aswell have the WHT refunds. (I was trying to get an answer from TRD, but I think they're inundated, as they have not give a response when asked, and now I cannot reach them.) 

[JohnnyBD]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Neither type is taxable in the US for Thai tax residents.

What I don't know if that covers only the remitted part or all of it even if not remitted.

I'm looking into that.

Your statement is incorrect. I've been a Thai tax resident for the past 8 years and I am required to file, report and pay taxes on my Tradional IRA distributions in the US. PwC does my tax returns, so I'm sure they know better than you what the rules are.

[Jingthing]

21 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

Your statement is incorrect. I've been a Thai tax resident for the past 8 years and I am required to file, report and pay taxes on my Tradional IRA distributions in the US. PwC does my tax returns, so I'm sure they know better than you what the rules are.

But you haven't been filing in Thailand during those years, have you?

Pretty much nobody has been filing based on remitances before this year.

This year, things are changing.

I am talking about going forward in the new environment here.

As I understand, both types of IRAs are to be taxed by Thailand ONLY for Thai tax resident as per the DTA treaty for private pensions.

You need to take action to communicate with IRS that you are under the tax treaty of course (though obviously not important for Roths).

Believe it or not.

I will be posting a new topic about related issues as I have questions about this as well.

I know it sounds crazy that both types of IRAs by Thailand.

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Neither type is taxable in the US for Thai tax residents.

What I don't know if that covers only the remitted part or all of it even if not remitted.

I'm looking into that.

 

Both countries have rights to tax IRA distributions under the US-Thai DTA.

 

Thailand has exclusive right to tax private pensions, including IRAs. Presently, Thailand only taxes the portion of IRA distributions that are remitted to Thailand.

 

Due to the operation of the saving clause, the US retains the right to tax IRAs after Thailand takes its cut, and this is regardless of whether the distributions were remitted to Thailand or not. The US does allow a tax credit for taxes paid to Thailand.

 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

 

Both countries have rights to tax IRA distributions under the US-Thai DTA.

 

Thailand has exclusive right to tax private pensions, including IRAs. Presently, Thailand only taxes the portion of IRA distributions that are remitted to Thailand.

 

Due to the operation of the saving clause, the US retains the right to tax IRAs after Thailand takes its cut, and this is regardless of whether the distributions were remitted to Thailand or not. The US does allow a tax credit for taxes paid to Thailand.

 

 

 

 

Thank you.

I assumed that it was only about the portion that was remitted but I was seeking confirmation of that.

I'm reading your post as agreeing with me that both types of IRAs are private pensions according to Thai tax law and Thailand has exclusive right to taxation of those for Thai tax residents but of the remitted portion only.

On the part about the savings clause impacting IRAs (private pensions) I am extremely skeptical. What is your source for that? I've heard nothing of the kind that the savings clause has anything to do with IRAs. 

These are the kind of issues that can be explored on the new topic I will open and I will also be seeking more clarification from the mainstream sources I have been following so far.

[JimGant]

40 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

4 hours ago, JimGant said:

That's why I said "traditional IRAs....." are subject to the saving clause found in the DTA -- and thereby taxable by the US.

Neither type is taxable in the US for Thai tax residents.

A little education here, Jingthing.

Quote

Most income tax treaties contain what is known as a "saving clause" which prevents a citizen or resident of the United States from using the provisions of a tax treaty in order to avoid taxation of U.S. source income.

 Thus, with but a few exceptions (like alimony and child support payments), there are no "exclusive" tax rights in the Thai-US tax treaty, like the "exclusive" tax right mentioned in the DTA that Thailand has on US private pensions and Traditional IRAs. Instead, the US -- per the saving clause -- always maintains a "secondary" taxation right in the DTA situations giving Thailand "exclusive" rights. In effect, Thailand still gets "primary" taxation rights, meaning, they get to keep all tax collections, and don't have to absorb a tax credit; but the US gets secondary rights -- but DOES have to absorb a credit for the taxes paid Thailand. Nothing violating the spirit of "no double taxation" with this situation, since credits come into play. But what it does do -- is ensure that there is not a "no no tax situation." A situation the OECD is trying eliminate with its new Model Tax Treaties. And a loophole the US plugged many years ago, with its saving clause insertion in all DTAs.

 

Jingling, click on this link and prepare for an educational read:

https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/3/

 

It's about a scam -- dreamed up by a US tax advisor in Bangkok -- who went around to various Thai cities with his sales pitch that he had found a glitch in the treaty language between Thailand and the US, that would exempt US IRAs from the saving clause. Thus, just come to Thailand for 181 days and become a Thai tax resident -- and you're exempt from US taxation on your IRA withdrawals. And -- even better -- remit that IRA withdrawal to Thailand the following year (remember, the old rules), and don't even pay tax to Thailand! Thus, Thailand -- per this scam artist -- would become the only country to which a US expat could move to -- and never have to pay US tax -- nor Thai tax! Too good to be true? Duh.

 

Anyway, read the link and pay attention to the IRS ruling vis-a-vis Switzerland, from the IRS top legal person, on how a US person, who becomes a tax resident abroad, but who has annual Traditional IRA withdrawals -- still is subject to US taxes on these withdrawals, per the saving clause. And note how the Swiss DTA is similar to the Thai DTA with the US, including treaty language. No surprise here, as both follow the OECD and UN Model Tax Treaties.

 

So how this charlatan tax advisor in Bangkok has gotten away with this (as he apparently has, as we've seen nobody questioned by the IRS) is curious -- and sad. He apparently charges an arm and a leg -- but, heck, I guess, if the deal wasn't such an obvious scam, my $300k Traditional IRA becoming tax exempt would be worth the price. And many, apparently, have gone this route. And even with Por 161, if Thai taxes were much less than US taxes on the same IRA withdrawal -- it would still be a money maker for Thomas Carden, er, Elmer Gantry. But, hey -- if my theory on Por 162 is correct (i.e., don't even declare it to Thailand, as it's pre 2024 income) -- Carden's scam is still completely in play.

 

Anyway, Jingthing -- be careful on how much credence you give to tax advisors. As Ben Hartman has raved on and on about -- they're all illegal crooks.  And, yes, Ben is referring to not having legal credentials to practice in Thailand. My example is about a crook who lacks integrity. But, of course, none of this helps in determining if correct interpretation of TRD dicates are correct -- from any of these questionable so-called tax advisors....

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, JimGant said:

A little education here, Jingthing.

 Thus, with but a few exceptions (like alimony and child support payments), there are no "exclusive" tax rights in the Thai-US tax treaty, like the "exclusive" tax right mentioned in the DTA that Thailand has on US private pensions and Traditional IRAs. Instead, the US -- per the saving clause -- always maintains a "secondary" taxation right in the DTA situations giving Thailand "exclusive" rights. In effect, Thailand still gets "primary" taxation rights, meaning, they get to keep all tax collections, and don't have to absorb a tax credit; but the US gets secondary rights -- but DOES have to absorb a credit for the taxes paid Thailand. Nothing violating the spirit of "no double taxation" with this situation, since credits come into play. But what it does do -- is ensure that there is not a "no no tax situation." A situation the OECD is trying eliminate with its new Model Tax Treaties. And a loophole the US plugged many years ago, with its saving clause insertion in all DTAs.

 

Jingling, click on this link and prepare for an educational read:

https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/3/

 

It's about a scam -- dreamed up by a US tax advisor in Bangkok -- who went around to various Thai cities with his sales pitch that he had found a glitch in the treaty language between Thailand and the US, that would exempt US IRAs from the saving clause. Thus, just come to Thailand for 181 days and become a Thai tax resident -- and you're exempt from US taxation on your IRA withdrawals. And -- even better -- remit that IRA withdrawal to Thailand the following year (remember, the old rules), and don't even pay tax to Thailand! Thus, Thailand -- per this scam artist -- would become the only country to which a US expat could move to -- and never have to pay US tax -- nor Thai tax! Too good to be true? Duh.

 

Anyway, read the link and pay attention to the IRS ruling vis-a-vis Switzerland, from the IRS top legal person, on how a US person, who becomes a tax resident abroad, but who has annual Traditional IRA withdrawals -- still is subject to US taxes on these withdrawals, per the saving clause. And note how the Swiss DTA is similar to the Thai DTA with the US, including treaty language. No surprise here, as both follow the OECD and UN Model Tax Treaties.

 

So how this charlatan tax advisor in Bangkok has gotten away with this (as he apparently has, as we've seen nobody questioned by the IRS) is curious -- and sad. He apparently charges an arm and a leg -- but, heck, I guess, if the deal wasn't such an obvious scam, my $300k Traditional IRA becoming tax exempt would be worth the price. And many, apparently, have gone this route. And even with Por 161, if Thai taxes were much less than US taxes on the same IRA withdrawal -- it would still be a money maker for Thomas Carden, er, Elmer Gantry. But, hey -- if my theory on Por 162 is correct (i.e., don't even declare it to Thailand, as it's pre 2024 income) -- Carden's scam is still completely in play.

 

Anyway, Jingthing -- be careful on how much credence you give to tax advisors. As Ben Hartman has raved on and on about -- they're all illegal crooks.  And, yes, Ben is referring to not having legal credentials to practice in Thailand. My example is about a crook who lacks integrity. But, of course, none of this helps in determining if correct interpretation of TRD dicates are correct -- from any of these questionable so-called tax advisors....

You do know a lot about U.S. taxation.

I get the gist of what you're saying but this grand "scam" trad IRA loophole that you were posting about years ago was BEFORE 2024. Before pretty much anyone was filing Thai tax returns and reporting and paying tax on trad IRA remittances. Now people will be. 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

22 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Thank you.

I assumed that it was only about the portion that was remitted but I was seeking confirmation of that.

I'm reading your post as agreeing with me that both types of IRAs are private pensions according to Thai tax law and Thailand has exclusive right to taxation of those for Thai tax residents but of the remitted portion only.

On the part about the savings clause impacting IRAs (private pensions) I am extremely skeptical. What is your source for that? I've heard nothing of the kind that the savings clause has anything to do with IRAs. 

These are the kind of issues that can be explored on the new topic I will open and I will also be seeking more clarification from the mainstream sources I have been following so far.

 

Here's a link to the IRS website that mentions the saving clause.  https://www.irs.gov/businesses/tax-treaties-can-affect-your-income-tax

 

I think that for IRA distributions to be exempt from the application of the saving clause, the DTA would have to specifically state that. I don't think the US-Thai DTA does. I agree with Jim Gant's post above.

 

The changes to the interpretation of the existing Thai tax regulations do nothing to negate the effect of the saving clause on one's US tax obligations.

[JimGant]

42 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I get the gist of what you're saying but this grand "scam" trad IRA loophole that you were posting about years ago was BEFORE 2024.

What I was saying is, only you and Thomas Carden have gone on record as saying you aren't required to file on your US tax return your Traditional IRA distro, because the saving clause uniquely doesn't apply with the US tax treaty with Thailand. This scam is equally applicable today, if Thai taxes are less than US taxes on same distro -- or you just don't remit your IRA distro to Thailand. But my main point is: You're dead wrong about your Traditional IRA not being taxable by the US because the DTA says Thailand has 'exclusive' taxation rights on your remitted Traditional IRA distro.

[JimGant]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I've heard nothing of the kind that the savings clause has anything to do with IRAs.

Did you read my link, and particularly the Swiss ruling on how the saving clause definitely applies to IRA distributions to US expats who now are tax residents abroad, whose new country has 'exclusive' taxation rights on that distribution.....? That, hopefully, will show you how the saving clause "has anything to do with IRAs." And how Carden's assertion that Thailand is unique in being exempt from the saving clause when it comes to IRAs -- is totally ludicrous.

[NoDisplayName]

2 hours ago, samtam said:

 

I want to file for WHT refunds for 2023 & 2022. I have the tax certificates for those years. Is that all I need to complete on the PND90 one each for 2023 & 2022? (For 2024 I will attach the WHT tax certificate plus the assessable income, which after TEDA means no tax.) I just want to be clear no need to file anything else for 2023 & 2022, (as these years are pre Por 161 & 162). Frankly I wouldn't have bothered for 2023 & 2022, but as I'm now going into the system, I might aswell have the WHT refunds. (I was trying to get an answer from TRD, but I think they're inundated, as they have not give a response when asked, and now I cannot reach them.) 

 

All the returns will be the same.  Log into the online system, select the year you want to file, fill out as normal, upload the bank withholding statement.

 

Payer TIN should be on your bank certificate.  You'll need that number to print off your completed return and your receipt.  Popup window asks for payer number as a security measure, your TIN is not it.

 

The first late return will add a 200-baht late filing fee.  You can pay by bank transfer, connecting to your bank thru the TRD system.  Only one late fee should be charged.

 

I did this last July, filing three late returns.  All refunds received.  No problems.

[JohnnyBD]

19 hours ago, JimGant said:

That's why I said "traditional IRAs....." are subject to the saving clause found in the DTA -- and thereby taxable by the US.

Jim, could you pleasd comment on how Traditional IRA distributions will be reported to each country.

 

For example;

Case 1: John, a US citizen, takes a $30k IRA distribution in 2024, and remits it to Thailand in 2024. John reports it on IRS 1040 tax return as normal, but he also files 1116 and claims a credit for taxes paid in Thailand, thereby reducing his US tax bill.

 

Cases 2: John, a US citizen, takes a $12k IRA distribution in 2024, and remits it to Thailand in 2024. John reports it on IRS 1040 tax return as normal, but he cannot claim a credit even though he filed a Thai tax return, because he didn't pay any taxes in Thailand due to his deductions and allowances.

 

Would this be how it would work?

[JimGant]

1 hour ago, JohnnyBD said:

Case 1: John, a US citizen, takes a $30k IRA distribution in 2024, and remits it to Thailand in 2024. John reports it on IRS 1040 tax return as normal, but he also files 1116 and claims a credit for taxes paid in Thailand, thereby reducing his US tax bill.

Using a 34bt FX rate, John's Thai tax bill -- assuming a 560k TEDA/150k freebie -- would be about $1300 (assuming the IRA is his only assessable income remitted). And since the saving clause mandates that John must also declare that $30k IRA on his US tax return -- this would amount to $6600 in US taxes, if in the 22% tax bracket. But, yes he can file a Form 1116 (and also Form 8833) and take a tax credit against that US tax -- so after that credit, his US tax bill on the IRA would be $5300. But your composite tax bill equates to the country having the higher tax bill -- in this case the US, with $6600.

 

Two conflicting scenarios here. One, if you believe your IRA's value on 12/31/2023 qualifies under Por 162 as "pre 2024 income." Or two, you believe some reports that only cash savings in a bank account qualify under Por 162. In the above example, it matters not which scenario you choose: Believe your IRA qualifies under Por 162, so don't even file a Thai tax return, with its $1300 tax charge. But do pay full fare of $6600 to the US, since there's no credit to be had -- total tax bill the same under either scenario. So, the argument over Por 162 and IRAs would be moot, at least in the above scenario.

1 hour ago, JohnnyBD said:

Cases 2: John, a US citizen, takes a $12k IRA distribution in 2024, and remits it to Thailand in 2024. John reports it on IRS 1040 tax return as normal, but he cannot claim a credit even though he filed a Thai tax return, because he didn't pay any taxes in Thailand due to his deductions and allowances.

 

In this scenario, Thailand doesn't exist as far as your US tax return filing. No Thai tax, no tax credit against your US taxes. Now, the opposite side of the coin would be -- a Thai tax on your remitted Roth IRA -- but no US tax on same, on which to apply the credit. This is where you want to believe that Por 162 covers Roth IRAs -- so that remitted Roth IRAs would thus be non assessable for Thai tax purposes.

[Bubbha]

17 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

Payer TIN should be on your bank certificate.  You'll need that number to print off your completed return and your receipt.  Popup window asks for payer number as a security measure, your TIN is not it.

@NoDisplayName

I completed my tax return online.

However, I am unable to access the Print Receipt for Paying Taxes function. 

My 13 digit TIN does not work.

The Filing Reference Number for my return does not work.

Do you have any advice, thanks....

 

[mudcat]

Interesting discussion of the treatment of private pensions including ROTH distributions in the Technical 2006 Model (note that the sections are different from the 1996 Thai-U.S. conventions which has this as Article 20.

 

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/131/Treaty-US-Model-TE-2006.pdf

 

ARTICLE 17 (PENSIONS, SOCIAL SECURITY, ANNUITIES, ALIMONY, AND CHILD SUPPORT)

This Article deals with the taxation of private (i.e., non-government service) pensions and annuities, social security benefits, alimony and child support payments.

Paragraph 1

Paragraph 1 provides that distributions from pensions and other similar remuneration beneficially owned by a resident of a Contracting State in consideration of past employment are taxable only in the State of residence of the beneficiary. The term "pensions and other similar remuneration" includes both periodic and single sum payments.

The phrase pensions and other similar remuneration is intended to encompass payments made by qualified private retirement plans. In the United States, the plans encompassed by Paragraph 1 include: qualified plans under section 401(a), individual retirement plans (including individual retirement plans that are part of a simplified employee pension plan that satisfies section 408(k), individual retirement accounts and section 408(p) accounts), section 403(a) qualified annuity plans, and section 403(b) plans. Distributions from section 457 plans may also fall under Paragraph 1 if they are not paid with respect to government services covered by Article 19.

In the other Contracting State, the term pension applies to: [    ]. The competent authorities may agree that distributions from other plans that generally meet similar criteria to those applicable to the listed plans also qualify for the benefits of Paragraph 1.

Pensions in respect of government services covered by Article 19 are not covered by this paragraph. They are covered either by paragraph 2 of this Article, if they are in the form of social security benefits, or by paragraph 2 of Article 19 (Government Service). Thus, Article 19 generally covers section 457, 401(a), 403(b) plans established for government employees, and the Thrift Savings Plan (section 7701(j)).

However, the State of residence, under subparagraph (b), must exempt from tax any amount of such pensions or other similar remuneration that would be exempt from tax in the Contracting State in which the pension fund is established if the recipient were a resident of that State. Thus, for example, a distribution from a U.S. "Roth IRA" to a resident of the other Contracting State would be exempt from tax in the other Contracting State to the same extent the distribution would be exempt from tax in the United States if it were distributed to a U.S. resident. The same is true with respect to distributions from a traditional IRA to the extent that the distribution represents a return of non-deductible contributions. Similarly, if the distribution were not subject to tax when it was “rolled over” into another U.S. IRA (but not, for example, to a pension fund in the other Contracting State), then the distribution would be exempt from tax in the other Contracting State.

[JohnnyBD]

3 hours ago, JimGant said:

Using a 34bt FX rate, John's Thai tax bill -- assuming a 560k TEDA/150k freebie -- would be about $1300 (assuming the IRA is his only assessable income remitted). And since the saving clause mandates that John must also declare that $30k IRA on his US tax return -- this would amount to $6600 in US taxes, if in the 22% tax bracket. But, yes he can file a Form 1116 (and also Form 8833) and take a tax credit against that US tax -- so after that credit, his US tax bill on the IRA would be $5300. But your composite tax bill equates to the country having the higher tax bill -- in this case the US, with $6600.

 

Two conflicting scenarios here. One, if you believe your IRA's value on 12/31/2023 qualifies under Por 162 as "pre 2024 income." Or two, you believe some reports that only cash savings in a bank account qualify under Por 162. In the above example, it matters not which scenario you choose: Believe your IRA qualifies under Por 162, so don't even file a Thai tax return, with its $1300 tax charge. But do pay full fare of $6600 to the US, since there's no credit to be had -- total tax bill the same under either scenario. So, the argument over Por 162 and IRAs would be moot, at least in the above scenario.

 

In this scenario, Thailand doesn't exist as far as your US tax return filing. No Thai tax, no tax credit against your US taxes. Now, the opposite side of the coin would be -- a Thai tax on your remitted Roth IRA -- but no US tax on same, on which to apply the credit. This is where you want to believe that Por 162 covers Roth IRAs -- so that remitted Roth IRAs would thus be non assessable for Thai tax purposes.

Thanks for the very detailed explanation. So, all US citizens are required to report and pay taxes on Traditional IRA taxable distributions on their US tax returns if they exceed their deductions, subject to credit for taxes paid in Thailand.

 

Someone seemed to suggest that one could notify the IRS that they are a Thai tax resident and then would not have to report those distributions on their US tax return. That doesn't seem correct.

[NoDisplayName]

12 minutes ago, Bubbha said:

@NoDisplayName

I completed my tax return online.

However, I am unable to access the Print Receipt for Paying Taxes function. 

My 13 digit TIN does not work.

The Filing Reference Number for my return does not work.

Do you have any advice, thanks....

 

 

The print receipt popup window is asking for a payer TIN.

 

My understanding is that is NOT your taxpayer TIN, but the TIN of a financial entity that paid you and withheld tax.

 

Try one of the TIN's you entered when reporting income.

 

In MY case, either my bank or brokerage worked.

[Bubbha]

12 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

Try one of the TIN's you entered when reporting income.

It worked like a charm.

Awesome, thank you so much!

Great advice.... 

[NoDisplayName]

2 minutes ago, Bubbha said:

It worked like a charm.

Awesome, thank you so much!

Great advice.... 

 

You're welcome, but be advised.

 

That was, as always, opinion only, not advice.

[JimGant]

1 hour ago, JohnnyBD said:

Someone seemed to suggest that one could notify the IRS that they are a Thai tax resident and then would not have to report those distributions on their US tax return. That doesn't seem correct.

Well, it was (maybe still is) a scam ginned up by a tax advisory firm in Bangkok. If you're really curious, and have some time and a sixpack, the following threads will fill you in:

https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/3/

https://aseannow.com/topic/1250834-how-is-the-us-tax-treaty-deduction-going/page/2/#comment-17239943

 

[samtam]

21 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

All the returns will be the same.  Log into the online system, select the year you want to file, fill out as normal, upload the bank withholding statement.

 

Payer TIN should be on your bank certificate.  You'll need that number to print off your completed return and your receipt.  Popup window asks for payer number as a security measure, your TIN is not it.

 

The first late return will add a 200-baht late filing fee.  You can pay by bank transfer, connecting to your bank thru the TRD system.  Only one late fee should be charged.

 

I did this last July, filing three late returns.  All refunds received.  No problems.

 

Quote

fill out as normal

 

When you say fill out as normal, does that mean I can leave the income section (1) blank and the only figures I include are the interest income Section 3 (1) and the WHT refund Section 11 (13)?

 

To be clear, I'm not going to state any other income, as 2023 & 2022 are pre Por 161 & 162. 

 

(The filing purpose for 2023 & 2022 is only for WHT refund.)

[NoDisplayName]

17 minutes ago, samtam said:

When you say fill out as normal, does that mean I can leave the income section (1) blank and the only figures I include are the interest income Section 3 (1) and the WHT refund Section 11 (13)?

 

To be clear, I'm not going to state any other income, as 2023 & 2022 are pre Por 161 & 162. 

 

(The filing purpose for 2023 & 2022 is only for WHT refund.)

 

Yes, same-same.

 

I filled out 3 returns, no assessable remittances, only income was Thai interest and dividends.  Entered total interest/dividends, total tax withheld, TIN of bank/brokerage.  Then upload bank/broker tax withholding statements when prompted.

 

The tax computation (section 11) is automated.  Online system fills in the blanks without further input.

 

YOU would leave the "income derived from employment" blank, if YOU had remitted no assessable income.

 

The only difference is you're selecting a different filing year for each, and you'll pay the 200-baht fee one time.  Ten minutes for the standard filing, 15-20 minutes if you do a bank transfer to pay the fee.

 

***OPINION ONLY.  NOT ADVICE.***

[samtam]

16 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Yes, same-same.

 

I filled out 3 returns, no assessable remittances, only income was Thai interest and dividends.  Entered total interest/dividends, total tax withheld, TIN of bank/brokerage.  Then upload bank/broker tax withholding statements when prompted.

 

The tax computation (section 11) is automated.  Online system fills in the blanks without further input.

 

YOU would leave the "income derived from employment" blank, if YOU had remitted no assessable income.

 

The only difference is you're selecting a different filing year for each, and you'll pay the 200-baht fee one time.  Ten minutes for the standard filing, 15-20 minutes if you do a bank transfer to pay the fee.

 

***OPINION ONLY.  NOT ADVICE.***

 

Thanks! Anything remitted pre 1 January 2024 is exempt according to Por 162....I think.

[NoDisplayName]

10 minutes ago, samtam said:

 

Thanks! Anything remitted pre 1 January 2024 is exempt according to Por 162....I think.

 

Not necessarily, that's from 2024, going forward.

 

I doubt you could backdate the applicability, otherwise anyone who paid tax on remitted income in the past (at least for two years) could file amended returns to claim a refund.

 

If you're filing a late return for 2022 or 2023, then the rules in effect then would apply.

 

If you brought in 2022 income in 2022, or 2023 income in 2023, then that would be potentially assessable.  Same as with 2024 income remitted in 2024.

 

That same 2022/2023 income remitted in 2024 would essentially follow the same rules, but would have been earned prior to 2024....so exempt.

 

 

***Absolutely opinion only.  May be full of poop.***