22 hours ago, sandyf said:

Of course it was.

The assumption made was that people were trying to avoid being a tax resident, which is not the case for the majority.

Promoting this kind of garbage - No longer will one be able to be a tax resident of nowhere. - is of little help to anyone.

Assume what you want.

The point being made was precisely that people should no longer be able to avoid having a tax residence.

If people do not know that then they should be aware, and read some information on the CRS system.

4 hours ago, shdmn said:

My idea of an expat? What is that supposed to mean? Not including people who are down and out begging on the streets? Sorry you took that so personally. 😒

No apology necessary, nothing was taken personally.

"expat" comes from the term "expatriate" normally someone who lives in a foreign country, often to work, with the intention of returning to the home country.

Those that live here on a long term basis without working and no clear intention to return are in fact unrecognised(non) immigrants.

Unfortunately one term is easier to use than the other, but it shouldn't be forgotton that those that work are more of an expat than the other.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Assume what you want.

The point being made was precisely that people should no longer be able to avoid having a tax residence.

If people do not know that then they should be aware, and read some information on the CRS system.

A point countinually pushed by those with some agenda other than addressing the issue in hand.

On 1/2/2026 at 10:14 AM, Caldera said:

It's SIMPLE until they challenge you on residency, which may or may not happen depending on a number of factors.

I have had a Revolut account for the past 8 years. The account has never been used other than in Thailand, in fact I was living in Thailand at the time of opening the account. I have been asked by Revolut to update my details to confirm they are correct twice in that time. Just before Christmas, I updated the account to a Premium A/C. I also use Revolut to transfer money to Thailand on a monthly basis, so they know I am resident here. Under the circumstances, why would they challenge my residency? Which factors do you refer to?

On 12/31/2025 at 1:37 AM, sandyf said:

You seem to have a problem acknowledging tax residency in more than one jurisdiction.

You are perfectly free to think that having paid tax in one jurisdiction does not affect your liability in another, but it does not make it a fact.

Your continued attempts to post misleading comments is of little help to anyone.

No problem here.

Merely stating, in my own opinion, I can see a day when all the various different country tax resident jurisdictions, and double taxation agreements, will give way to world wide tax based on citizenship. It's already happening in a few countries. I am quite sure many others will follow in the future.

Do you disagree?

33 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Do you disagree?

You've got pretty much nothing right in ~ 2 years of tax discussions so it would probably be quite difficult to find anyone who actually agrees with any of your positions.

16 minutes ago, treetops said:

You've got pretty much nothing right in ~ 2 years of tax discussions so it would probably be quite difficult to find anyone who actually agrees with any of your positions.

In relation to Thailand taxation, all I did was cover my a** and declared and paid a small amount.

In relation to Australia taxation, I have posted many, many, many credible links so people Australians could prepare.

Taxation is not the stock market, where you buy and sell and get it "right." Taxation is a legal obligation in which if one seeks to evade their obligations, there are serious consequences, including gaol time.

Thailand loves to work in the grey area, that's so they can put anyone, or everyone, in either the back, or the white area, at any time. I chose to minimize the risk and play the game the way I like to play it, taking the grey area away from various Thai government departments that may seek to extort me. Each to their own.

4 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Merely stating, in my own opinion, I can see a day when all the various different country tax resident jurisdictions, and double taxation agreements, will give way to world wide tax based on citizenship. It's already happening in a few countries. I am quite sure many others will follow in the future.

This is part of the globalists plan leading to total control and enslavement of the sheeple for "their own good".

They will not succeed.

10 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

This is part of the globalists plan leading to total control and enslavement of the sheeple for "their own good".

They will not succeed.

who is they? thanks for clarifying ...

1 minute ago, motdaeng said:

who is they? thanks for clarifying ...

The ones who want to cut people freedom off.

15 hours ago, motdaeng said:

who is they? thanks for clarifying ...

The shape shifting reptilian humanoids from the Alpha Draconis star system

20 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

No problem here.

Merely stating, in my own opinion, I can see a day when all the various different country tax resident jurisdictions, and double taxation agreements, will give way to world wide tax based on citizenship. It's already happening in a few countries. I am quite sure many others will follow in the future.

Do you disagree?

Disagree.
Which countries have imposed it recently since the CRS?
There is only one country that has for a long time imposed global taxation on citizens and it is nothing to do with current trends. USA with the Revenue Act of 1913.
FYI, there appears to be only one other country with some global taxation.
Eritrea imposes a 2% income tax on all its citizens living outside the country, a measure that has faced international criticism.
Eritrea began levying this 2% "recovery and rehabilitation tax" on the income of its citizens living abroad in the 1990s, shortly after gaining de facto independence.
Aagin, nothing to do with current trends.
Even then the eritrea 2% is hardly the same sort of thing compared to the 25% to 40% or more income tax that most countries levy,

17 hours ago, Yumthai said:

This is part of the globalists plan leading to total control and enslavement of the sheeple for "their own good".

They will not succeed.

Correct.

Also, countries going cashless will play a big part.

Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide your money from the tax man.

Of course, it will be "sold" to the public as an anti crime and anti tax evasion policy, but the truth is, the government will know where every dollar you receive comes from, and where every dollar you spend goes to.

Governments want to see an end to the cash or black economy.

I'll probably live long enough to see the start of it, but the next generation will definitely see it in their lifetime.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Which countries have imposed it recently since the CRS?

USA, Hungary, Myanmar, Eritrea, and Tajikistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_taxation

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

There is only one country that has for a long time imposed global taxation on citizens and it is nothing to do with current trends. USA with the Revenue Act of 1913.

And, most of the world peg their own currency to the US dollar.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

FYI, there appears to be only one other country with some global taxation.
Eritrea imposes a 2% income tax on all its citizens living outside the country, a measure that has faced international criticism.
Eritrea began levying this 2% "recovery and rehabilitation tax" on the income of its citizens living abroad in the 1990s, shortly after gaining de facto independence.

Wrong.

See the above link.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Aagin, nothing to do with current trends.

Did I say it would happen next week????

I said, "I can see a time..................."

We all know the good ole days of tax havens are coming to an end.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Even then the eritrea 2% is hardly the same sort of thing compared to the 25% to 40% or more income tax that most countries levy,

You actually contradicted yourself.

You said, "There is only one country that has for a long time imposed global taxation on citizens"

Then you said, "FYI, there appears to be only one other country with some global taxation."

Errrr, that would make two countries, but actually there are a few more. Once again, scroll down the above link. The percentage of the taxation is irrelevant.

Why are you confident world wide taxation based on citizenship will not be adopted by more and more countries in the future?

22 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Also, countries going cashless will play a big part.

Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide your money from the tax man.

Of course, it will be "sold" to the public as an anti crime and anti tax evasion policy, but the truth is, the government will know where every dollar you receive comes from, and where every dollar you spend goes to.

Governments want to see an end to the cash or black economy.

I'll probably live long enough to see the start of it, but the next generation will definitely see it in their lifetime.

They are striving hard to implement this madness however it will eventually fail.

There will always be free human beings to stand against enslaving rules. That might not be painless though.

12 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

They are striving hard to implement this madness however it will eventually fail.

There will always be free human beings to stand against enslaving rules. That might not be painless though.

It might bring back the old barter system.

With much luck, in the future, a bar girl might say to me, "If you change the broken light bulb in my room, I will give you a boom boom. No money." 😂

Here's some interesting stats for the Aussie members. I had no idea Australia was so cashless already. I thought with an ageing population it would be further away. I wonder what use of cash stats other countries have.

Article dated today, 5/1/26.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/finance-news-could-australias-declining-use-of-cash-lead-to-a-cashless-economy/12cdbc89-612e-44fd-96a6-2715ff46e603

1 hour ago, KhunHeineken said:

USA, Hungary, Myanmar, Eritrea, and Tajikistan.

Hungary is not relevant to the discussion.
They do not impose global taxation on non-residents. Its only on tax residents in Hungary.
Thats the same as is many countries such as UK.
Myanmar has imposed income tax on its non-resident citizens' foreign earnings, effective from October 1, 2023. Imposed by military coup rulers.
I already told you Eritrea.
Tajikistan is confusing.
From 2022. Tax Residents and Citizens: Individuals who are citizens of Tajikistan or who are present in the country for more than 182 days in a consecutive 12-month period are generally considered tax residents. These individuals are subject to tax on their worldwide income.

But then the rules state: Non-Residents: Non-residents are only taxed on their income sourced within Tajikistan. This can be corroborated on other websites.

So the main addition to what i stated is Mynamar. You can hardly describe a militarily imposed rule as representative of any worldwide opinion or trends.

"most of the world peg their own currency to the US dollar" ?
Not the case. Many countries do not do so.
Wikipedia lists 38 countries as an Exchange rate anchor, with less that are pegged.
There are 49 other countries listed including Euro, 30 Number.
Anyway what has the USD got with global taxation of non-resident individuals?

My post is not contradictory.
I was perfectly correct when saying "There is only one country that has for a long time imposed global taxation on citizens'.
2022 and 2023 is not a long time. 1913 is.
I pointed out that eritrea was one other country since 1990's.

i can see a time...
When they will tax people for solar system income when they live on the moon or mars.
But nothing that concerns us in the here and now.

Why do you have any serious belief that global income taxation for citizens is in the near future. With all the different currencies and rates that are specific to residents in a each country and the needs of each economy, and different types of income subject to extremely wide variables, there would have to be a single income tax structure globally that applies in every country the same.
Not a cat in hells chance of that happening in my lifetime, unless one or just a few nations rule the whole world.

21 hours ago, motdaeng said:

who is they? thanks for clarifying ...

Mainly the EU, with Macron the most zealous one, as EU leaders (and again mainly Macron) are preparing worldwide tax and control on their citizens, new wealth tax, exchanges of personal data, cryptocurrencies taxes and regulations, and the dystopian list goes on... So there has been a lot of emigration towards Thailand and UAE. They put pressure on Thailand, if it wants to join the OECD they should follow their recommendations.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Hungary is not relevant to the discussion.
They do not impose global taxation on non-residents. Its only on tax residents in Hungary.
Thats the same as is many countries such as UK.
Myanmar has imposed income tax on its non-resident citizens' foreign earnings, effective from October 1, 2023. Imposed by military coup rulers.
I already told you Eritrea.
Tajikistan is confusing.
From 2022. Tax Residents and Citizens: Individuals who are citizens of Tajikistan or who are present in the country for more than 182 days in a consecutive 12-month period are generally considered tax residents. These individuals are subject to tax on their worldwide income.

But then the rules state: Non-Residents: Non-residents are only taxed on their income sourced within Tajikistan. This can be corroborated on other websites.

So the main addition to what i stated is Mynamar. You can hardly describe a militarily imposed rule as representative of any worldwide opinion or trends.

So, you disagree with the content in the link. Is that correct?

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

"most of the world peg their own currency to the US dollar" ?
Not the case. Many countries do not do so.

Rubbish.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

My post is not contradictory.
I was perfectly correct when saying "There is only one country that has for a long time imposed global taxation on citizens'.
2022 and 2023 is not a long time. 1913 is.
I pointed out that eritrea was one other country since 1990's.

You said there was only one country, then you said there were two countries. That's a contradiction.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

i can see a time...
When they will tax people for solar system income when they live on the moon or mars.
But nothing that concerns us in the here and now.

Your moon or Mars comment is just an insult.

My country, Australia, is already looking at ways to tax electric vehicles. (EV's) Most people charge their EV from their solar system. The reason for considering this tax is because the government is not making any tax money out of EV owners though gasoline sales. Catch up with the times.

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Why do you have any serious belief that global income taxation for citizens is in the near future. With all the different currencies and rates that are specific to residents in a each country and the needs of each economy, and different types of income subject to extremely wide variables, there would have to be a single income tax structure globally that applies in every country the same.

Because governments want complete control under the guise of anti crime and anti tax evasion policy. Think, mass surveillance Edward Snowden. Things are already happening to move it in that direction. Only a matter of time.

You comment about the different currencies is funny. Look at the EU. One currency for 27 countries. Why are you so sure one currency for 196 countries is not possible?

1 hour ago, jojothai said:

Not a cat in hells chance of that happening in my lifetime, unless one or just a few nations rule the whole world.

Have a look around you. Do you see what's happening in the world. A few nations ruling the world is exactly what is happening.

8 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Why are you confident world wide taxation based on citizenship will not be adopted by more and more countries in the future?

My view is many countries prefer taxation on residents (and not restricted to citizenship), because residents in a country use the services/facilities provided by the country's government. While non-residents in the most part do not use as much of the government services.

Hence if one is a citizen, but a non-resident of the country, one is not using the government's services. Hence the view (of many governments) is in that case, if not using the government services (which is the case for non-residents), and especially if no income from the country where one is not a resident, there is no need to pay taxes to their country. Also, it can be a PIA and an expense, to track down citizens, who are no longer resident.

However as we all know, some countries DO tax based on citizenship.

Might there be more countries that wish to tax based on citizenship?

Possibly, but I think the case for more governments wanting to impose taxation of global income based on residency is more likely. However opposing global taxation based on residency, for some countries, is the wealthy who contribute to the political parties, may have lots of money outside of the country. To push taxation of those resident people (in this example mostly citizens), could mean less money contributed to the political parties of the countries (as those very very wealthy citizens are opposed to global taxation). ... Which is not to say global taxation can not happen, but it does say there is likely money being spent (discretely contributed?) to oppose global taxation (IMHO) in cases.

.

there are foreigners in thailand who try to follow the laws and rules. i am grateful for basic information that i receive here on this forum, whether it is about building, banks, visas, or taxes. but in the end, it is up to each person what they do with this information ...

unfortunately, there are foreigners who cannot stand it when for example information about the adjusted tax regulations are shared. these people do only attacking and insulting ...

if someone does not want to comply with tax obligations in thailand, that is their own choice. no one here is forcing anyone to do anything regarding taxes, the goal is simply to share informations and to give some advices ...

my personal opinion is that sooner or later the tax rules will become stricter, just as we are now seeing with all the new banking regulations ... and if not, than it is a good thing for us foreigners ...

13 hours ago, oldcpu said:

My view is many countries prefer taxation on residents (and not restricted to citizenship), because residents in a country use the services/facilities provided by the country's government. While non-residents in the most part do not use as much of the government services.

They can tax both.

13 hours ago, oldcpu said:

Hence if one is a citizen, but a non-resident of the country, one is not using the government's services. Hence the view (of many governments) is in that case, if not using the government services (which is the case for non-residents), and especially if no income from the country where one is not a resident, there is no need to pay taxes to their country. Also, it can be a PIA and an expense, to track down citizens, who are no longer resident.

I'm a self funded retiree with health insurance and under 67 years of age. Tell me, if I go back to Australia, what government services do I qualify to use?

13 hours ago, oldcpu said:

Might there be more countries that wish to tax based on citizenship?

Possibly, but I think the case for more governments wanting to impose taxation of global income based on residency is more likely. However opposing global taxation based on residency, for some countries, is the wealthy who contribute to the political parties, may have lots of money outside of the country.

Once again, why can't they impose it on both?

People with big money may seek to renounce their birth citizenship and gain, for example, a Monaco citizenship.

Remember when Murdoch renounced his Australian citizenship. in order to gain US citizenship, just so he could expand his media ownership. Some may seek to do similar for tax purposes.

Off topic and bickering removed

3 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

Since you asked the following come to mind, which are relevant to a lessor or greater extent:

Medicare and PBS I accept. I'll concede that. Of course I knew this.

Obviously, with private health insurance, no waiting list for me. So, it my choice not to use Medicare.

I do pay the Medicare Levy though. So, I do pay towards a system that others use, and I do not.

7 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

2. Public Infrastructure You Use Daily
These are tax-funded services embedded into everyday life:
- Roads, bridges, tunnels, traffic systems
- Public transport infrastructure (even if you pay fares)
- Airports, air traffic control, maritime safety
- Water supply regulation and quality assurance
- Power grid regulation and reliability oversight
- Telecommunications regulation (emergency access, standards)
Yes you will likely pay some user fees, but capital, maintenance, and regulation are government-funded.

I pay for all of these.

7 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

4. Legal, Civic, and Regulatory Systems
These are essential:
- Courts and legal system
- Property title registration and protection
- Consumer protection (ACCC)
- Financial system regulation (banks, superannuation safeguards)
- Electoral system
- Immigration and border protection
Your assets, contracts, and personal security rely on these government funded frameworks.

I pay for all of these.

8 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

5. Local Government Services
Government-provided:
- Waste collection and recycling
- Local roads and footpaths
- Parks, libraries, community facilities
- Planning and zoning enforcement
- Environmental health (food safety, inspections)

I pay for all of these.

9 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

6. Health & Aged-Care System Preparation (Even Before You Use It)
Even under 67, the system is being funded in advance of future need:
- Hospital capacity planning
- Aged care infrastructure
- Workforce training (doctors, nurses, carers)
- Medical research and public health programs
You may not use aged care yet, but the system may exist for you later.

I have assets. If / when I go back to Australia and into aged care, the last I heard, it will be around $600k AUD, up front, depending on location.

11 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

7. Tax Concessions & Structural Benefits
Even without payments, you benefit from:
- Superannuation tax concessions
- Capital gains tax exemptions (e.g. principal residence)
- Absence of wealth taxes
- Government-backed financial stability

Superannuation is compulsory, is it not?

11 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

So you asked. There is an answer. I obtained the above from a quick surf. Some points are IMHO debatable, but some clearly for many of those Australia aspects , they need tax money to be there (as Australia exists today).

Debatable is an understatement. 🙂

The only thing the Australian government has ever given me, and I mean, NOT subsidized, is Keven Rudd's $950 that everyone got. Admittedly, that $950 was just my own money coming back to me.

I'm generating an income in Australia. I submit a tax return and pay resident tax rates on that income, despite living in Thailand, due to a tax loop hole, which will change in the future, but that's being debated in another thread.

So, here I am, paying for all the the above in your list/s, which also means contributing towards pensions received by Aussies living in Thailand, and I use none of the infrastructure / services you mention. Would you care to elaborate on that?

20 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

My point is at present the VAST MAJORITY do not. And there are reasons why not. Reasons can change, but I see no evidence supporting massive change.

Why wouldn't they go after every tax dollar they can get?

Have you seen how much debt western countries are in?

21 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

Its not uncommon that wealthy people, who feel the price they pay to live in one location costs too much money, will move from one location to another.

We have done that, haven't we? As have most members of this forum.

22 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

A classic case, is one of the wealthiest people in the world (Jeff Bezos) moved from one state to another state, where in part, the state taxes he paid in one USA state was much higher, than the state tax of where he moved his residence too. In that case it was despite Mr.Bezos being taxed based on citizenship, he still had benefits to move, and he did not have to renounce his citizenship.

My point, in Bezos case, US states do NOT tax state residents based on the USAstate in which they were born. They tax based on residency. Taxing based on residency is very common, not only at international level and national level (which is what is of interest to most of us on this forum), but can also tax further based on the provincial/state level, and even in cases, civic level - where it is residency is the determining factor as to whether one is taxed.

I have always been referring to federal taxes, not state taxes.

Countries can tax both residents for tax purposes and citizens on world wide income. You make it sound like they can only tax one, and not the other, and not both? I simply disagree. They can tax both, and, I CAN SEE THE DAY when countries will.

6 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I'm generating an income in Australia. I submit a tax return and pay resident tax rates on that income, despite living in Thailand, due to a tax loop hole, which will change in the future, but that's being debated in another thread.

I do the same re; my Canadian income - I pay taxes in Canada for the income I receive in Canada. I even received a formal letter from the Canadian government, offering to tax me as a Canadian tax resident (even thou I am a resident of Thailand) so that I could better take advantage of tax deductions offered to tax residents of Canada. it was nice of them to give me the choice. I thankfully declined that offer to be taxed as a Canadian tax resident (even thou I am not a resident). Again, it was nice to be given the choice.

Surprising (to me) is for my German pension, as a resident of Thailand, I don't need to submit a German tax return. I did submit one for the first couple of years in which i moved to Thailand, and i subsequently received a formal letter from the German government advising me as long as my residence and financial situation did not change, I did not have to submit a German tax return. ... I wish Canada was that nice. lol !

5 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

I do the same re; my Canadian income - I pay taxes in Canada for the income I receive in Canada. I even received a formal letter from the Canadian government, offering to tax me as a Canadian tax resident (even thou I am a resident of Thailand) so that I could better take advantage of tax deductions offered to tax residents of Canada. it was nice of them to give me the choice. I thankfully declined that offer to be taxed as a Canadian tax resident (even thou I am not a resident). Again, it was nice to be given the choice.

Surprising (to me) is for my German pension, as a resident of Thailand, I don't need to submit a German tax return. I did submit one for the first couple of years in which i moved to Thailand, and i subsequently received a formal letter from the German government advising me as long as my residence and financial situation did not change, I did not have to submit a German tax return. ... I wish Canada was that nice. lol !

You are lucky.

Australia is moving to a physical presence and time based taxation model. Basically, the same as Thailand. In Australia 183 days a calendar year, resident. Outside Australia for 183 days a calendar year, non resident.

The non resident tax rates start at 30% for $0 to $120,000, and no tax free threshold. One can't get around this because Australian immigration will know how long one has been in and out of Australia.

What is interesting is the Australian Taxation Office deems the aged pension to be an income. It was the source of much debate in another thread, but I mentioned it's possible expat pensioners may lose 30% of their pension when the proposed changes are passed into legislation. Didn't the thread light up. Of course, the message was so horrible that if we troll the messenger enough, maybe it won't happen. 😂

2 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

The non resident tax rates start at 30% for $0 to $120,000, and no tax free threshold. One can't get around this because Australian immigration will know how long one has been in and out of Australia.

What is interesting is the Australian Taxation Office deems the aged pension to be an income. It was the source of much debate in another thread, but I mentioned it's possible expat pensioners may lose 30% of their pension when the proposed changes are passed into legislation. Didn't the thread light up. Of course, the message was so horrible that if we troll the messenger enough, maybe it won't happen. 😂

Well, I 'feel' for you regarding taxation, if you end up being excessively taxed.

I believe there are many variations for tax obligations, dependent on the country of one's income, and the Thai-to-foreign-country Double Tax Agreement (DTA).

Relatively recently, I spent a lot of time reviewing Canadian tax law and the Thai-Canada double tax agreement, while at the same time trying to be up to date with Thai tax law and Thai ministerial documents (relevant to taxation) and of course any relevant (to taxation) Royal Decrees. I only looked at these from my perspective given my income sources.

I contributed to a thread on Canadian taxation on this forum ( https://aseannow.com/topic/1307606-what-is-the-tax-treaty-between-canada-and-thailand/page/2/ ) where I summarized my research.

Why do all of this?

As a non-resident to Canada, I feel I paid too much tax in Canada in tax-year 2024, and that was what motivated me to do more research. I now plan, in my 2025 tax return to Canada (that i will submit in a few months) to include an accompanying letter, referencing specific sections in Canadian tax law, and also in the Canada-Thai Double tax agreement, justifying some deductions in my planned tax return.

My current view is whoever in Revenue Canada, reviewed my tax return for 2024 tax year, was (like me at that time) not fully aware of all of the details of Canada-Thai DTA, and not aware of some tax aspects in regards to Canada law for taxing non-residents (where withholding tax has already been applied). I believe I may have failed to make some deductions, and the Revenue Department did not correct my return to give me the appropriate deductions. Further, since then, I slightly restructured some Canadian finances to hopefully better minimize inappropriate excessive tax exposure. In some cases, a DTA with Thailand may open up such possibilities for foreign income, dependent on the DTA details.

In terms of this thread, .... regardless of any Thai tax proposed changes, that may, or may not come to pass, for those where the tax due can be significant, it may be useful to familiarize one's self with the tax law (of Thailand, of one's income sourced country, and the relevant DTAs). I am a bit surprised we don't see more threads (like the one I contributed to on Canada taxation) for other countries. We have expats from many countries on this forum.

And given my upcoming April-2026 plans (for my Canada tax return), i suspect later in 2026 i will find out how much Revenue Canada agrees, or disagrees, with how I file my tax return. Murphy's Law says they will disagree with me. Lol !

1 hour ago, oldcpu said:

Well, I 'feel' for you regarding taxation, if you end up being excessively taxed.

Worse case scenario, I'll have to do 45 days in Australia every year. It's part of the legislation. The Australian government wants to classify as many people as possible as tax residents, so, if you are in Australia for 45 days, but less than 183 days, you are a tax resident. Not great, but I did't burn my bridges back home and have a property I can go back to.

1 hour ago, oldcpu said:

I believe there are many variations for tax obligations, dependent on the country of one's income, and the Thai-to-foreign-country Double Tax Agreement (DTA).

The Australia / Thailand DTA only covers government pensions, not the aged pension.

In relation to your information about Canadian tax, the way I see it is most western countries are broke. They are in record debt. They will be chasing every dollar from everywhere, and from everyone into the future. Data bases are starting to talk to each other to tighten the net. They will be changing policy so one does not qualify for an aged pension, possibly forcing the sale of the family home. They will be raising the age to qualify for the pension. It was 65 in Australia, now 67. Probably go to 69 in the future. The government's excuse will be, because we are living longer. They basically will want people to die whilst still employed so they don't have to give them a pension.

The UK freeze the pensions of tier citizens who live abroad. Other countries may seek to tax pensions where the recipients live abroad.

Time will tell.

On 12/30/2025 at 9:50 AM, SamSpade said:

I then told my mate about it & suggested he opened an account before his trip to the UK as his UK Bank accounts had been closed by his Bank (Virgin/RBS or whoever they are nowadays) and he opened one from Thailand, said nothing about Tax residency and used his father's address where he was planning to stay for a few days. 

 

Neither of us had to show any proof of address, in fact all's you needed was a scan of your passport and a Live "Photo" that showed it was you making the application. 

 

 

 

I did the same, signed up to revolut from Thailand using my parents UK address. They didn't need any proof of my address in UK. They also don't send anything to that address in UK for to confirm it's my address either.

On 12/30/2025 at 9:50 AM, SamSpade said:

They won't deliver a physical card to Thailand so if you want one, you should use an address that you'll either be visiting or have somebody there who can forward it to you.

 

 

Yes they do. That's how I have received two Revolut physical cards. Took 2 days via DHL.