53 minutes ago, ukrules said:

So what makes it assessable at any time for income earned after Jan 1, 2024 is that if a specific lump sum was earned in a resident year, then it's taxable forever regardless of residence in the year of subsequent remittance.

I understand your position/ logic here but I don't believe it's accurate.

A non-resident is subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand. Non residents are not required to file a tax return at all, unless they have Thai sourced income.

Remitted foreign income earnt in a previous year(post 2024 whilst a Thai tax resident)  isn't Thai sourced.

The income remitted may have been earnt 2,3 or more years in the past, and doesn't even relate to the tax year of filing, apart from it being remitted during that tax year.

For the year being filed for, the hypothetical person isn't a Thai tax resident that year.

For the scenario to be taxable, something like a new category of tax resident would need to be created and/or legislation updated.

1 hour ago, ukrules said:

So what makes it assessable at any time for income earned after Jan 1, 2024 is that if a specific lump sum was earned in a resident year, then it's taxable forever regardless of residence in the year of subsequent remittance. In a similar manner if it's earned in a non resident year then it's non assessable forever.

That simple infographic covers all of these scenarios - I added some notes to my copy of it which may or may not be useful :

This infographic is misleading and that's why it is misunderstood by most.

Firstly:

It is entitled FOREIGN-SOURCED INCOME. According to the current Thai tax code, foreign-sourced income is only relevant to tax residents since non-residents are only subject to tax on Thai-sourced income.

So the infographic is specifically, and only, addressing tax residents in coherence with the Revenue Department Order No. P. 161/2066 (2023) translated in an earlier post.

Secondly:

The double column "Number of days staying in Thailand (during the year the income is earned)" refers to the individual tax residency status when the income is earned NOT when it is remitted.

It indicates that: If the individual earned the foreign income while being resident => income is assessable (deductions/exemptions may apply) at remittance in any subsequent years ; If the individual earned the foreign income while being non-resident => income is never assessable and can be remitted tax-free at any time.

Actually to be crystal clear a double column "Number of days staying in Thailand (during the year the income is remitted)" would be necessary, but then the infographic would be addressing both residents and non-residents which again is not the purpose.

To sum it up:

The infographic is only addressed to residents for tax purposes and consequently it is nowhere referring to the tax residency status of the individual at remittance (because it is implied to be de facto tax resident).

This is my understanding, of course, I stand to be corrected.

2 hours ago, ukrules said:

So what makes it assessable at any time for income earned after Jan 1, 2024 is that if a specific lump sum was earned in a resident year, then it's taxable forever regardless of residence in the year of subsequent remittance. In a similar manner if it's earned in a non resident year then it's non assessable forever.

I'm not disputing your interpretation of the chart, I just want to ask your opinion about the following scenario.

A person was a resident for one year (in 2024), did not remit any assessable income, didn't need to get a TIN, was not required to file a tax return, and is never a resident again.

If that person visits Thailand 1 year, 5 years or even 10 years later for 60 days as a tourist, do you really think that person needs to make sure the money he remits was not earned in 2024? Do you really think that is what the chart means? How can that rule ever be legally enforced against a tourist when they can't even enforce it against their own residents?

26 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

I'm not disputing your interpretation of the chart, I just want to ask your opinion about the following scenario.

A person was a resident for one year (in 2024), did not remit any assessable income, didn't need to get a TIN, was not required to file a tax return, and is never a resident again.

If that person visits Thailand 1 year, 5 years or even 10 years later for 60 days as a tourist, do you really think that person needs to make sure the money he remits was not earned in 2024? Do you really think that is what the chart means? How can that rule ever be legally enforced against a tourist when they can't even enforce it against their own residents?

or another example: a foreigner comes to thailand for the first time ever for 4 months in 2026 and he does transfers all of his income from 2024 and 2025 to thailand. in 2027, this foreigner decides to move to thailand and becomes a tax resident.

does this foreigner now have to pay tax in 2027 on the money that was transferred to thailand in 2026 (as he was not a tax resident in thailand)? how absurd would that be ...

the "tax law question" is: if any money is remitted while a person has the status of not being a tax resident and has no income in thailand, does this money have to be taxed in any later year when the person becomes a tax resident? IMHO, no ...

1 hour ago, JohnnyBD said:

If that person visits Thailand 1 year, 5 years or even 10 years later for 60 days as a tourist

... even for 179 days in any calendar year as a non-resident (technically a tourist for tax matters).

The main loophole in the Thai tax system is the one and only tax residency condition which in itself allows convenient tax avoidance workarounds.

There are some reasons why it has never been amended. Only naives believe rich Thai residents pay 35% tax on their income. There is no good yield in passive investment in Thailand, cash surplus must be put at work abroad... then repatriated.

2 hours ago, motdaeng said:

or another example: a foreigner comes to thailand for the first time ever for 4 months in 2026 and he does transfers all of his income from 2024 and 2025 to thailand. in 2027, this foreigner decides to move to thailand and becomes a tax resident.

does this foreigner now have to pay tax in 2027 on the money that was transferred to thailand in 2026 (as he was not a tax resident in thailand)? how absurd would that be ...

the "tax law question" is: if any money is remitted while a person has the status of not being a tax resident and has no income in thailand, does this money have to be taxed in any later year when the person becomes a tax resident? IMHO, no ...

Obviously he wasn't Thai tax resident until he moved to Thailand in 2027 (4 months is approx 120 days so he wasn't Tax resident in 2026) so nothing he remitted or earned before then would be taxable.

If he spent 6 months (approx 183 days) in Thailand in 2026 then anything he earned in 2024/2025 would be non-taxable and anything he earns from 2026 onwards (assuming he remains Thai Tax Resident) is tax assessible and he might have to pay Tax on it (subject to source of income, DTAs, personal allowances etc...).

If he took a year out in 2029 then any income he earned between 2026-2028 is still taxable even if he remitted it in 2029 and any income earned in 2029 is not taxable even if he remits it in a year when he is Thai Tax resident.

32 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

... even for 179 days in any calendar year as a non-resident (technically a tourist for tax matters).

I agree, if a foreigner stays 179 days or less in Thailand, that person is a non-resident foreign visitor for tax purposes.

The issue I have with the law we're discussing (if it truly is law), it's very unlikely Thailand can legally force non-resident foreign visitors to pay income taxes on any remittances because there's no way for Thailand to know if those remittances were from foreign earned income when the foreigner may have been a resident. And, I don't think Thailand has the legal authority to compel foreign visitors to disclose their personal overseas financial data. So, we're at a dead end. The law (if it truly is law) cannot be legally or practically enforced.

If a non-resident foreigner wants to file a tax return and pay taxes on their remittances, I say to each his own.

14 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

I agree, if a foreigner stays 179 days or less in Thailand, that person is a non-resident foreign visitor for tax purposes.

The issue I have with the law we're discussing (if it truly is law), it's very unlikely Thailand can legally force non-resident foreign visitors to pay income taxes on any remittances because there's no way for Thailand to know if those remittances were from foreign earned income when the foreigner may have been a resident. And, I don't think Thailand has the legal authority to compel foreign visitors to disclose their personal overseas financial data. So, we're at a dead end. The law (if it truly is law) cannot be legally or practically enforced.

If a non-resident foreigner wants to file a tax return and pay taxes on their remittances, I say to each his own.

They could audit you going back at least 5 years (10 in some cases) so if you were to spend 2027 outside of Thailand & became a Thai Tax Resident again in 2028 when you file your 2028 return they can ask you for the previous year's income/remittance data & if you don't file they can audit you as to why you didn't file.

Granted if you stay outside of Thailand for at least 10 years then you should be covered but having said that, in 2023 I tried to claim a refund of the withheld tax on interest for 2021/2022 and they asked me for bank statements going back to when the accounts were opened, I pointed out that 1 of the accounts was opened > 40 years ago but they still wanted to see all statements.

I also pointed out that I only became Tax Resident in 2020 and all of the money I had remitted was brought over when I was non Tax Resident working in Singapore - still wanted to see all statements so I gave up on getting the refund & haven't bothered since.

4 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

there's no way for them to know if those remittances were from foreign earned income when the foreigner may have been a resident. And, I don't think Thailand has the legal authority to compel a foreign visitor to disclose their personal overseas financial data.

The only way to know is to scrupulously audit residents and non-residents (screened at immigration checkpoints) alike.

But even then, Thailand will struggle to get information from foreign financial institutions (most if not all FIs won't reply and there's nothing much TRD can do without decisive local political pressure), out of automatic data exchanges through CRS/FATCA (if Thai tax residency has been recorded).

5 minutes ago, SamSpade said:

They could audit you going back at least 5 years (10 in some cases) so if you were to spend 2027 outside of Thailand & became a Thai Tax Resident again in 2028 when you file your 2028 return they can ask you for the previous year's income/remittance data & if you don't file they can audit you as to why you didn't file.

Yes, they could audit you if you become a resident again. But, if you never become a resident again, then you have nothing to worry about just like the other millions of foreign visitors.

8 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

The only way to know is to scrupulously audit residents and non-residents (screened at immigration checkpoints) alike.

How likely is that? Thailand cannot force a foreign visitor to disclose their overseas financial data. I guess they could always deny entrance or revoke a visa, but there are millions of foreign visitors, so not likely.

1 hour ago, SamSpade said:

If he took a year out in 2029 then any income he earned between 2026-2028 is still taxable even if he remitted it in 2029

No. Non-residents are only subject to tax on Thai-sourced income. Any remittance (from abroad) is not Thai-sourced.

If he's non-resident in 2029, any remittance is tax-free.

You are entitled to your opinion but your statement is not backed by any current Thai tax code reference.

6 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

No. Non-residents are only subject to tax on Thai-sourced income. Any remittance (from abroad) is not Thai-sourced.

If he's non-resident in 2029, any remittance is tax-free.

I agree with your statements. I think this horse has been beaten to death for the past 2 years. Each person is free to do as they wish.

46 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

No. Non-residents are only subject to tax on Thai-sourced income. Any remittance (from abroad) is not Thai-sourced.

If he's non-resident in 2029, any remittance is tax-free.

You are entitled to your opinion but your statement is not backed by any current Thai tax code reference.

True the official document from TRD does not explicitly state that income earned whilst Thai Tax Resident would be taxable when remitted as a Non-Thai Tax resident, but it's doesn't say that it isn't taxable either.

PWC is very clear on it...

Foreign-sourced income (including capital gains) earned in a year you were a Thai tax resident (180+ days) is taxable upon remittance to Thailand in any year, even if you're not a resident in the remittance year (2026). This applies to income from 2024 onward. Pre-2024 income follows the old rule.

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/significant-developments

At the end of the day the fact it is not set in stone means TRD could tax you on it if you were audited so I tend to err on the side of caution & assume it is taxable.

11 minutes ago, SamSpade said:

True the official document from TRD does not explicitly state that income earned whilst Thai Tax Resident would be taxable when remitted as a Non-Thai Tax resident, but it's doesn't say that it isn't taxable either.

PWC is very clear on it...

Foreign-sourced income (including capital gains) earned in a year you were a Thai tax resident (180+ days) is taxable upon remittance to Thailand in any year, even if you're not a resident in the remittance year (2026). This applies to income from 2024 onward. Pre-2024 income follows the old rule.

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/thailand/individual/significant-developments

At the end of the day the fact it is not set in stone means TRD could tax you on it if you were audited so I tend to err on the side of caution & assume it is taxable.

I've tried to show all over this thread quoting the currently enforced law why some statements, including the one from PwC, are misinterpreting (could be a mistranslation) the tax regulation. The law is set in stone until amended, interpretations are just opinions.

Now you may believe Thai authority can bend (to some extent) the rules at will, however here we are not talking about "discretion" but fully dismissing a written law.

Under current Thai tax regulations (as of April 2026), foreign income earned while you were a tax resident in Thailand is not taxable if you repatriate it to Thailand after you have ceased to be a Thai tax resident.

Source: Ki กรมสรรพากร

Here are the key details of this regulation:

Condition for tax liability: Foreign income is only taxed in Thailand if two conditions are met simultaneously:

You are a Thai tax resident (residence of 180 days or more) in the calendar year in which the income was earned.

You repatriate this income to Thailand.

... Remittance status is crucial: The Thai Revenue Department clarifies that income from foreign sources remitted to Thailand by a person who is not a Thai tax resident at the time of remittance is not subject to Thai tax, even if it was earned during a period of previous tax residency.

Important exception (before 2024): Foreign income earned before January 1, 2024, generally remains tax-free upon remittance to Thailand, regardless of current residency status.

1 hour ago, Sato said:

Under current Thai tax regulations (as of April 2026), foreign income earned while you were a tax resident in Thailand is not taxable if you repatriate it to Thailand after you have ceased to be a Thai tax resident.

Source: Ki กรมสรรพากร

Here are the key details of this regulation:

Condition for tax liability: Foreign income is only taxed in Thailand if two conditions are met simultaneously:

You are a Thai tax resident (residence of 180 days or more) in the calendar year in which the income was earned.

You repatriate this income to Thailand.

... Remittance status is crucial: The Thai Revenue Department clarifies that income from foreign sources remitted to Thailand by a person who is not a Thai tax resident at the time of remittance is not subject to Thai tax, even if it was earned during a period of previous tax residency.

Important exception (before 2024): Foreign income earned before January 1, 2024, generally remains tax-free upon remittance to Thailand, regardless of current residency status.

The Revenue Department seems to disagree with your opinion.

44 minutes ago, Porthos said:

The Revenue Department seems to disagree with your opinion.

This slide is misleading.

https://www.asco.or.th/uploads/articles_attc/1726134914.pdf

The law is correctly stated on slide 5, and specifically on slide 6:

"The elements to consider for income tax liability on income from foreign sources are as follows:

1) The person is a resident of Thailand and has assessable income due to work or business conducted abroad, or due to assets located abroad, from January 1, 2024 onwards; and

2) The assessable income is brought into Thailand in any tax year.

Result: Tax is payable in the tax year in which the income is brought into Thailand."

44 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

2) The assessable income is brought into Thailand in any tax year.

Result: Tax is payable in the tax year in which the income is brought into Thailand."

Apparently, the Revenue Department's interpretation is that this does not need to be a Tax Resident.

3 hours ago, Porthos said:

Apparently, the Revenue Department's interpretation is that this does not need to be a Tax Resident.

The Revenue Department's interpretation on the slide you posted somewhat contradicts the law articulated on slide 6.

To me the rule is precise and clearly formulated: There is an "and" meaning the two conditions ( 1- the person is a (tax) resident, and 2- the assessable income is brought to Thailand ) shall be combined for the overall statement to be TRUE. It's not either or.

18 hours ago, Yumthai said:

This slide is misleading.

https://www.asco.or.th/uploads/articles_attc/1726134914.pdf

The law is correctly stated on slide 5, and specifically on slide 6:

"The elements to consider for income tax liability on income from foreign sources are as follows:

1) The person is a resident of Thailand and has assessable income due to work or business conducted abroad, or due to assets located abroad, from January 1, 2024 onwards; and

2) The assessable income is brought into Thailand in any tax year.

Result: Tax is payable in the tax year in which the income is brought into Thailand."

Correct.

Also note that slide 4 has Domestic source heading with Thai resident / non resident. While Foreign source heading only has Thai resident.

Additionally , slide 5 paragraph 2 , which addresses foreign source income- states “the authority of the territory over the person ( who has been in Thailand for 180 days)”.

Furthermore, slide 6 states for foreign sourced income tax to apply - “be a person in Thailand “ ( meaning be a tax resident) AND etc...

All of this makes it very clear.

Non-residents don’t pay Thai tax on remitted foreign source income, regardless of the tax year it was earned or remitted.

On 4/11/2026 at 8:45 PM, Yumthai said:

The Revenue Department's interpretation on the slide you posted somewhat contradicts the law articulated on slide 6.

To me the rule is precise and clearly formulated: There is an "and" meaning the two conditions ( 1- the person is a (tax) resident, and 2- the assessable income is brought to Thailand ) shall be combined for the overall statement to be TRUE. It's not either or.

What you describe in this thread would be the ideal scenario but I would like to see some public case law after these changes before remitting anything earned during a resident year. If auditors do go after this income and it's challenges in court - only then would I rely on it.

I separate out my income streams into different banks in different countries and I'm good for the next 10 to 15 years or so with existing non assessable funds and I'll just continue saving all the income being earned right now during resident years and not remit any of it. This income is completely untaxed due to where it comes from and where it goes and where I'm from.

If it does turn out that I can take another year out and remit earnings from 2025 to say 2035 which will almost certainly all be Thai resident years then maybe I'll take another year out.

3 hours ago, ukrules said:

What you describe in this thread would be the ideal scenario but I would like to see some public case law after these changes before remitting anything earned during a resident year. If auditors do go after this income and it's challenges in court - only then would I rely on it.

I'm just reading the current written law as we all can do and I think it's clearly articulated.

Everyone would like to see any individual tax audit/case law reports to rely on but it seems hopeless.

4 hours ago, ukrules said:

If it does turn out that I can take another year out and remit earnings from 2025 to say 2035 which will almost certainly all be Thai resident years then maybe I'll take another year out.

Of course you may want to take maximum precautions if you are able to easily financially structure yourself and take punctual tax residency off. That's not possible for everybody.

6 hours ago, Yumthai said:

I'm just reading the current written law as we all can do and I think it's clearly articulated.

Be that as it may, they often do whatever they want in this country regardless of what the law says.

If you're sitting in front of an auditor who's just frozen your passport and threatening you with many millions in fines then what can you do?

This kind of thing has happened, I've even heard of companies being forced to pay tax on investment capital for R&D as it was remitted (therefore on the balance sheet it must have been profit) - they are not nice and do anything they can to get the money.

This is incompetence to the next level when companies close down and fire dozens of high earning employees due to the way the revenue department treat the investors. They have a very bad reputation.

I would expect to be talked down to and treated like pure dirt by any official, I would never meet with them without a lawyer and/or accountant who has all my well prepared paperwork and I would let them do the talking.

They will tax as much as they can get away with, especially if they think you can't afford a multi million Baht case to take them to court - nothing to stop them.

On 4/6/2026 at 3:33 PM, SamSpade said:

At the end of the day the fact it is not set in stone means TRD could tax you on it if you were audited so I tend to err on the side of caution & assume it is taxable.

A classic grey area. And common sense says - in a grey area situation, you take the avenue to your benefit -- particularly if you can quote tax code to support your position ("non residents are exempt from taxation on foreign remitted income"). So, OP shouldn't file a tax return for income remitted in year he was not a tax resident. In the minimal chance he's called in for an audit (super large remittance brings attention.....?), he's on solid ground for not filing, thus worst case is that RD disagrees, and he has to file and pay tax, with interest and fine. But, again, we're talking a minimal chance of this ever happening, and certainly a defensible position against any fraudulent intent. So, why wouldn't a sensible individual go this route?

But, yeah, he's gotten info from the other side of the coin. An audit agency has provided information that suggests that he'd better file a tax return. Of course they did -- maybe they've found another fish to pay their five-figure tax filing fee, plus maybe another fee for a TIN......

3 hours ago, ukrules said:

If you're sitting in front of an auditor who's just frozen your passport and threatening you with many millions in fines then what can you do?

I call my lawyer/embassy because the auditor is exceeding his authority trying to enforce unlawful rules.

Again you need to take into perspective the consequences of taxing multiple million baht remittances (at 35% marginal rate) brought into Thailand to invest in real estate or even for splurge spending. Such act relayed by all medias worldwide will nuke Thailand attractiveness for long term residents. I'm not sure Thailand wants to get rid of the relatively wealthy foreigners, keeping the cheap crowd ; quite the opposite actually.

4 hours ago, ukrules said:

This kind of thing has happened, I've even heard of companies being forced to pay tax on investment capital for R&D as it was remitted (therefore on the balance sheet it must have been profit) - they are not nice and do anything they can to get the money.

Corporate and individual tax are two different animals not treated the same way.

On 3/31/2026 at 9:46 AM, CallumWK said:

Lived here constantly for 30 years, and have yellow book/pink card and tax ID, so without doubt I'm resident for tax purposes and have to pay tax on income sent here.

Now in year 31 I decide to stay here for less than 180 days.

Is it really written in stone that for that single year I am not a tax resident, and can transfer as much money in as I want without paying income tax?

Is it really that simple, or are it just assumptions without any evidence?

Note, in year 32 I would again stay here full time.

If you are not a Thai tax resident it is that simple.

If you are not a Thai tax resident, and if you transfer foreign money into to Thailand during the year in which you are not a Thai tax resident, then that money is not taxable by Thailand. Full stop!

If not a Thai tax resident, then you don't pay Thai tax on foreign income while you are not a Thai tax resident. A number of forum members have noted this on this thread. That money is not assessable income, it is basically governed by Thai RD ministerial directives PAW.161/162. You have your evidence!

If, thou (and you did not ask this) , but if, you earned the (post-1-Jan-2024) foreign money while a Thai tax resident, and then if some years later you brought that money into Thailand when once again a Thai tax resident, then that money is potentially Thai taxable.

Note I say potentially Thai taxable. The details of the Double tax agreement (DTA) between Thailand, and the country in which the income was earned comes into play, and hence that DTA may (or may not) indicate no Thailand tax is associated with that income, no matter when the money is brought into Thailand. Or the DTA may indicate Thai tax is possibly associated. So the income source (when one is a Thai tax resident) is important as such is governed by the DTA.

A number of forum members have noted this (with different wording), such as Yumthai and JohnnyBD and ukrules and others.

4 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

A number of forum members have noted this (with different wording), such as Yumthai and JohnnyBD and ukrules and others.

For a starters Ukrules has said that I would have to pay tax in my situation,maybe read his posts again.

A few other members have also said I would have to pay tax.

One member has said this

Unfortunately.

A senior tax official has said they will NOT accept this loophole and they WILL tax what you send here in the year you are not a tax resident.

(I cannot remember who exactly it was - I don't know him anyway.

He said it in a session to inform foreigners, not youtube or a newspaper.

The information comes from one of the big accounting firms here, the information was not free.

This was also mentioned somewhere in the tax threads)

He is Thai, so nobody dared to contradict him and say "This contravenes the letter of the law"

https://aseannow.com/topic/1391112-tax-residency/#findComment-20444091

An auditor has told me I would have to pay tax in my situation, and guess who i will be confronted with when the sh!t hits the fan. Right an auditor.

Now guess who I believe, a member on an anonymous forum, or an auditor and a senior tax official?

33 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

An auditor has told me I would have to pay tax in my situation, and guess who i will be confronted with when the sh!t hits the fan. Right an auditor.

Now guess who I believe, a member on an anonymous forum, or an auditor and a senior tax official?

Are you certain you gave them the correct information?

If you are not a Thai tax resident, and if your income is not from Thailand, then there is no Thai tax to pay. This is in accordance with Thailand tax law. Surf and you can find English language translations.

Its really that simple. Check the Thai tax law if you do not believe me. Non residents of Thailand do not pay Thai tax on income foreign to Thailand.

Check the tax law if you continue to disbelieve me.

But if you ARE a Thai tax resident, then you may need to pay Thai tax on remitted income dependent on a number of factors. Again, this is in accordance with Thailand tax law.

My guess is your auditor and your senior tax official totally misunderstood you. They thought you were asking as a Thailand tax resident. Make it 100% clear to them, you are asking as a NON Thai Tax resident - I think you will find the situation is very different.

Oh ... and I did ask a Thai RD official some time back. It was made clear if I was NOT a Thai tax resident - then I don't pay Thai tax on foreign remitted income. The above is the answer. That answer is also clearly indicated in the RD charts posted on this thread by a number of Asean now forum members. OK?

48 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

A senior tax official has said they will NOT accept this loophole and they WILL tax what you send here in the year you are not a tax resident.

That is wrong.

If it were true, it would mean any foreign money remitted to Thailand by non-residents of Thailand, is taxable by Thailand when it is remitted by the non-residents. But it is not true.

That is contrary to Thai tax law. One must be a Thai tax resident (or have Thai income as a non-resident) to be taxed. The Thai RD slide that was posted by a few on this thread clearly indicates this. Further Ministerial Directive PAW.161/162 clearly states other than what the 'senior tax official' "allegedly" said.

Again, my guess is the senior Thai tax official was misquoted or was provided incorrect information and hence they were answering a different scenario.