38 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

. . . going to have a hard time proving to TRD . . .

I agree with you about one thing. I don't and won't expect any audit to be reasonable. I'll have my attorney with me if it ever happens.

And like @ukrules posted, I fully expect them to do just about anything and "it looks to me like they can literally make it up as they go."

5 hours ago, Talon said:

I'm not claiming that it's only SS funds. I'm showing what's deposited into the account from both pensions, and I'm showing what's been brought into Thailand. There are no wire transactions. Only ATM transactions that all remain in cash.

That doesn't seem too hard a math problem. Private pensions remitted to Thailand are "assessable income," so the percentage of your annual deposits that are private pensions would be the percentage figure used to determine amount of remittance that is assessable. This would be very simple, if the only other deposit is SS. But, for co-mingled deposits, of both assessable and non assessable income off various sorts -- the percentage method is also doable.

I doubt TRD has any guidance, if presented with this percentage method of assessable remittances. But, it seems straightforward enough to pass muster, at least with someone of intelligence at TRD. And, really, how would you otherwise deal with remittances from a bank account containing co-mingled funding......

But if my only remittances were via ATM -- I certainly wouldn't even bother considering filing a Thai tax return. Same with credit card purchases. Yes, some tax assistance firms have conjectured that TRD considers such spending in Thailand as a remittance. But I don't believe there's anything concrete about this in TRD guidance. And certainly, as someone said, you wouldn't be on anyone's radar -- so why worry about an indefinite....?

1 hour ago, JohnnyBD said:

I'm probably going to have a hard time proving to TRD that the money I sent over from that acct was only my tax exempt money.

Read this, it's from forum user 'ballpoint' and he speaks of his audit experience : https://aseannow.com/topic/1316342-new-tax-era-in-thailand-begins-as-revenue-now-shares-data-with-138-countries-within-the-oecd/page/5/#findComment-18603618

Then consider - is anything set in stone with these people ?

They flipped the usual FIFO script during audit.

Edited Monday at 01:47 PM3 days by ukrules

Useful decision tree. One practical input that people often get wrong is the day count: the 180-day test is cumulative within the calendar year, not one continuous six-month stay. For anyone travelling in and out, keeping a dated entry/exit log and supporting travel records is much safer than reconstructing the year later. A day-count checkpoint around 150/165/175 days could complement the decision tree nicely. Not tax advice — just a record-keeping point from someone based in Thailand who writes software.

Is using a "foreign" ATM card and paying 2%? fee better than worrying about so far non-existent tax requirements?

24 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Is using a "foreign" ATM card and paying 2%? fee better than worrying about so far non-existent tax requirements?

If your fee is reimbursed every month, you don't sweat it. 😁

14 hours ago, ukrules said:

16 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

I'm probably going to have a hard time proving to TRD that the money I sent over from that acct was only my tax exempt money.

Read this, it's from forum user 'ballpoint' and he speaks of his audit experience: https://aseannow.com/topic/1316342-new-tax-era-in-thailand-begins-as-revenue-now-shares-data-with-138-countries-within-the-oecd/page/5/#findComment-18603618

Thnaks for the link. The partial quote you used was part of a longer hypothetical statement I posted for the benefit of those who have co-mingled monies in their bank accts. My full statement is below:

16 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

So, if I have a US bank acct that has all my money in the same acct; tax exempt SS, pre-2024 monies, my taxable private pension, and taxable post Jan 2024 monies in it, I'm probably going to have a hard time proving to TRD that the money I sent over from that acct was only my tax exempt money.

I actually keep my exempt SS monies in a separate acct from my other income streams. When I send my SS money to Thailand, I have definitive proof that those remittances consist only of exempt SS funds.

44 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Is using a "foreign" ATM card and paying 2%? fee better than worrying about so far non-existent tax requirements?

If they really want to crack down, they may want to know how much money you brought into the country at some point.

But I'm talking out of my butt-hole. I really don't know, but neither do I think these tricks will work if they want to get strict.

17 minutes ago, Talon said:

38 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Is using a "foreign" ATM card and paying 2%? fee better than worrying about so far non-existent tax requirements?

If your fee is reimbursed every month, you don't sweat it.

I agree. My Chase bank card has 0% fees, and they reimburse the 250 baht ATM fee. I decline the Thai bank conversion fee which can be 5.5% or higher. The Visa exchange rates are quite good.

17 hours ago, Talon said:

17 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

. . . because TRD cannot track ATM withdrawals using a foreign bank card?

If you're bringing money in by ATM only, using a foreign bank card, then you're not even on TRD's radar screen.

Really? I've never heard this anywhere before.

I don't know if there's anyway for TRD to track ATM withdrawals using a foreign bank card or not. You took only a partial quote from my original question which I was asking. See below.

17 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

Is he/she saying your withdrawals are tax exempt, or the amount you bring in falls under the threshold for paying taxes, or you just don't have anything to worry about because TRD cannot track ATM withdrawals using a foreign bank card?

If you're bringing money in by ATM only, using a foreign bank card, then you're not even on TRD's radar screen.

I find it hard to believe that TRD could track ATM withdrawals for people using a foreign bank card. How would they know if that person was a tourist or Thai tax resident? How would they know if John Abbott Cole Jr (tax resident) was the same person as the John Cole who's shorter name is on the foreign bank card? I think those using a foreign bank card to bring money in are pretty safe.

27 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

. . . but neither do I think these tricks will work if they want to get strict.

It's not a "trick" if you track all of your withdrawals, keep records and file when your remittances exceed your deductions and other non taxable income like Social Security.

If I owed, I would file -- no matter how the funds arrived in Thailand.

9 minutes ago, JohnnyBD said:

I find it hard to believe that TRD could track ATM withdrawals for people using a foreign bank card. How would they know if that person was a tourist or Thai tax resident? How would they know if John Abbott Cole Jr (tax resident) was the same person as the John Cole who's shorter name is on the foreign bank card? I think those using a foreign bank card to bring money in are pretty safe.

That may all be true. I never considered those conflicts. And it could be especially true for US Expats since the US is not part of the WEF or the OECD.

Here is the American lawyer guy. He just put out another tax video.

The title sounds ominous.

Not sure if he is fear-mongering or what.

7 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Here is the American lawyer guy. He just put out another tax video.

The title sounds ominous.

Not sure if he is fear-mongering or what.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF0hBBfrsGI

He seemed to play down the news article about everyone needing to file; and he said what many of us have been thinking and saying: that there are many things about what's going on with taxation that are unclear and that things are getting ramped up everywhere re: changes in requirements and laws for foreigners. I didn't view it as fear mongering at all.

Just now, Talon said:

I didn't view it as fear mongering at all.

He confirms that it's still not the case that every foreigner NEEDS to file.

But he also believes Thailand will start auditing foreigners in 2027. Some people who thought they didn't owe anything or had to file may be pulled aside.

Not fear mongering. But he may be stating what will actually happen.

Edited Tuesday at 07:28 AM2 days by save the frogs

4 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

Is using a "foreign" ATM card and paying 2%? fee better than worrying about so far non-existent tax requirements?

every transaction leaves a trail. cash withdrawals from a thai atm using a foreign card can also be traced and linked to your financial activity, just like other money transfers ...

and if, at some point (perhaps a few years from now ) you as a tax resident in thailand and are selected for a tax audit, you may realize that your strategy for avoiding taxes was actually quite easy to see through ...

but hey, to each their own. everyone has to decide for themselves how they want to handle their tax affairs ... :-)

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

. . . Some people who thought they didn't owe anything or had to file may be pulled aside.

Not fear mongering. But he may be stating what will actually happen.

That's why it's important to consult a Thai tax attorney; but even they cannot predict what will happen and can only quote the tax laws as they are currently. What may happen overnight or in the years to follow is anyone's guess.

Based on what's been happening in many crackdowns and more stringent processes across Thailand for foreigners, I viewed his video as doing exactly what you stated: it may actually happen.

18 minutes ago, Talon said:

Based on what's been happening in many crackdowns and more stringent processes across Thailand for foreigners, I viewed his video as doing exactly what you stated: it may actually happen.

I will keep following this lawyer's channel.

I'm sure if foreigners start getting audited or if Thailand makes things more official, he will be aware.

Integrity Legal is a little confused. He concentrates on LTR visas as where, possibly, tax audits may concentrate, beginning in 2027 -- as this is where LTR visa holders will begin meeting the five year anniversary requiring reevaluation. But that reevaluation is only about whether or not you still meet the requirements you needed for the initial issuance (annual passive income, health coverage, et al). It's certainly not about taxation, as holding an LTR visa means there is no taxation on remitted foreign income -- so what's to audit if you're an LTR visa holder not working in Thailand, i.e, holding the 'wealthy pensioner' variety......

Had a consultation with my Thai tax attorney over the last 3 days regarding Social Security and Pension in the same savings account overseas prior to January 1, 2024.

She is well aware that taxpayers and the TRD may have disputes about the law; and that the final solution must be based on the correct interpretation of Thai tax law and not on the arbitrary interpretation of an individual TRD employee. Get an attorney who knows the law.

The attorney put forward this example:

• 1.4 million baht deposited in overseas account from Social Security and private pension (400,000 baht Social Security and 1 million baht private pension)

• 700,000 baht brought into Thailand

• 500,000 baht in Thailand tax deductions

400,000 baht of tax free Social Security brought into Thailand. 300,000 baht taxable. 500,000 baht in deductions. No tax owed, so no filing necessary.

As an aside, she did state that FIFO is part of the Thai tax law.

In the event of any audit, as a preliminary action, have your tax attorney prepare a written explanation and outline of your remittances each year since January 1, 2024. This will be an attachment to the documents that you bring to your local TRD office. The purpose is to establish why your case is tax free based on the correct interpretation of the current Thai tax laws, and why the Revenue officers do not have a legal basis to impose tax on you.

If things go beyond the audit, and the documentation is unacceptable, you can weigh the cost of an attorney in tax court vs paying any fines or taxes.

I am not an attorney and only passing on what was told to me. Always do what's best for you.

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by Talon

13 minutes ago, Talon said:

No tax owed, so no filing necessary.

It seems to me it's safer to file, even if you don't owe anything.

Otherwise, there is more risk of being audited.

As not filing can be viewed suspiciously.

Just my two cents. If your lawyer advised you differently, their opinion may be more valid than mine. No need to respond. I'm not a tax expert. Personally, I think I will just file and be done with it.

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by save the frogs

1 hour ago, Talon said:

As an aside, she did state that FIFO is part of the Thai tax law.

Interesting

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

It seems to me it's safer to file, even if you don't owe anything.

Otherwise, there is more risk of being audited.

As not filing can be viewed suspiciously.

It's actually quite the opposite according to factual reports: Some people who filed getting hammered by TRD with extensive queries and extra supporting docs, while residents who do not file (the majority of people) are not being bothered.

Edited 11 hours ago11 hr by Yumthai

9 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

It's actually quite the opposite according to factual reports: Some people who filed getting hammered by TRD with extensive queries and extra supporting docs, while residents who do not file (the majority of people) are not being bothered.

I know of one guy personally.

57 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

It's actually quite the opposite according to factual reports: Some people who filed getting hammered by TRD with extensive queries and extra supporting docs, while residents who do not file (the majority of people) are not being bothered.

there are always exceptions, but let’s not confuse the issue ...

if someone has been specifically reviewed by the thai revenue department, provided the required evidence, and received written confirmation from theTRD, then they have a solid basis for considering the matter settled!

but simply not filing a tax return does not mean you are automatically “out of the woods”. quite the opposite. choosing not to file does not remove a potential tax liability, nor does it turn taxable income into non-taxable income ...

if you are potentially liable for thai income tax and you believe in following thai law, then the straightforward and responsible thing to do is to file a tax return and declare what is required ... as simple as it is ...

some people may get away with ignoring the rules / thai law for a long time. IMHO that still doesn’t make it a good strategy ...

4 hours ago, Talon said:

regarding Social Security and Pension in the same savings account overseas prior to January 1, 2024.

The balance in that savings account on Dec 31, 2023 is all non assessable income, regardless if its original form was private pension or social security. If that was 1.4M, as you indicate -- then it's all non assessable, and no reason to break it out between private pension and social security. Thus, saying "400 was social security, 300 private pension" is nonsensical for tax purposes, 'cause it's all non taxable. Yes, if we're addressing tax year 2026, then remittances from this savings account in 2024 and 2025 need to be subtracted from your Dec 31, 2023 figure to arrive at what's left of the non assessable (per POR 162) savings. All this using FIFO, which several sources indicate its acceptability to TRD, including this historical one from the Bangkok Post:

For scripless securities [or the equivalent in a fungible savings or checking account], the taxpayer is allowed to use any acceptable accounting method such as FIFO, LIFO or weighted average method in calculating cost of securities.

https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/general/299691/when-the-revenue-department-changes-its-mind-the-taxpayer-gets-the-headache

1 hour ago, motdaeng said:

but simply not filing a tax return does not mean you are automatically “out of the woods”. quite the opposite. choosing not to file does not remove a potential tax liability, nor does it turn taxable income into non-taxable income ...

You self-assess, give yourself the benefit of the doubt in grey areas, determine that you owe no tax -- so you don't file. You're then not in TRD's data base and thus will never hear from them (unless they start investigating folks with really large remittances -- and you're one of them).

And, of course, in the remote possibility that TRD calls you in for a chat, you have your self-assessment data sheets for support. This assumes you're really on the up-and-up and concluded that you owed no taxes; obviously, not filing, if you determine you owe taxes -- is not what we're talking about here.

No, TRD is not interested in thousands of tax filings with no check attached. And tax filings contain no rationale for the numbers you provide -- so just filing doesn't automatically make you a 'good guy' in TRD's eyes.

2 hours ago, motdaeng said:

but simply not filing a tax return does not mean you are automatically “out of the woods”. quite the opposite. choosing not to file does not remove a potential tax liability, nor does it turn taxable income into non-taxable income ...

if you are potentially liable for thai income tax and you believe in following thai law, then the straightforward and responsible thing to do is to file a tax return and declare what is required ... as simple as it is ...

some people may get away with ignoring the rules / thai law for a long time. IMHO that still doesn’t make it a good strategy ...

DUH!

I don't think anyone in this thread has their head in the sand and just refusing to file.

1 hour ago, motdaeng said:

some people may get away with ignoring the rules / thai law for a long time. IMHO that still doesn’t make it a good strategy ...

I'm just indicating the reality regarding tax enforcement. Most of people, foreigners as locals, do not file and are not audited. Do you deny that? Everything else is speculation.

You and some others may believe TRD will quickly be successful in enforcing their current obsolete and conservative rules, I don't.

I believe they are more likely to eventually either keep ignoring enforcement as usual or rather amend their tax laws in order to remain regionally competitive and attractive to foreign wealth.

33 minutes ago, JimGant said:

The balance in that savings account on Dec 31, 2023 is all non assessable income, regardless if its original form was private pension or social security. If that was 1.4M, as you indicate -- then it's all non assessable, and no reason to break it out between private pension and social security. Thus, saying "400 was social security, 300 private pension" is nonsensical for tax purposes, 'cause it's all non taxable. Yes, if we're addressing tax year 2026, then remittances from this savings account in 2024 and 2025 need to be subtracted from your Dec 31, 2023 figure to arrive at what's left of the non assessable (per POR 162) savings. All this using FIFO, which several sources indicate its acceptability to TRD, including this historical one from the Bangkok Post:

All true. I have that option as well, with more than enough to cover me for several years using FIFO.

The example provided was for those choosing to use that method -- which I could also do without any tax liability.