Inheritance tax gets NCPO nod

[Pib]

Sorry that we dont agree.. if you make so much and pay so much then an other 7000 or 8000 is not going to kill you or you are living at the edge too much. 

 

Yeap, it's OK to disagree.  But taxes are slippery slopes...govts become addicted to them.   They always seem to be new ones..."all for the betterment of the country." 

[jpeg]

 

 

no political party would have done this 

 

They haven't 'done' this yet 

[Feesbay John]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182209" timestamp="1406870079"]
[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182194" timestamp="1406869772"]

[quote name="robblok" post="8182118" timestamp="1406868844"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182104" timestamp="1406868678"]


 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182052" timestamp="1406868139"]


 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182016" timestamp="1406867710"]


 


 
I have been here for over 10 years and do follow the news.
 
You are taking about the middle class getting taxed and the rich not on salary and you think the best way to deal with this is to tax the home's of the lower and average class. Salary and a home are two different things, Tax the salary of the rich and job done.
 [/quote]
Better still would be to tax the salary, divined and the bonuses of the rich, not just the salary.
When I had my own company for many years I saved a future because I only paid myself a low salary and that is how the rich are saving.  
 [/quote]
As you are a tax accountant should you not be looking at how you can tax these company' on there so called perk's and not the average Thai. Or is this the easy way for you to tax the average Thai and not the company's
 [/quote]
Those perks can be hidden too well.. as I said you don't understand the system. If it was that easy I should be done. In the West they do tax the perks. But the registration of things is 10 fold better and not achievable here. 
 
They could even receive no salary and just company benefits and again it would be too hard to fix.. this is a tax that is much harder to avoid and easier to register.
 [/quote]
So find these perks that are hidden so well, if this can be achieved in other country's then it could all so be here, I am not saying is will be easy to do here BUT is that not the way to get at the rich.
 
What this tax is doing is to make them that do not have business pay for them that have, [/quote]

Many of these businesses are family owned with everyone and the grandma being paid officially 20k and the money being rolled into one to fund a family.

The cars are taxed actually to hell already. Basically, this land tax does tax the rich because the distribution is so bad in Thailand. 80% of the land is held by a 20%.

It is as simple and effective a way to get this done.[/quote]
 
So let's tax the 80% to get the 20% to pay. Read what you are saying, Think about what you are saying, YOU want to tax every one more because the rich are not paying there way and this is the way to do it, BULL Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttt

Huh?

The land is held in the hands of the relatively few. Go and read about who are the single largest land holders in the country. Yes people may have. 1/2 a rai in a moobhan for a house, but there are the wealthy who are holding thousands, tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of rai all untaxed at present.

This reform sits pretty squarley on rich land holders and it a long overdue reform. A former owner of a company I worked for had 26000 rai under cultivation and huge tracts of land in the north sitting idle. He paid nothing .



Houses are a different issue, but if people are trying to fund a 5 or 6 mn baht mortgage with only 30k per month they are in trouble anyway.

 

If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.

[robblok]

 

 

If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.

 

Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 

 

And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.

[Thai at Heart]

[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182373" timestamp="1406872163"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182313" timestamp="1406871414"]
[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182263" timestamp="1406870679"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182209" timestamp="1406870079"]
[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182194" timestamp="1406869772"]

[quote name="robblok" post="8182118" timestamp="1406868844"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182104" timestamp="1406868678"]


 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182052" timestamp="1406868139"]


 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182016" timestamp="1406867710"]


 


 
I have been here for over 10 years and do follow the news.
 
You are taking about the middle class getting taxed and the rich not on salary and you think the best way to deal with this is to tax the home's of the lower and average class. Salary and a home are two different things, Tax the salary of the rich and job done.
 [/quote]
Better still would be to tax the salary, divined and the bonuses of the rich, not just the salary.
When I had my own company for many years I saved a future because I only paid myself a low salary and that is how the rich are saving.  
 [/quote]
As you are a tax accountant should you not be looking at how you can tax these company' on there so called perk's and not the average Thai. Or is this the easy way for you to tax the average Thai and not the company's
 [/quote]
Those perks can be hidden too well.. as I said you don't understand the system. If it was that easy I should be done. In the West they do tax the perks. But the registration of things is 10 fold better and not achievable here. 
 
They could even receive no salary and just company benefits and again it would be too hard to fix.. this is a tax that is much harder to avoid and easier to register.
 [/quote]
So find these perks that are hidden so well, if this can be achieved in other country's then it could all so be here, I am not saying is will be easy to do here BUT is that not the way to get at the rich.
 
What this tax is doing is to make them that do not have business pay for them that have, [/quote]

Many of these businesses are family owned with everyone and the grandma being paid officially 20k and the money being rolled into one to fund a family.

The cars are taxed actually to hell already. Basically, this land tax does tax the rich because the distribution is so bad in Thailand. 80% of the land is held by a 20%.

It is as simple and effective a way to get this done.[/quote]
 
So let's tax the 80% to get the 20% to pay. Read what you are saying, Think about what you are saying, YOU want to tax every one more because the rich are not paying there way and this is the way to do it, BULL Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttt[/quote]
Huh?

The land is held in the hands of the relatively few. Go and read about who are the single largest land holders in the country. Yes people may have. 1/2 a rai in a moobhan for a house, but there are the wealthy who are holding thousands, tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of rai all untaxed at present.

This reform sits pretty squarley on rich land holders and it a long overdue reform. A former owner of a company I worked for had 26000 rai under cultivation and huge tracts of land in the north sitting idle. He paid nothing .



Houses are a different issue, but if people are trying to fund a 5 or 6 mn baht mortgage with only 30k per month they are in trouble anyway.[/quote]
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.[/quote]


Well call it a fine on untaxed land if you like, but this is a tax. The rent will rise for some I have no doubt, but there is a huge slush fund of money swilling around in land that is purely spexualtive and hiddent from the govt. Just look at what has been going on up country in the last 5 years.

Bangkokians buying up swathes of land just outside provincial cities waiting for the trains to arrive. Mainly cash paid.

Now I know some wealthy people in the west, but when people start dishing out 200k GBP cash for transactions on land in thailand where is the money coming from. This is serious wedge for most people but the sums flying around in the last 5 years or so are huge.

Yes the taxman should do a better job up front, but land is the countrys prime asset and it is relatively untouched. It has become the rich mans bank. It is time it was taxed.

[wordchild]

As always the devil will be in the detail (which no one knows yet); but there are likely to be  implications (maybe significant) for foreign residents of Thailand. For example will foreign owners of Thai property, who have no income in Thailand, now have to complete a Thai tax return. so far there has been no need for this but if it does become  a requirement (because of the need to collect the property tax) then many people who have been off the radar for the Thai tax authorities may find themselves subject to some greater scrutiny.  

[Feesbay John]

 

 

 

If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.

 

Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 

 

And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.

 

 

Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 

 

Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.

[hanuman2543]

This new law will only effect the middle and lower classes; The largest landholder is exempt from paying taxes anyway.

This is not true. The family which owns the most land in Thailand owns about 20 times as much land as the CPB.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ XA using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Thai at Heart]

 

 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 

Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 

 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.

Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land

[Pattszero]

This is great news. Hopefully it will force land speculators who buy land and then just sit on it for generations to actually do something with it or sell it, rather than waiting 30 years for some fool to come and offer 3x market value.

 

This vacant land tax rate should probably be calculated at 5% inside designated metropolitan boundaries. Hopefully this would create a fluid and realistic property market that reflects true value for the landowner rather than a few rich families owning all the good positions.

 

At the rate they are proposing it won't make a blind bit of difference to property speculators. Nada, zilch, zero. 

[Feesbay John]

 

 

 

 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 

Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 

 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.

Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land

 

 

I can see a need to tax the rich, BUT once this tax on property is passed it will change over the years and the poor will end up paying for it. The goal posts will be moved as with all taxes.

[Pib]

As always the devil will be in the detail (which no one knows yet); but there are likely to be  implications (maybe significant) for foreign residents of Thailand. For example will foreign owners of Thai property, who have no income in Thailand, now have to complete a Thai tax return. so far there has been no need for this but if it does become  a requirement (because of the need to collect the property tax) then many people who have been off the radar for the Thai tax authorities may find themselves subject to some greater scrutiny.  

 

There would be no need for a tax return to collect property taxes; instead, a property tax notice is mailed to you once a year and you go pay it by X-date.

 

And if they handle it like in the U.S. on mortgage loans that would be paid yearly by the bank you have the mortgage loan with, and the bank would just increase you monthly payment due....the bulk of the monthly payment going to pay the loan and the rest going into a set-aside escrow account to pay the annual properly tax. With mortgages banks have a keen interest in the land/home not be sold by the govt to collect overdue property taxes...and the banks take extra precautions to ensure that...and I expect if significant properly taxes do come into effect that banks will modify how they protect the loan/investment in the property.   Now, I doubt Thai banks have any procedures in place right now to collect extra each month for them to pay the property tax but as with most slippery slopes it would probably end up like that in X-years.

 

But whether your home is paid off or it still has a mortgage, no need for an income tax return to be involved....the local land/district office will just be mailing out annual property tax notice to be paid by X-date....maybe to be paid once a year or an option to break it into a semi-annual payments.

[kimamey]

 

No tax is good,

 

How can anyone say taxing is good. It will not effect the rich, it never has in all the other country's around the world that have these taxes, so and how do you think it will here. Its the lower class that will be hardest hit. If tax is on land they now have to find that extra to get on the ladder. 

 

How many years before this low rate of 0.05% will it take to be 5% plus,,, This rate is just set to get it passed. Years to come is the one's I feel for. Were will this money be spent, on roads, Hold on we already pay tax on fuel for that, Schools, hospital, ect ect, Hold on is that not why we pay VAT. 

Or is this new tax to help pay the bankers more and so Thailand can borrow more, making like Europe and USA  were it can never be payed back.

 

This tax is not good for the Thai people.

 

No tax means no roads no electricity no development no healthcare nothing.. So tax is necessary. Thing is the rich were not taxed now they are and really you are dreaming if you think that this tax will increase to 100 times what it is now. That is totally unrealistic and scaremongering. 

 

If they increase the VAT poor will pay more so that is not a good tax for the poor. I really wonder sometimes about peoples education, I always thought foreigners were well educated but it seems quite a few are not.

 

They need more money for healthcare and the poor.. they already have a shortage of money.. The rich were not paying.. so this is a way to get at them.

 

 

I myself wonder where people think the money a government uses comes from.

[Thai at Heart]

[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182627" timestamp="1406874740"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182558" timestamp="1406874170"]

 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182520" timestamp="1406873810"]
 [quote name="robblok" post="8182395" timestamp="1406872453"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182373" timestamp="1406872163"]
 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 [/quote]Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 [/quote] 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.[/quote]
Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land
 [/quote]
 
I can see a need to tax the rich, BUT once this tax on property is passed it will change over the years and the poor will end up paying for it. The goal posts will be moved as with all taxes.[/quote]

Hardly a reason not tot start it. No law is forever.

[Emster23]

Thailand has shown me something I thought would not happen: real estate taxes are a good thing. Here in Jomtien there is a building that has been empty since I came here 8 years ago, "Jomtien Beach House", prime beach front property. Owning land with no taxes is better than money in the bank. All that land sitting unused or underdeveloped would tend to drive prices up for land that is moved in the market. Those little pieces of property where shack sits in Bangkok are good example of poor use of limited resource. That said, there ought to be some sort of property tax relief for lower economic group. Taxes on land are incentive to use it.

[cmsally]

I can think of more than a few living in property that is now worth about 20-30 m baht that has been in their family a long while and only increased in value the last 30 yrs. For example one 80yr old retired lady who lives in such a house. How is she going to afford to pay tax on this?

[robblok]

I can think of more than a few living in property that is now worth about 20-30 m baht that has been in their family a long while and only increased in value the last 30 yrs. For example one 80yr old retired lady who lives in such a house. How is she going to afford to pay tax on this?

Take a loan on the house and pay it from that.. sure it leaves less for the inheritance. Or sell the house move into a smaller home. Id love to have her problem.

Edited August 1, 2014 by robblok

[bangrak]

1) About tax on Real Estate: in addition to the taxes in the article, the NCPO should tax rental income (outside of the income tax, but deductible from it!) f.i.: add 1% yearly tax based on R.E. value for private housing rented long term and unfurnished, but, add 5% (or more) of the amount of the (real) contractual rent, for R.E. being rented out furnished, for offices, for shops/commercial, and for industrial properties. IMHO, that would be THE way to really tax the rich and wealthy (who have an army of attorneys and tax experts to help them avoid paying taxes, like the income tax).

2) About inheritance tax: make an exception for the house/condo where the deceased and his wife/husband/family have been living in for at least 5 years, but, do tax, heavily, the assets outside Thailand, as most have been 'dissimulated' in a tax-evasion operation in the first place, and the others have not financially contributed to the well-being in Thailand while the money was initially 'created' in Thailand, and, again this will only 'touch' the rich and wealthy.

3) And what about, really, levying a tax on assets located in Thailand and the profits generated, for Thais and non-Thais (outside of the income tax, and not deductible), perceived from the companies based on their, well analysed, balances, with, huge, automatic (no Courts), penalties for any kind of 'attempted avoidance'? For the rich and wealthy to pay, again...

4) There is also the possibility to offer, for a definite length of time, some kind of 'bargain regulation' to tax-evasionists who would accept to repatriate to Thailand their assets from abroad, and are made to pay only a part of the taxes and fines they should normally have had to, it has been successfully done in several European countries, bringing back huge amounts of money to be invested in the economy...

There are many possibilities to advance towards a better (not difficult, as per today there is none), more equal, more honest, distribution of wealth in Thailand. It is important though not to add tax pressure on the poor and small incomes (f.i.: when the rental income would be taxed, the rents should be blocked first, to stop the owner from 'transmitting' his tax to the renter), and also to minimise the impact on the middle class, which is at the present the category bringing in most of the tax incomes of the Thai State, while, strongly, relentlessly, going after those, a small minority of the population, owning most of the country (the 80/20 rule doesn't even apply to Thailand, here it would be 95/5, meaning 5% of the population owning 95%, it is actually even less than 5% when I'm correct...), not as a punishment, but rather a 'compensation' for what they have been taking away, and keeping away, from the 'small people' and the poor. And don't let anyone call this 'socialism', it is not, far from it, when it'd need a name, I'd call it 'social justice'! 

[jayboy]

 

 

The inheritence and land tax however have a very big loophole in it which would be used by the rich to minimise the effect of the tax on them, that is the appraised value of the assets. It is normal practice in Thailand to lower the purchase price of properties for transfers to decrease the fees payable to the LO. For the tax to be effective all properties should be re-evaluated on an annual basis.

That is why there are appraisers.. its fun to see a red-shirt now argue against the tax. First they were saying this tax would never be (and to be honest I did not disagree with them) Now its there they say it won't be paid but to be honest I disagree. If they put some good appraisers on it then they will have to pay.
 
Its fun to see red supporters trying to have a go at the junta even though they do good things.
 
I don't like taxes, but Thailands tax base was far too small.
 

Why must you try to make everything about color coded politics? Can't you just look at a comment and take it for face value. I didn't say the tax is bad or that it will not work. The only problem is that if they want it to work they need to appraise every property in the country on an annual basis for that there needs to be a system inplace which is not there at present. And no it will not be a few appraisers, there will have to be thousands to get a baseline appraisal which then are changed on an annual basis. Before critising a person please do some research and educate yourself about how things work in this world. I doubt it if you even pay taxes in Thailand like myself but you have plenty to say. The junta have done good things and the bad I can't discuss with you, because its against the law and thats the crux of the problem.
 

I just remember who the red posters are and read their posts differently. This is a giant step forward that no goverment (Democrats also) would ever have done because they would be voted away. Plus the rich were in control. This is a great thing just take it as it is and sure there might be some problems with it but that can be rectified. You go from not taxing the rich to something that will work (even if some things should be amended). The General will be remembered as the man fighting corruption and making the changes the PTP would not make. I say cheers.
 
As i noted before thought the threshold should be higher and tax higher om more valuable things to hit the rich a bit harder and exclude the poor a bit more. But this is way better as before when the rich were NOT taxed at all.

It is fatuous and ignorant beyond belief to think the interests of the rich are not a primary concern of the Junta.





Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[robblok]

 

It is fatuous and ignorant beyond belief to think the interests of the rich are not a primary concern of the Junta.





Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

 

This seems to prove its not.. they are getting taxed..  Just wait and see what happens when this becomes law. So far they show more balls as all the other governments combined (democrats included) as they dont have to worry about popularity. This was needed and its done. They are doing so many things now.

Edited August 1, 2014 by robblok

[cmsally]

 

I can think of more than a few living in property that is now worth about 20-30 m baht that has been in their family a long while and only increased in value the last 30 yrs. For example one 80yr old retired lady who lives in such a house. How is she going to afford to pay tax on this?

Take a loan on the house and pay it from that.. sure it leaves less for the inheritance. Or sell the house move into a smaller home. Id love to have her problem.

 

 

Hardly the greatest solution for someone who is already that age and has worked hard all their life.

These people are also not few and far between where I live.

Then considering personal loans are about 80% of GDP. Something is going to have to give here. It really doesn't look good.
 

[robblok]

 

 

I can think of more than a few living in property that is now worth about 20-30 m baht that has been in their family a long while and only increased in value the last 30 yrs. For example one 80yr old retired lady who lives in such a house. How is she going to afford to pay tax on this?

Take a loan on the house and pay it from that.. sure it leaves less for the inheritance. Or sell the house move into a smaller home. Id love to have her problem.

 

 

Hardly the greatest solution for someone who is already that age and has worked hard all their life.

These people are also not few and far between where I live.

Then considering personal loans are about 80% of GDP. Something is going to have to give here. It really doesn't look good.
 

 

 

If that house is valued so much and free of a mortgage she will get it. The house is wealth and can be liquidated. Its never good for anyone to pay taxes but wealth is wealth. 

 

Though I do feel that if a house is mortgaged the mortgaged part should not be included in the tax. 

[HerbalEd]

With large land being held you're doing to see a very small, very cheap, no-frills house being build. 

[Feesbay John]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182558" timestamp="1406874170"]

 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182520" timestamp="1406873810"]
 [quote name="robblok" post="8182395" timestamp="1406872453"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182373" timestamp="1406872163"]
 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 [/quote]Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 [/quote] 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.[/quote]
Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land
 [/quote]
 
I can see a need to tax the rich, BUT once this tax on property is passed it will change over the years and the poor will end up paying for it. The goal posts will be moved as with all taxes.

Hardly a reason not tot start it. No law is forever.

 

But a good reason not to start it.

 

How has it helped other country's that are paying property tax, has the rich got poorer or has the poor got richer. NO The rich got richer.

 

OK they have better roads or in most country's. BUT how much are these country's in dept.

 

Let's just look at VAT which we were told was only for a few years, to help pay of the dept. Many years after and now at 20% in the UK.

 

We need to start looking at how we can make the tax money that is paid already and how that is spent.

 

Let's find a way to tax the rich BUT not at the average mans expense. 

[HUAHIN62]

The inheritence and land tax however have a very big loophole in it which would be used by the rich to minimise the effect of the tax on them, that is the appraised value of the assets. It is normal practice in Thailand to lower the purchase price of properties for transfers to decrease the fees payable to the LO. For the tax to be effective all properties should be re-evaluated on an annual basis.

That is why there are appraisers.. its fun to see a red-shirt now argue against the tax. First they were saying this tax would never be (and to be honest I did not disagree with them) Now its there they say it won't be paid but to be honest I disagree. If they put some good appraisers on it then they will have to pay.
 
Its fun to see red supporters trying to have a go at the junta even though they do good things.
 
I don't like taxes, but Thailands tax base was far too small.

Why must you try to make everything about color coded politics? Can't you just look at a comment and take it for face value. I didn't say the tax is bad or that it will not work. The only problem is that if they want it to work they need to appraise every property in the country on an annual basis for that there needs to be a system inplace which is not there at present. And no it will not be a few appraisers, there will have to be thousands to get a baseline appraisal which then are changed on an annual basis. Before critising a person please do some research and educate yourself about how things work in this world. I doubt it if you even pay taxes in Thailand like myself but you have plenty to say. The junta have done good things and the bad I can't discuss with you, because its against the law and thats the crux of the problem.

I just remember who the red posters are and read their posts differently. This is a giant step forward that no goverment (Democrats also) would ever have done because they would be voted away. Plus the rich were in control. This is a great thing just take it as it is and sure there might be some problems with it but that can be rectified. You go from not taxing the rich to something that will work (even if some things should be amended). The General will be remembered as the man fighting corruption and making the changes the PTP would not make. I say cheers.
 
As i noted before thought the threshold should be higher and tax higher om more valuable things to hit the rich a bit harder and exclude the poor a bit more. But this is way better as before when the rich were NOT taxed at all.

If you do some research you will see what happened in other developing countries that imposed similar land taxes on the rural poor. Over the long run this tax will decrease land ownership among the rural poor and concentrate land ownership among the rich. For the poor this tax will have to be paid from the money they use to survive, for the rich the land tax will become deductable from their income/company tax. For the smale scale rice farmer that has seen his/her potential income decrease by 50% recently, this maybe the final straw and may sell their land.

It will further increase land prices as the tax will end up in the selling price. Higher land prices will decrease the ability of the poor to own land.

Why not have the first 10 rai agricultural land exempt from tax and have a progressive tax system on the number of rai's owned? Why are they imposing this tax without looking at land reform? What measures will be put into place to ensure that the valuation of land will be fair and equal (transparency)? What legal recourse will I have if I believe that the valuation of my land is unfair? What will they be doing with this additional tax thats been collected?

[robblok]

 

 

 

 

That is why there are appraisers.. its fun to see a red-shirt now argue against the tax. First they were saying this tax would never be (and to be honest I did not disagree with them) Now its there they say it won't be paid but to be honest I disagree. If they put some good appraisers on it then they will have to pay.
 
Its fun to see red supporters trying to have a go at the junta even though they do good things.
 
I don't like taxes, but Thailands tax base was far too small.

 

Why must you try to make everything about color coded politics? Can't you just look at a comment and take it for face value. I didn't say the tax is bad or that it will not work. The only problem is that if they want it to work they need to appraise every property in the country on an annual basis for that there needs to be a system inplace which is not there at present. And no it will not be a few appraisers, there will have to be thousands to get a baseline appraisal which then are changed on an annual basis. Before critising a person please do some research and educate yourself about how things work in this world. I doubt it if you even pay taxes in Thailand like myself but you have plenty to say. The junta have done good things and the bad I can't discuss with you, because its against the law and thats the crux of the problem.

 

I just remember who the red posters are and read their posts differently. This is a giant step forward that no goverment (Democrats also) would ever have done because they would be voted away. Plus the rich were in control. This is a great thing just take it as it is and sure there might be some problems with it but that can be rectified. You go from not taxing the rich to something that will work (even if some things should be amended). The General will be remembered as the man fighting corruption and making the changes the PTP would not make. I say cheers.
 
As i noted before thought the threshold should be higher and tax higher om more valuable things to hit the rich a bit harder and exclude the poor a bit more. But this is way better as before when the rich were NOT taxed at all.

 

If you do some research you will see what happened in other developing countries that imposed similar land taxes on the rural poor. Over the long run this tax will decrease land ownership among the rural poor and concentrate land ownership among the rich. For the poor this tax will have to be paid from the money they use to survive, for the rich the land tax will become deductable from their income/company tax. For the smale scale rice farmer that has seen his/her potential income decrease by 50% recently, this maybe the final straw and may sell their land.

It will further increase land prices as the tax will end up in the selling price. Higher land prices will decrease the ability of the poor to own land.

Why not have the first 10 rai agricultural land exempt from tax and have a progressive tax system on the number of rai's owned? Why are they imposing this tax without looking at land reform? What measures will be put into place to ensure that the valuation of land will be fair and equal (transparency)? What legal recourse will I have if I believe that the valuation of my land is unfair? What will they be doing with this additional tax thats been collected?

 

You are expecting that everything there is is in this small news article. There will be more news, so far its great news because the rich have most of the land they get taxed the most. They already have exempts for the real poor for houses now lets see what other exempts are there. You have to admit that this is a great step forward in getting a fair tax base. 

 

Things like what you said have to be taken into account and thresholds set. I am sure they will be unlike you I have faith in the junta who has done great work for Thailand. Do you really think your beloved government would have done anything like this or the Democrats (that i prefer). I doubt it... the junta is reforming this country and when we look back at this it will be General P who has lead the country into progress. 

[Thai at Heart]

[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182894" timestamp="1406878028"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182744" timestamp="1406875912"]
[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182627" timestamp="1406874740"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182558" timestamp="1406874170"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182520" timestamp="1406873810"]

 [quote name="robblok" post="8182395" timestamp="1406872453"]

 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182373" timestamp="1406872163"]

 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 [/quote]Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 [/quote] 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.[/quote]
Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land
 [/quote]
 
I can see a need to tax the rich, BUT once this tax on property is passed it will change over the years and the poor will end up paying for it. The goal posts will be moved as with all taxes.[/quote]

Hardly a reason not tot start it. No law is forever.[/quote]
 
But a good reason not to start it.
 
How has it helped other country's that are paying property tax, has the rich got poorer or has the poor got richer. NO The rich got richer.
 
OK they have better roads or in most country's. BUT how much are these country's in dept.
 
Let's just look at VAT which we were told was only for a few years, to help pay of the dept. Many years after and now at 20% in the UK.
 
We need to start looking at how we can make the tax money that is paid already and how that is spent.
 
Let's find a way to tax the rich BUT not at the average mans expense. [/quote]

The country is at a point of 45% debt to GDP. They need money to fund growth. The govt can borrow it, or taxpayers can pay.

Choices choices

[Feesbay John]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182744" timestamp="1406875912"]
[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182627" timestamp="1406874740"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182558" timestamp="1406874170"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182520" timestamp="1406873810"]

 [quote name="robblok" post="8182395" timestamp="1406872453"]

 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182373" timestamp="1406872163"]

 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 [/quote]Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 [/quote] 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.[/quote]
Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land
 [/quote]
 
I can see a need to tax the rich, BUT once this tax on property is passed it will change over the years and the poor will end up paying for it. The goal posts will be moved as with all taxes.[/quote]

Hardly a reason not tot start it. No law is forever.[/quote]
 
But a good reason not to start it.
 
How has it helped other country's that are paying property tax, has the rich got poorer or has the poor got richer. NO The rich got richer.
 
OK they have better roads or in most country's. BUT how much are these country's in dept.
 
Let's just look at VAT which we were told was only for a few years, to help pay of the dept. Many years after and now at 20% in the UK.
 
We need to start looking at how we can make the tax money that is paid already and how that is spent.
 
Let's find a way to tax the rich BUT not at the average mans expense. 

The country is at a point of 45% debt to GDP. They need money to fund growth. The govt can borrow it, or taxpayers can pay.

Choices choices

 

See how the story has changed, from wanting to tax the rich to the tax payers can pay. The rich people are the people that have got this country into 45% dept. So find a way to tax them more that will not effect the average Thai.

The tax on property will not make the rich any poorer, name me one country that this has happen, 

Introduce a tax on any company, family or person with asset's over 25m baht and make this tax a high % so the country will not need to borrow. Then the rich will pay as you are trying to make this new tax law look.

[Feesbay John]

 

No tax is good,
 
How can anyone say taxing is good. It will not effect the rich, it never has in all the other country's around the world that have these taxes, so and how do you think it will here. Its the lower class that will be hardest hit. If tax is on land they now have to find that extra to get on the ladder. 
 
How many years before this low rate of 0.05% will it take to be 5% plus,,, This rate is just set to get it passed. Years to come is the one's I feel for. Were will this money be spent, on roads, Hold on we already pay tax on fuel for that, Schools, hospital, ect ect, Hold on is that not why we pay VAT. 
Or is this new tax to help pay the bankers more and so Thailand can borrow more, making like Europe and USA  were it can never be payed back.
 
This tax is not good for the Thai people.
 

Taxation is a necessary evil in a civil society. I pay mine and while not always happy to do so, direct or indirect, I do see why it is necessary.

 

Taxation is necessary BUT we all are paying tax already, every thing we buy has VAT. 

People on here are claiming its the only way to get the rich to pay as they own most of the land, BUT do you think they will pay this tax or just pass it on to the person renting. Then the person who is renting a place for his business will have this to find and if he own's his own home he will have the tax to pay on that as well. The rich will not even feel it BUT the middle and low class will. 

 

Only way to get the rich to pay the tax they should would be to tax there assets, But the rich will never let this happen as then it would be coming from them.

[Feesbay John]

 

 

 

[quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182627" timestamp="1406874740"]

[quote name="Thai at Heart" post="8182558" timestamp="1406874170"]
 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182520" timestamp="1406873810"]

 [quote name="robblok" post="8182395" timestamp="1406872453"]

 [quote name="Feesbay John" post="8182373" timestamp="1406872163"]

 
 
If this tax is about getting at the rich then the limit should be set at the one's that have loads of land and not every one. All this tax is going to do to them that have land and house's rented out, is to up the rent so the average Thai end's up paying it any way. You no this is going to happen. If they have so much land and this is not rented out then make a law to get them to pay a fine on unused land.
 [/quote]Did you actually read the article ? They have a fine on unused land it goes up in tax 
 
And so your saying don't tax the rich they will get it back from the poor. Sound reasoning. So best we could do is not to tax the rich just the poor. Or even better no tax no government no laws.
 [/quote] 
Not once have I said DO NOT TAX THE RICH, BUT find a way to tax them that will not be passed down to the poor as the property tax will be.... Or is this to hard to do for an accountant to find away. Let's take the easy way and tax everyone to get at the rich which is who we are trying to get at. 
 
Why not look at the asset's of these big company's and tax that. Them that hide what they have fine them. Them that have land in family's name's put the family asset's together and have a tax on a family asset's. If this is the goal to get at the rich have a family tax that will not effect the average Thai.[/quote]
Yes, the 3rd largest single landowner in the country is actually Unilever through its partnership to produce palm oil. All the rubber companies own huge tracts for plantation. This is exactly what this change in the law is going to do.

It will look at companies and individuals who own land. Somchai poor guy might own a few rai of scrub and pay little. Pooyai man has either thousands of rai or several rai down town worth millions . I don't see why you can't equate that if someone is poor low value they have little land and someone who is rich is likely to have large amounts of high value land
 [/quote]
 
I can see a need to tax the rich, BUT once this tax on property is passed it will change over the years and the poor will end up paying for it. The goal posts will be moved as with all taxes.[/quote]

Hardly a reason not tot start it. No law is forever.

 
But a good reason not to start it.
 
How has it helped other country's that are paying property tax, has the rich got poorer or has the poor got richer. NO The rich got richer.
 
OK they have better roads or in most country's. BUT how much are these country's in dept.
 
Let's just look at VAT which we were told was only for a few years, to help pay of the dept. Many years after and now at 20% in the UK.
 
We need to start looking at how we can make the tax money that is paid already and how that is spent.
 
Let's find a way to tax the rich BUT not at the average mans expense. 

The country is at a point of 45% debt to GDP. They need money to fund growth. The govt can borrow it, or taxpayers can pay.

Choices choices

 

See how the story has changed, from wanting to tax the rich to the tax payers can pay. The rich people are the people that have got this country into 45% dept. So find a way to tax them more that will not effect the average Thai.

The tax on property will not make the rich any poorer, name me one country that this has happen, 

Introduce a tax on any company, family or person with asset's over 25m baht and make this tax a high % so the country will not need to borrow. Then the rich will pay as you are trying to make this new tax law look.

 

 

How the tax could be done.

 

New taxation for the rich. That will only affect the rich.

Any company, Organization, family or person with assets over 25m baht.

All company assets including

Money in the bank,

Land, home or business at today’s value,

Motors,  

Stocks and shares.

Including any asset’s that are generating a profit.

How and what they need to pay.

 If a person’s assets are 50m baht he or she will pay tax on the amount over 25m baht.

This will be set at 10%,

If there assets are over 51m baht but fewer than 99m baht.

The first 25m baht will be taxed at 10% and the rest will be taxed at 12%

If there assets are over 100m baht.

The 25m baht to 50m baht will be taxed at 10% and the 50m baht will be taxed at 12%, the rest will be taxed at 15%

Once this tax has been paid it cannot be paid again on money that has already been taxed. BUT if the person’s assets grow, then the tax will be payable on the growth each year.

Company tax or an organization will be taxed in the same way. BUT any assets that have already paid in tax though the personal tax on its assets cannot be taxed twice.

Family tax, will be a family assets that amount to the figures above BUT again if a company or person has already paid the tax, it cannot be taxed again.  

As tax has already been paid by the above no inheritance tax will be added.

OK this needs a lot of work to make it happen BUT it could be achieved.

This would rise money needed to pay of the 45% debt to GDP