PM warns of tax audits far back to five years for tax evaders

[rooster59]

PM warns of tax audits far back to five years for tax evaders

 

BANGKOK: Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha yesterday advised all Thais to make comprehensive payments on their taxes and warned that any attempt to avoid tax payment could result in tax audits back to past five years.

 

His call for cooperation in tax payment was made as he chaired a ceremony to recognize government departments that have managed their budgetary allocations outstandingly.

 

Of the 224 government departments in total, 88 prizes were handed out to those who have performed well.

 

In his speech the prime minister admitted that he recognized that these prizes were highly regarded by all government departments. Furthermore, he stressed that they will also serve as an important motivation for all departments to strive for greater achievements in accordance with government reform programs.

 

Accordingly, Gen Prayut also advised government departments to adopt progressive attitudes so that they will remain relevant and not fall behind with technological and societal developments.

 

In his address he also advised the public to make sure that they pay all necessary taxes as failure to do so could result in facing tax audits back to five years.

 

He stressed that for this year the government will be strictly enforcing taxation laws.

 

He added that the government’s significant rise in tax collection was entirely due to new tax structures and collection methods that are currently being employed.

 

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/pm-warns-tax-audits-far-back-five-years-tax-evaders/

 

 

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2016-08-27

[clockman]

Just dreaming, if only!

[Caveat Emptor]

I suppose members of the junta,   NLA etc are exempt . 

 

[Eligius]

13 minutes ago, Caveat Emptor said:

I suppose members of the junta,   NLA etc are exempt . 

 

Maybe exempt - maybe not. But it does not matter, either way. Who, after all, is going to challenge and stand up to the men with the tanks, bombs and bullets? Their word is  Law and their demoniacal wrath, if they are questioned, is something terrible to behold!

Edited August 27, 2016 by Eligius

[halloween]

Having had a difference of opinion with the ATO and been subject to a 7 year tax audit by them, I can assure you tanks, bombs and bullets would seem friendly in comparison.

[NongKhaiKid]

Woooh,    I'm coming to get you   !

Depending on who you are of course.

[anon467848]

As usual they will just go after the 'small fish' and use them as scapegoats... The 'big fish' are totally exempt, because the law is only applied to the low/middle income classes... In Thailand the rich get richer, at the expense of everybody else. It's been that way for generations, and isn't likely to change, despite assurances from the PM that all Thais are treated equally, cough, cough..

[Eligius]

1 minute ago, merlin2002 said:

As usual they will just go after the 'small fish' and use them as scapegoats... The 'big fish' are totally exempt, because the law is only applied to the low/middle income classes... In Thailand the rich get richer, at the expense of everybody else. It's been that way for generations, and isn't likely to change, despite assurances from the PM that all Thais are treated equally, cough, cough..

Yes - all Thais are equal - but some are a LOT more equal than others!

[gandalf12]

Just adopt a PAYE  (Pay As You Earn)

[waldroj]

"...recognize government departments that have managed their budgetary allocations outstandingly..."

 

Being rewarded for simply doing their job as a manager of public money is laughable, and one wonders how these agencies (and managers) would perform in an external audit.

 

It's even enshrined in their legislation - according to the Civil Service Act, B.E. 2661 (2008) Section 74:

 

Where a civil servant who has conducted himself/herself ethically and adhered to disciplinary rules, and has performed official functions efficiently and achieved the desired result-based outcome in State's tasks, the supervising official may consider a salary increase as appropriate in such case as provided by CSC Regulation, and may also grant other rewards which may be a commendation, mark of distinction or prize.

 

This only reinforces an expectation of quid pro quo (which is not a good thing where public money is concerned), and does little to address reasons for poor budget management in other agencies (and managers).

 

As for Prayut suggesting that "...any attempt to avoid tax payment could result in tax audits back to past five years....". I can just see the auditors at the Revenue Department applauding all the extra work he is heaping on them. Let's hope they can get some prize for their efforts.

[adhd]

just wondering if and how much he paid tax on his 300 million baht land sale ?

[terminatorchiangmai]

It is happening , had the tax department already in my office last month.

They want every company to start using e payments for staff , etc etc so they can trace how much income a person has.

Personally i don't mind it ,there are to many non tax payers while we pay fully.

Also i heard that if a Thai person  makes under 20.000 per month he/she don't have to pay tax which is ridiculous in my opinion.

 

Edited August 27, 2016 by terminatorchiangmai

[sahibji]

5 hours ago, clockman said:

Just dreaming, if only!

be careful. it night be for real and then it will become an ugly dream.

[sahibji]

30 minutes ago, terminatorchiangmai said:

It is happening , had the tax department already in my office last month.

They want every company to start using e payments for staff , etc etc so they can trace how much income a person has.

Personally i don't mind it ,there are to many non tax payers while we pay fully.

Also i heard that if a Thai person  makes under 20.000 per month he/she don't have to pay tax which is ridiculous in my opinion.

 

taxes are essential component of funding the budget and should be paid unless the country intends to head towards disaster.

[sahibji]

31 minutes ago, adhd said:

just wondering if and how much he paid tax on his 300 million baht land sale ?

is the sale not regulated by sales tax.

[sahibji]

3 hours ago, gandalf12 said:

Just adopt a PAYE  (Pay As You Earn)

fine if you are in a regular job with a pay slip.

 

how do you tax the vendors in the market, the  stall keepers in the night markets and people who do occasional jobs.

[gandalf12]

26 minutes ago, sahibji said:

fine if you are in a regular job with a pay slip.

 

how do you tax the vendors in the market, the  stall keepers in the night markets and people who do occasional jobs.

You register them. For that a reasonable estimate of potential earning would be required

[sharecropper]

I only find this objectionable because of the corruption, waste, malfeasance and negligence when it comes to troughing in the hard-earned taxes of others.

[Baerboxer]

7 hours ago, NongKhaiKid said:

Woooh,    I'm coming to get you   !

Depending on who you are of course.

 

Of course. Those poor overworked tax officials can't possible check and audit everyone. They are lucky that they'll be given "guidance where to focus their efforts". And of course, where not!

[halloween]

3 hours ago, sahibji said:

is the sale not regulated by sales tax.

No. That would come under Capital Gains Tax.

[halloween]

5 hours ago, waldroj said:

"...recognize government departments that have managed their budgetary allocations outstandingly..."

 

Being rewarded for simply doing their job as a manager of public money is laughable, and one wonders how these agencies (and managers) would perform in an external audit.

 

It's even enshrined in their legislation - according to the Civil Service Act, B.E. 2661 (2008) Section 74:

 

Where a civil servant who has conducted himself/herself ethically and adhered to disciplinary rules, and has performed official functions efficiently and achieved the desired result-based outcome in State's tasks, the supervising official may consider a salary increase as appropriate in such case as provided by CSC Regulation, and may also grant other rewards which may be a commendation, mark of distinction or prize.

 

This only reinforces an expectation of quid pro quo (which is not a good thing where public money is concerned), and does little to address reasons for poor budget management in other agencies (and managers).

 

As for Prayut suggesting that "...any attempt to avoid tax payment could result in tax audits back to past five years....". I can just see the auditors at the Revenue Department applauding all the extra work he is heaping on them. Let's hope they can get some prize for their efforts.

If this is "not a good thing where public money is concerned" why is it standard practice in most countries?  http://www.oecd.org/governance/pem/35117916.pdf

[Kasset Tak]

Atleast the taxes are not as high as in some countries... I had my own company back home 25% sales tax and in top of that basically 65% of any profit I made went away in taxes!

 

Edited August 27, 2016 by Kasset Tak

[waldroj]

halloween

From my own experience in the public sector, performance pay was usually limited to senior public servants on special contracts, and was conditional on them exceeding predetermined performance standards, and usually only offered in times of major organisational change.

It was typically not available to salaried officers.

Financial management alone would not usually be justification for awarding a prize to the senior public servant. And other performance criteria would be considered more important in determining is the person should be rewarded.

Conversely, failing to achieve performance targets could see the person's contact terminated!

Even the article in your link notes on p. 3 that only a handful of OECD member countries can be considered to have an extended, formalised PRP policy. So, it can hardly be seen as standard practice.

It would be interesting to know the date of your article as public sector HR policies do tend to change quite quickly over time (usually with changes of government).

[brianinbangkok]

As usual they will just go after the 'small fish' and use them as scapegoats... The 'big fish' are totally exempt, because the law is only applied to the low/middle income classes... In Thailand the rich get richer, at the expense of everybody else. It's been that way for generations, and isn't likely to change, despite assurances from the PM that all Thais are treated equally, cough, cough..

Well not only in Thailand.
In the western countries its only the middle class income people who pay tax. The lower income group pay almost nothing and the rich pay nothing at all.

[sujoop]

6 hours ago, sahibji said:

taxes are essential component of funding the budget and should be paid unless the country intends to head towards disaster.

 

Fair points.
1) Taxes: As in PM Thaksin, how to avoid paying on say a multi-billion asset sale?
No prob, use your 'democracy/entitlement'  to change the law and pay zero.

2) Disaster: Multi billion, self-serving, rice scheme/scam:
Disaster which greatly benefited some but did nothing to benefit poor farmers

 

 

[yellowboat]

17 hours ago, merlin2002 said:

As usual they will just go after the 'small fish' and use them as scapegoats... The 'big fish' are totally exempt, because the law is only applied to the low/middle income classes... In Thailand the rich get richer, at the expense of everybody else. It's been that way for generations, and isn't likely to change, despite assurances from the PM that all Thais are treated equally, cough, cough..

Yes, by allowing the big fish a free pass, they decrease the size of their tax base.  Limiting their middle and lower class they again decrease their tax base.   The favorite limitation is of course brewing beer.  Only two families are allowed to do this and sell it in Thailand.  Because of this, I will not drink Thai beer outside of Thailand. 

[halloween]

8 hours ago, waldroj said:

halloween

From my own experience in the public sector, performance pay was usually limited to senior public servants on special contracts, and was conditional on them exceeding predetermined performance standards, and usually only offered in times of major organisational change.

It was typically not available to salaried officers.

Financial management alone would not usually be justification for awarding a prize to the senior public servant. And other performance criteria would be considered more important in determining is the person should be rewarded.

Conversely, failing to achieve performance targets could see the person's contact terminated!

Even the article in your link notes on p. 3 that only a handful of OECD member countries can be considered to have an extended, formalised PRP policy. So, it can hardly be seen as standard practice.

It would be interesting to know the date of your article as public sector HR policies do tend to change quite quickly over time (usually with changes of government).

 

"Two-thirds of OECD member countries have implemented PRP or are in the process of doing so  (OECD, 2004) "

 

[Caveat Emptor]

18 hours ago, adhd said:

just wondering if and how much he paid tax on his 300 million baht land sale ?

    Right anymore of that and it will be a little more than the sin bin for you   !     

[aussieinthailand]

19 hours ago, adhd said:

just wondering if and how much he paid tax on his 300 million baht land sale ?

Didn't have family land transferred just before bring in the land transfers and tax laws?  and avoided paying taxes?  and when questioned on it, twisted his biscuit and went all  hissy fit at reporters???

Nice to have inside information before making legislation huh...  some would call that morally corrupt, and some abusing loopholes.

[sharecropper]

11 hours ago, sujoop said:

 

Fair points.
1) Taxes: As in PM Thaksin, how to avoid paying on say a multi-billion asset sale?
No prob, use your 'democracy/entitlement'  to change the law and pay zero.

2) Disaster: Multi billion, self-serving, rice scheme/scam:
Disaster which greatly benefited some but did nothing to benefit poor farmers

 

 

Surely you should have added wasting taxpayers money on ridiculous airships, useless bomb detectors, aircraft carriers, submarines etc etc, you know, just for balance?