Thailand new change - world wide income at Thai tax levels to be taxed

[Mercury]

and intends to speculate on SUI in the crypto markets, as it will likely 10x from here.

SUI at 30$? Hope you're right!

He does trade shitcoins makes 10m$ overseas, leaves Thailand the following tax year for 180+ days then returns to thailand he can remit that 10m$ tax free into thailand as it's now 'new principle' value, even though he made those profits whilst sitting in a bar getting head from a LB, but as it was done on overseas exchanges (decentralised/centralised) and deposited to overseas accounts (or left in stablecoins) its not under the territorial tax of Thailand.

In theory, capital gains realised (FIAT cash out, not sure about stablecoins) overseas while being Thai tax resident are assessable income when remitted in any further year regardless of the individual tax residence status at that time. In practice, I don't see how Revenue Department could work it out and enforce this over non tax residents.

 

[wellington]

SUI at 30$? Hope you're right!

Verse 1:
(Sui starts the journey)
Sui twende, juu zaidi, (Sui let’s go, higher and higher)
Mtandao wa kasi, hakuna kusubiri, (A fast network, no waiting around)
Crypto sasa ni dunia yetu, (Crypto is now our world)
Na Sui anatupa mwangaza wa kesho, (And Sui gives us the light of tomorrow)

Chorus:
Karibu sana, kwa dunia ya Solana, (You’re most welcome, to the world of Solana)
Kwa mwendo wa kasi, hatutaki kulala, (With great speed, we don’t want to sleep)
Sei pia iko tayari, tupo pamoja, (Sei is also ready, we’re together)
Karibu sana, kwenye dunia ya crypto safi! (You’re most welcome, to the clean world of crypto!)

Verse 2:
(Solana sets the stage)
Solana iko mbele, bila kizuizi, (Solana is ahead, without any barriers)
Transaksi ya haraka, ni kama upepo, (Transactions fast, like the wind)
Hatuogopi, hatuna wasiwasi, (We’re not afraid, we’re not worried)
Solana ina nguvu, twende kwa kasi! (Solana has power, let’s go fast!)

Chorus:
Karibu sana, kwa dunia ya Solana,
Kwa mwendo wa kasi, hatutaki kulala,
Sei pia iko tayari, tupo pamoja,
Karibu sana, kwenye dunia ya crypto safi!

Verse 3:
(Sei brings it all together)
Sei anafunga, mitandao yote, (Sei brings together all the networks)
Blockchain safi, mawasiliano bora, (A clean blockchain, better communication)
Usalama juu, ni kama ngome, (Security up high, like a fortress)
Twende mbali, kwa pamoja tutafika! (Let’s go far, together we will reach!)

Chorus:
Karibu sana, kwa dunia ya Solana,
Kwa mwendo wa kasi, hatutaki kulala,
Sei pia iko tayari, tupo pamoja,
Karibu sana, kwenye dunia ya crypto safi!

Outro:
Sui, Solana, Sei… tunafika mbele, (Sui, Solana, Sei… we’re reaching ahead)
Karibu sana, twende wote, (You’re most welcome, let’s all go together)
Crypto yetu, kwa kizazi kipya, (Our crypto, for the new generation)
Karibu sana, safari ni njema! (You’re most welcome, the journey is good!)

 

[JJReddick]

ok so thanks for your input guys, I am now wondering how the big picture would be once we know that thai tax agency cant claim taxes on crypto trades if not remitted (i am still on the fence on hot wallets, not convinced by your explainations but thats ok as long as it holds in front of thai tax authorities, pretty sure it wouldnt hold elsewhere lmao)


Now say there is a EU citizen who holds a thai dtv visa. Formally they are still a tax resident in a 0% income jurisdiction as they still hold a resident visa there and they have been a tax resident there for a few years already. Let's say this individual loves Thailand and spends there >180days during the fiscal year 2025 and 2026. let's also say that this person spends 4 months a year in the EU to enjoy the summer and xmas.

Say in either 2025 or 2026 they cash out mid 7 figs from crypto to a bank, and let's assume that the bank is based in Europe, lets make it the worst case scenario and let's assume it's based in the same country of citizenship of the individual and where they spend their summer although they have not been tax resident there for a long a*s time, let's say 10/15 years.

So for this individual we have this sitituation for the year when the offramp wire hits the bank:
- spent > 180 days in Thailand --> Thai tax resident
- spent 2 weeks in 0% income tax jurisdiction but owns property and/or rental contract there and their long term visa doesnt require physical presence --> 0% income tax jurisdiction tax resident
- spent 4 months in EU country of citizenship, which is also the country where the crypto offramp bank is based

When the money gets to the bank account, several AML alarms hit. The bank is now used to it as it happened already in the past, however the EU country authorities are alerted. These authorities notice that contrary to the past, this individual is now not spending the majority of their year in the country where they declare to be tax resident, which, let's assume it's within the EU AML high-risk third countries.

They look at how much time this individual spent in their own EU country, how much in the 0% income tax jurisdiction and they start wondering if this individual should be considered a tax resident in their country too even if they spent less than 180 days in it. After all even if this individual doesnt own cars or houses there, they still have family (let's say parents or siblings) and a (very substantial) bank account in that country, and they seem to enjoy spending few months there every year.

They decide to open an investigation. The individual will prove that they spent over 6 months in thailand during those years and will argue that they owe nothing to the EU tax authority. The individual might well win, but it's not a pleasent journey as the authroity might also look at 2024, when the individial might have spent more time in that EU country (still < than 6 months tho) than anywhere else in the world.

The question would be..to avoid all this mess, would it be better for the individual to:

1) postpone the offramp only to when they are officially thai tax resident, having spent >180 days already, and having updated authorities, embassies, banks and brokers with their new address (can they do that on a DTV visa anyway?)

2) remit on purpose some money to pay some taxes for 2025 to thai govt so to "cement" their tax residency


a bit of worst case scenario but think it can be an interesting example of how to juggle jurisdictions without breaking any laws

 

[JJReddick]

SUI at 30$? Hope you're right!


In theory, capital gains realised (FIAT cash out, not sure about stablecoins) overseas while being Thai tax resident are assessable income when remitted in any further year regardless of the individual tax residence status at that time. In practice, I don't see how Revenue Department could work it out and enforce this over non tax residents.

that would make sense otherwise it would be too easy to game. Still better than UK policy. I recall being forced to spend in the UK less than 16 days/year for the 3 years following my depature to avoid claims from her majesty

 

[wellington]

Just looking over that - they’d surely owe the taxes in Europe based on the circle of life location

I.e you can’t just move to a country and cash out when coming from a western country and then move back.

In my case it’s different and will be for others in similar - I.e I’ve not been a resident in a western nation for near on two decades

But for someone coming from Europe to say Thailand just to cash out crypto and then heading back

- they’ve not allowed maturity
- they are moving back within a time frame
- their circle of life is still in the western nation.

Now if they were a resident in Dubai for 2/3 yrs and then moved to Thailand and then moved back to Dubai they’d be under Dubai tax laws - with perhaps Thailand tax laws dependent on “principle” argument reducing their effect

- note circle of life is mainly something you need to unentangle yourself from the west if coming from a tax haven or even a non western tax based country you don’t need to worry about that hence you can do all of the above without issues

 

[wellington]

a bit of worst case scenario but think it can be an interesting example of how to juggle jurisdictions without breaking any laws

Just to point out in those scenarios no laws would be broken - basically people make mistakes it’s not always criminal - taxes is a civil matter dealt via negotiated settlements - it’s only when you’ve lost and not being responsive does it become criminal

 

[Mercury]

The question would be..to avoid all this mess, would it be better for the individual to:

Avoid home country/EU banks for large cash outs.
Get offshore banking (SG,HK, potentially CH) to off-ramp crypto gains with Thai or 0% income tax jurisdiction address for CRS purposes.

 

[yomboloz]

Hey @wellington I have a bit of a weird question for you, since you are quite knowledgable about this type of stuff.

Lets say I had the following on 31st Dec 2023:
IBKR : 250k
Bank 1: 100k
Bank 2: 400k
Total 750k on the 31st of Dec 2023


Lets say in 2024 I moved some funds around, or sold a property, or got a large bonus at work or whatever, and that was paid to Bank #1 (the funds in IBKR and Bank #2 were not touched)

Can I now remit 750k tax free from bank 1, or only that EXACT 100k can be remmited, and then I can send exactly 400k from Bank 2 tax free?

Basically if you had a recorded networth of X on the 31st of Dec, does it matter from which bank account you actually remit it?

 

[wellington]

Hey @wellington I have a bit of a weird question for you, since you are quite knowledgable about this type of stuff.

Lets say I had the following on 31st Dec 2023:
IBKR : 250k
Bank 1: 100k
Bank 2: 400k
Total 750k on the 31st of Dec 2023


Lets say in 2024 I moved some funds around, or sold a property, or got a large bonus at work or whatever, and that was paid to Bank #1 (the funds in IBKR and Bank #2 were not touched)

Can I now remit 750k tax free from bank 1, or only that EXACT 100k can be remmited, and then I can send exactly 400k from Bank 2 tax free?

Basically if you had a recorded networth of X on the 31st of Dec, does it matter from which bank account you actually remit it?

Bank is just a transaction rail.

You had 750,000 of networth in assets/value/principle prior to 1st Jan 2024.

Therefore as long as you have a paper-trail its clear to transfer tax free.

 

[yomboloz]

Bank is just a transaction rail.

You had 750,000 of networth in assets/value/principle prior to 1st Jan 2024.

Therefore as long as you have a paper-trail its clear to transfer tax free.

Even if in theory 650k out of that 750k I transfered in 2024 was from money that came into Bank 1 was 2024 sourced, its still tax free, since 750k matches my NW at the end of 23'?

Thank you!

 

[wellington]

Even if in theory 650k out of that 750k I transfered in 2024 was from money that came into Bank 1 was 2024 sourced, its still tax free, since 750k matches my NW at the end of 23'?

Thank you!

Yes you had a principle net worth of 750,000 pre 2024

 

[wellington]

Just ensure you have good accounting that marks to market assets pre 2024 as your principle

 

[scooterguy]

Even if in theory 650k out of that 750k I transfered in 2024 was from money that came into Bank 1 was 2024 sourced, its still tax free, since 750k matches my NW at the end of 23'?

Thank you!

It's not always tax free.

If you move cash around it is free, but if you sell assets then capital gains tax kicks in if you transfer a portion of that amount to Thailand.

For example, if that $100k comes from selling stocks you purchased for $50k some time ago, then your capital gains are $50k. If you transfer the full $100k into Thailand, you have to pay capital gains tax on $50k.

 

[wellington]

capital gains tax kicks in if you transfer a portion of that amount to

If over the principle mark to market value pre-2024.

Mark-to-Market is a accounting term that determines market value, it's a 'principle' value post 2024 for assets sold after that date (jan).

Hence you bought a house in 2004. Price appreciated from initial 100,000 to 250,000, but in 2023 the price was 220,000 mark-to-market.

You sell the house in 2024 for 250,000, you now can move 220,000 to Thailand tax free based on mark-to-market principle value pre-2024.

Not the initial 100,000 alone (principle initial), as mark-to-market gives market price in 2023 being your net-worth / assets in 2024 and the exception that applies (grandfathered in) that value(s) in liquid or assets at 31//12/23 are tax free remitted but value appreciation from 1/1/24 are taxable as income.

AGAIN... good accountant and confirmed mark-to-market valuation upto 31/1/23.

 

[scooterguy]

If over the principle mark to market value pre-2024.

Mark-to-Market is a accounting term that determines market value, it's a 'principle' value post 2024 for assets sold after that date (jan).

Hence you bought a house in 2004. Price appreciated from initial 100,000 to 250,000, but in 2023 the price was 220,000 mark-to-market.

You sell the house in 2024 for 250,000, you now can move 220,000 to Thailand tax free based on mark-to-market principle value pre-2024.

Not the initial 100,000 alone (principle initial), as mark-to-market gives market price in 2023 being your net-worth / assets in 2024 and the exception that applies (grandfathered in) that value(s) in liquid or assets at 31//12/23 are tax free remitted but value appreciation from 1/1/24 are taxable as income.

AGAIN... good accountant and confirmed mark-to-market valuation upto 31/1/23.

Thailand takes income into account, not changes in net worth. Realizing capital gains after 2024 creates income, hence taxable if remitted.

I'm sure that if you have a whole tangle of companies and accounts, a good accountant can make it all look like money was being moved around.

But according to the TRD it's just about income earned after 2024 and whether it was brought into the country or not. It is all summarized here: https://www.rd.go.th/fileadmin/user_upload/lorkhor/newspr/2024/FOREIGNERS_PAY_TAX2024.pdf.

 

[wellington]

Realizing capital gains after 2024 creates income, hence taxable if remitted.

Based on my discussions in Bangkok, and Phuket with the Revenue department, those that have been here x year(s) are grandfathered in and the value is taken into account as principle, otherwise those domestic would be charged from the sale of a property they bought in the 80s at Thai income value(s).

Again that was a discussion directly with the Revenue department, and it has to be accounted for as 'initial principle', 'principle based on mark-to-market' 31/12/23.