You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

April 3, 2015

Effects of a Land and Buildings Tax on Condo Owners

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

As has been widely reported, the Finance Ministry has proposed a new property tax on land and building owners. However, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has decided to delay the new tax, citing concerns about weak economic growth and the bill’s impact on the poor.

Despite the prime minister’s latest decision, property owners should be aware of the proposed tax bill’s provisions so they can prepare for the eventuality that the bill is passed. This article will discuss the proposed bill’s impact on a particular segment of property holders: owners of condominium units.

The proposed law represents a stark departure from the current law’s stance on property taxes. At present, property tax is governed by the Local Maintenance Tax Act of 1965, under which the government collects a local maintenance tax from real estate owners. If an owner uses his or her property as a personal residence, then the local maintenance tax can be partially reduced or even eliminated, depending on the location and size of the property.

For example, if a person owns land in an area that is densely populated such as central Bangkok, he or she will only be obligated to pay local maintenance tax on that land if the area was more than 100 square wah. This tax is not enforced for condominium units that are used by their owners as personal residences.

Under the proposed new law, however, the government is seeking to increase the tax base to generate additional streams of revenue. Therefore, the proposed law provides for additional factors and considerations such as the value or area of a condominium unit to determine tax eligibility.

The value would be based on an assessment price set by the Treasury Department. According to information currently available but still under review by the Finance Ministry, if the area of a condominium unit exceeded 50 square metres or its value was higher than 1 million baht, the owner would be required to pay the new tax. With such criteria, a large percentage of condominium units in Bangkok would be subject to tax.

In addition, according to currently available information, if an owner of a condominium unit used his or her unit as a place of residence, the applicable tax rate would not exceed 0.1% of the unit’s assessed value.

If the same unit owner had a second condominium unit in Thailand with an area of more than 50 square metres or a value that exceeded 1 million baht, the applicable tax rate on such an additional unit would not be higher than 0.5% of its assessed value.

If the law takes effect, the proposed land and building taxes would apply to all condominium owners. Taxpayers would be required to pay the new tax by the end of April each year.

However, one potential consequence of such a law would be a reduction in the number of condominium unit resales.

The Lands Department, upon notification by the relevant government entities, might attach “encumbrances” to a condominium unit if an owner did not pay the tax.

As the official transfer of a condominium unit must be registered at a local Lands Department office, the outstanding tax liability attached to the unit would hold up the transfer until the tax was paid.

Condominium owners would, however, be able to challenge the tax assessments levied against them. Owners could do this by petitioning a local administrative executive to review the assessment. If the owner disagreed with the local administrative executive’s decision, an additional appeal could be made to an appeal committee.

Importantly, owners would still be responsible for paying the applicable taxes during the petition and appeal process. The only exception would be if the local administrative executive allowed the taxpayer not to pay the tax pending the appeal. If the taxpayer did not agree with the appeal committee’s decision, he or she could file a claim against the relevant government entity.

Whether the tax bill will be passed is uncertain. What is certain, however, is that current and prospective condominium owners should take note of how they may be affected if the law eventually comes into force.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 2, 2021
Like many countries, Thailand requires stamp duty to be paid on the execution of certain legal instruments. A liable person who fails to pay stamp duty on a required instrument can be subject to a maximum surcharge of six times the applicable stamp duty, and an instrument on which stamp duty has not been paid will not be admissible as evidence in civil cases (that is, it will have limited legal weight and enforceability). Before July 2019, there were three methods for paying stamp duty: Affixing adhesive stamps on the instrument (and canceling it by the liable person in order to make sure that the adhesive stamp duty cannot be reused); Having a stamp impressed on the paper instrument; or Filing a prescribed form and paying the duty by cash or cashiers cheque at an area revenue office. In addition to paying the correct amount of stamp duty, the law also requires that stamp duty on certain instruments be paid using a specific prescribed method from the list above. Failure to use the prescribed method would be considered as that the stamp duty not having been paid. For example, a hire-of-work instrument is subject to stamp duty, but if the remuneration stated within the agreement is at least THB 1,000,000 (approximately USD 33,500), the stamp duty must be paid by filing a prescribed form and paying by cash or cashier’s cheque at an area revenue office. Affixing adhesive stamp duty is not allowed in that circumstance. E-Stamp Duty In June 2019, the Revenue Department introduced a fourth method of paying stamp duty, allowing online payments in specific circumstances (e-Stamp Duty). After the launch of the e-Stamp Duty system, the Revenue Department issued a notification (Notification of the Director-General of Revenue concerning Stamp Duty (No. 58)) requiring stamp duty on
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension
February 22, 2021
Following the recent imposition of sanctions on Myanmar individuals and companies by the US, the UK and Canada have now imposed new sanctions. As with the US sanctions, these new measures impact UK and Canadian citizens and companies, and non-UK and non-Canadian companies and citizens with interests in those jurisdictions. The EU has indicated that it is planning to issue similar sanctions in the near future. New UK Sanctions In addition to the 16 individuals already sanctioned by the UK government, on February 18, 2021, the UK government announced that three individuals have been sanctioned for serious human rights violations and are now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. The full list of Myanmar individuals and companies sanctioned by the UK is available on the website of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. Breaches of UK financial sanctions are criminal offences punishable in the UK by up to 7 years imprisonment and heavy fines. New Canadian Sanctions Also on February 18, timed to coincide with the UK sanctions, new Canadian sanctions were imposed on nine individuals. As with the UK, Canada already had a number of individuals in the Myanmar military on its sanctions list, and the new additions bring the total number of individuals sanctioned by Canada to 54. All assets of these individuals in Canada are now frozen, and they are banned from travelling to Canada. Canadian businesses or entities may not do business with any of the 54 individuals. Full details of the impact of the sanctions are available on the Government of Canada’s website, as is a database of the Myanmar individuals and companies subject to them. Breach of Canadian sanctions carries with it up to 5 years’ imprisonment in Canada and/or a large fine. Other Countries The EU is reportedly drawing up sanctions
February 12, 2021
On January 29, 2021, Thailand’s Revenue Department published the Notification of the Director-General of the Revenue Department Re: Income Tax (No. 400), which prescribes the criteria, methods, and conditions for Revenue Department officials on how to assess income and adjust expenses for transactions between related parties (as defined in Section 71 bis of the Revenue Code) that engage in intercompany transactions where conditions between the two parties in their commercial or financial relations differ from those that would be made between independent parties (i.e., where the transaction is not an “arms length” transaction). Those who are familiar with international transfer pricing standard practices will note that the measures under the notification generally follow the concept of chapters II, III, VI and VII of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations. The key elements of the notification are summarized below. Accepted Transfer Pricing Methods The notification recognizes the following as accepted transfer pricing methods: Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method Resale Price Method Cost Plus Method Transactional Net Margin Method Transactional Profit Split Method The notification also requires that the arm’s length result of an intercompany transaction (i.e. the controlled transaction) must be determined using the most appropriate transfer pricing method. If none of the above transfer pricing methods is appropriate for the tested controlled transaction, the company may apply an alternate pricing method to the transaction by notifying the Director General of Revenue in writing, within the relevant accounting period, and describing the reason for doing so. Selection of the Most Appropriate Transfer Pricing Method  There is no formal order of preference for the use of the five accepted pricing methods. However, the notification requires the selection process to take account of the following factors: The respective strengths and weakness of the recognized methods; The appropriateness of