Measures for registering sale and mortgage of immovable property & Condominium Unit in 2023, Measures for e-Tax system and use of e-Withholding Tax system, Labor case study
Measures for a reduction of the government fees for registering sale and mortgage of certain types of immovable property or condominium units in 2023
Thai Government set government fees for registration of sale and mortgage of immovable property by reducing government fess for registration of transfer of immovable property from 2% to 1% of land and building appraisal price or sale price, and government fees for registration of mortgage of immovable property from 1 % to 0.01 % of the mortgage amount or total loan amount in order to support and lighten burden on Thai people’s shoulder who desire to have their own house as well as to strengthen the real estate business sector
The reduced rates apply only to the sale and mortgage which proceed within the date prescribed as two notifications issued by the ministry of inferior, namely Ministerial Regulation on specifying government fess for registration of transfer and mortgage of immovable property in order to support and lighten burden on Thai people’s shoulder who desire to be property ownerships B.E. 2565 (2023) and Ministerial Regulation on specifying government fess for registration of transfer and mortgage of Condominium Unit in order to support and lighten burden on Thai people’s shoulder who desire to be property ownerships B.E. 2565 (2023), effective from January 3 – 31 December, 2023, to Thai individuals of detached houses, semidetached houses, row houses, commercial buildings, and the land surrounding these buildings, as well as of condominium units, whether first-hand or second-hand immovable property, and the property sale price, officially assessed value, and mortgage amount each must not exceed THB 3 million.
To qualify for the reduced mortgage registration rate under above measures, having an important condition is the mortgage registration must be a result of registering sale of immovable property or condominium unit that is reduced government fees according to such measures and the sale and mortgage must be registered at the same time.
However, sale with particular portion and co-ownership are not exempted from government fees.
Extension of period for tax measures in support of investment in e-Tax system and tax measures in support of use of e-Withholding Tax system
On January 24, 2023, Thai Government approved extension of period for tax measures in support of investment in e-Tax system and tax measures in support of use of e-Withholding Tax system in order to encourage private sector using e-Tax for tax transaction each other and also with public sector extensively that will be supporting digital economic and digital transformation for private sector and public sector
- The first tax measures specify Company or Juristic Partnership are granted income exemption as 2 times of expenses as follows
① Expenses for investment in e-Tax Invoice & e-Receipt
② Expenses for investment in e-Withholding Tax system
③ Expenses for use of service in e-Tax Invoice & e-Receipt and e-Withholding Tax from service provider from January 1, 2023 to 31 December 31, 2025 - As the second tax measure specify a reduction of Withholding Tax from 5%, 3% and 2%, respectively, to 1 % for paying income assessment via e-Withholding Tax from January 1, 2023 to 31 December, 2025 for Company or Individual, excluding foundation and organization by the rate of Withholding Tax for paying income assessment as prescribed by Ministerial Regulation
Lobur Case Study
1. Specifying compensation in case employees do not work at the agreed period in advance
Supreme Court Judgement No. 3811/2561 (2018) is for the case that a company (employer) had hired an employee to work as Sale representative. The company would provide training, whether technical or educational knowledge, regarding production, method for sale of the company’s goods and other products which is business confidential to the employee, and in order to protect the company’s business carrying on its business continually. Both agreed and record terms regarding work with condition; if the employee resigns before the agreed period of work, 1 year, the employee must pay compensation to the company in the amount of 80,000 Baht. According to this Supreme court judgment, upon such agreement, the company has the right to specify compensation under such terms in advance because such compensation arisen from not working at the agreed period, which it regarded to be non-performance or not performing the obligation in the proper manner and this case not regarding exercising the right of rescission or fixing a period to be rescission of contract under Labor Protection Act B.E. 2541
This judgment suggested that agreement to fix damage amount in case of an employee resign from the company before agreed period can be effective as long as the fixed damage within reasonable amount.
2．Labor case and Tax case concerning compensation in case employees do not transfer work to an employer after resigning
Supreme Court Judgement No. 5461/2555 (2012) ruled that an employee sued a lawsuit for claiming Severance Pay and Payment in Lieu of Notice from an Employer while the Employer counterclaimed compensation from the employee whom had a duty to manage computer system intentionally did not transfer work regarding computer system such as password for access the system or information about computer causing computer system could not work and the Employer must hire outsource for fixing around 260,000 baht. However, the Court decided to have the Employee only paid 10,000 Baht because the Employer specified time for sending work after off from work (dismiss on August 5, 2004, effective on the next day, the Employee must send work in evening) while not sending work to the Employer could cause some damage to the Company. In this case, the Employer must pay Payment in Lieu of Notice to the Employee due to dismissal without advance notice correctly because the Employee did not act offence whereas the Employer had the right to claim compensation from the Employee in case that he did not send work to the Employer causing damage to the Employer as well. Therefore, it can be summed up from this Supreme Court Judgement that the Employer has right to demand damage compensation against the Employee if the Employer have the Employee sends work to the Employer and such work is not completed causing damage to the Employer, regardless of whether Employment Contract will be terminated due to resignation or dismissal.
There is Supreme Court Judgement No. 203/2559 (2016) also ruled that accounting manager did not inform Vat assessment to the company’s directors (Employer) and did not send work under such assessment to a new accounting manager so it is deficiency for management by the Employer, himself, for letting the accounting manager whom resigned from her position during recruiting a new one for replace in her position as well as did not inspect that whether the accounting manager transfer completely work to a new person. The employer claimed that he did not know about what this matter occurred and could not file an appeal within the prescribed time, it cannot be reasonable cause under section 3 Octo para. 1 of revenue code. This judgment teaches us that any delay for required period under the law to Revenue department or any other government agency could not be reasonable reason so that the Employer should demand the Employee who will resign from the Company to hand over his work as much as possible to avoid this kind of problem.