A different EU v UK question on boat place

[Hurricane]

A small thread drift.
I understand that, after registering in a country and after the magic 183 days, you can (to a certain degree) elect which country you pay tax in. According to the tax treaty set between your registered countries. I dont think that registering in a country, automatically means you pay tax in that country. This doesn't apply to me - just something I read a long time ago and it is probably complex subject. I hope I haven't opened another can of worms.

 

[DavidJ]

A small thread drift.
I understand that, after registering in a country and after the magic 183 days, you can (to a certain degree) elect which country you pay tax in. According to the tax treaty set between your registered countries. I dont think that registering in a country, automatically means you pay tax in that country. This doesn't apply to me - just something I read a long time ago and it is probably complex subject. I hope I haven't opened another can of worms.

The worms have just stated to crawl out of the can.
I’m not sure you can elect which country you pay tax in after 183 (nights I remember) It’s about where the income is earned.
I also believe that the US has their own (advantageous) rules which are different from what is internationally recognised.
There are double taxation agreements to help people to not pay tax twice.
All from memory, I’ll stop there.

 

[Portofino]

Billskip, I don't have the energy anymore. One last go, briefly...

(a) your "must register after 90 days" is correct only in some countries and in some circumstances - this thread isn't just about Spain and your particular circumstances;
(b) your "requirement that any foreigner registers..." is just not correct in law across the EU, even if it happens to be a requirement in Spain - again this thread isn't Spain-specific; and
(c) Porto is not saying the same. He is saying something very different. He is saying that the 90 day limit now applicable to UK folks following Brexit already applied to them pre-Brexit, which is 100% wrong. He, and you, are conflating Brexit's removal of a very important right to be somewhere with a mere occasional trivial administrative obligation to register as being somewhere. See post 99 immediately above.

This forum is in general a reliable source of info and it's a shame that Porto repeatedly pollutes it.

I think you will find all them require folks to be “ made known “ after a 90 day stay .
Nobody on here has yet answered my Q which one , member states doesn’t after 90 days , or ignores this or use the “ May “ word as a we can’t be bothered .

Here is the Italian working of it FWIW .As a typical example .
Pretty onerous if you ( Hooligan with Irish PP eg ) overstay 90 and fail to make presence know , etc meet officialdom.

https://sdg.interno.gov.it/en/d1-re...mporarily-or-permanently-another-member-state.
If you read ^ carefully they suggest if you intend to exceed 90 make yourself known earlier is better as they auto default to you have already exceeded the 90 .This is not trivia getting into that spot .

Immigration + other stuff I have touched upon like folks living other member states but not paying taxes have sharpened up ALL EU officialdom .This has been creeping up we’ll be fore brexit btw .

I would advise any EU member PP holder wishing to spend a lot of time in another eu state to seek advice from the relevant Embassy or local authorities first regarding “ making a presence” .Get it from the horses mouth .

Certainly not hang to a word like “ May “ .

 

[Hurricane]

The worms have just stated to crawl out of the can.
I’m not sure you can elect which country you pay tax in after 183 (nights I remember) It’s about where the income is earned.
I also believe that the US has their own (advantageous) rules which are different from what is internationally recognised.
There are double taxation agreements to help people to not pay tax twice.
All from memory, I’ll stop there.

Maybe I'm wrong, and it probably depends on the tax treaties but I thought you don't end up paying the same tax twice.

 

[DavidJ]

Maybe I'm wrong, and it probably depends on the tax treaties but I thought you don't end up paying the same tax twice.

That’s right and that’s what the double taxation treaty is all about but I believe you do have to pay tax in the country you have earned money in if over 183 nights.

 

[DAW]

A small thread drift.
I understand that, after registering in a country and after the magic 183 days, you can (to a certain degree) elect which country you pay tax in. According to the tax treaty set between your registered countries. I dont think that registering in a country, automatically means you pay tax in that country. This doesn't apply to me - just something I read a long time ago and it is probably complex subject. I hope I haven't opened another can of worms.

Very brave to open up this topic!!! First point to make is that every situation is unique, so any comments below are intended to be general and illustrative only.

183 days of presence is not the only test for determining tax residency. Many countries have much lower thresholds and factors such as ownership of property, presence of dependant family members, concentration of business and other financial interests, and evidence of presence and tax residency elsewhere are also relevant. Once you fulfil the requirements for tax residency, you generally have to report your worldwide income to the tax authorities of the country in which you are deemed to be tax resident. Some countries are happy for you to report only domestically sourced income, but these are in the minority. Note that reporting income is not the same as paying tax to that authority.

If you spend significant time at an overseas home (or boat) that you own but still spend significant time in the UK, it would be easy to find yourself tax resident in both the UK and the country you are visiting, resulting in the requirement to report your worldwide income to both tax authorities. It's less common, to find yourself tax resident in two or more third party countries, but not impossible.

Income is generally taxable in the country from which it is sourced ... which is usually (but not always) where the income is generated, work is performed or service is delivered, rather than where it is supplied to or from where it is paid. This is generally not something on which you can make an election. The rules for determining the source of income for tax purposes are complex, vary from country to country, and are dependent on the nature of the duties. Depending on the nature of your work, if you routinely work remotely from a holiday home (or boat) in Spain or France you may be required to report this to the local tax authorities and account for any taxes due on income or profits that you earn, even if you are not tax resident in Spain or France. There are exceptions if the overseas work is only incidental to your duties and the work performed in a home country, but working remotely over an extended period of time falls into a distinctly grey area.

Once you have paid all of your taxes locally, the role of the tax treaty is to ensure that you do not pay tax twice and get relief for the taxes paid overseas when you report your worldwide income in the country (or countries) in which you are tax resident. In simple terms, you calculate the taxes that would be payable in the country where you are tax resident, and then you deduct from this any taxes already paid in other countries where the income was generated. If after deducting taxes already paid there is a net tax liability (because your home country rates are higher) then you usually have to pay the additional taxes. If you have overpaid taxes (for example because the rates in the foreign countries are higher) you are not usually able to obtain a refund or offset these higher taxes against your other liablities. There are some circumstance where it's possible to elect to have income earned in one country taxed in another, but these are generally very limited and subject to restrictions.

Some countries ... such as the US ... require their citizens to report worldwide income and account for taxes on that income regardless of where they are tax resident. It's one of the reasons why tax shelters such as Monaco are not particularly interesting for US citizens.

While there is a degree of similarity between the approaches in European countries, the US is quite different in many respects ... some advantageous and some disadvantageous. As mentioned above, US citizens in principle have to pay federal taxes equivalent to what they would pay in the US regardless of where they are actually resident, but there are many more deductions and opportunities for efficient tax planning. For non-US citizens, the US has a tax residency requirement once you go over an average of 120 days of presence per year, (measured over a three year period) but this can sometimes be waived if you can demonstrate to their satisfaction that you are not working or running a business in the US and are tax resident somewhere else. Swings and roundabouts ...

As mentioned at the start, every circumstance is unique so apologies in advance if any of the above is incorrect or does not apply.

 

[DAW]

Billskip, I don't have the energy anymore. One last go, briefly...

(a) your "must register after 90 days" is correct only in some countries and in some circumstances - this thread isn't just about Spain and your particular circumstances;
(b) your "requirement that any foreigner registers..." is just not correct in law across the EU, even if it happens to be a requirement in Spain - again this thread isn't Spain-specific; and
(c) Porto is not saying the same. He is saying something very different. He is saying that the 90 day limit now applicable to UK folks following Brexit already applied to them pre-Brexit, which is 100% wrong. He, and you, are conflating Brexit's removal of a very important right to be somewhere with a mere occasional trivial administrative obligation to register as being somewhere. See post 99 immediately above.

This forum is in general a reliable source of info and it's a shame that Porto repeatedly pollutes it.

100% agree!!!

I think it's also worth mentioning that people are discussing access to Schengen/EU, and freedom of movement/right to work and live in the EU, as if they are interchangeable and the same thing, and they are not.

The 90/180 requirement is a Schengen rule ... if you want to spend more that 90 days in 180 in the Schengen area, you need to be either a citizen of an EU country or have a long stay visa issued by a Schengen member. This then usually gives you the right to freedom of movement within the Schengen area, but not the right to work.

While the granting of a long stay visa and/or a work permit by an EU member state normally gives you the right to freedom of movement within the Schengen area, your right to live and work is restricted to the member state issuing the visa and the conditions attached to it, and is not valid for the EU in general.

As mentioned above, the requirement to notify your presence to the relevant authorities after 90 days has nothing to do with the above. It has always been there in some states, but not others, and applies equally to EU and non-EU citizens.

Without question, UK citizens have lost something significant as a result of Brexit ... the automatic right to free movement in Schengen and the EU, and the right to live and work in any EU member state.

 

[petem]

I think you will find all them require folks to be “ made known “ after a 90 day stay .
Nobody on here has yet answered my Q which one , member states doesn’t after 90 days , or ignores this or use the “ May “ word as a we can’t be bothered .

Here is the Italian working of it FWIW .As a typical example .
Pretty onerous if you ( Hooligan with Irish PP eg ) overstay 90 and fail to make presence know , etc meet officialdom.

https://sdg.interno.gov.it/en/d1-re...mporarily-or-permanently-another-member-state.
If you read ^ carefully they suggest if you intend to exceed 90 make yourself known earlier is better as they auto default to you have already exceeded the 90 .This is not trivia getting into that spot .

Immigration + other stuff I have touched upon like folks living other member states but not paying taxes have sharpened up ALL EU officialdom .This has been creeping up we’ll be fore brexit btw .

I would advise any EU member PP holder wishing to spend a lot of time in another eu state to seek advice from the relevant Embassy or local authorities first regarding “ making a presence” .Get it from the horses mouth .

Certainly not hang to a word like “ May “ .

I've read the link. What do you think is burdensome (it seems to be a formality to me)?

 

[billskip]

I've read the link. What do you think is burdensome (it seems to be a formality to me)?

Nothing to do with burdensome...nothing to do with Brexit...its to do with the law/ requirements of the country...please name a country where it's legal to go and spend more than 90 days in 180 without any obligation or legal requirement...not just UK people ...please give an example.

 

[Portofino]

So ideally you don’t wanna pop up on some EU s states tax radar .
If you read the link I posted in post #103 ( Italian make your presences known ) even after 90 days they expect or assume or drop you into residency status .Sure you might want to reg a car etc , but also it’s a slippy slope downhill into there tax regime.
Of which is crippling with there wealth tax(s)on WW assets .Same in France a wealth tax on French assets , maybe WW I haven’t looked for a while .Some one will correct me wether it’s WW or just Fr ? .

But really you don’t wanna imho want to be snared in either of those two eu states , end up a tax resident .

Thats why it’s doubly important to be aware of over stays and stay clear of any roving spotlights .The 90 day thing .

In certain cantons in CH you can get a fiscal deal .lump sum deal .

In Italy you could get a flat tax of iirc 20% for a period of 17 yrs if you relocate to certain regions .You need to do your own due diligence on both of these check the numbers and regions .The regions are imho not the better ones as they are trying to attract big spenders to boost the economy in said regions .


So no ones commented on my post #94 .
Let me be hopefully clearer .
Austrian PP holder retired with a 20 M flat over the Austrian / Italian border . Buys a €25 M Venetian palazzo .
Every 89 th day he drives back to his Austrian 20 m flat ,checks on the mail etc .His mother by chance lives there too .
So he spends 4/5 days a year in Austria the rest in his palazzo ,with a nice Riva at the bottom of his tiny garden on the grand cannal .

What do you think the Italian officials will do about his residency status tax position?
My point is they will do him come at him and use the default 90 in 180 as if he is a 3 P .


The majority of you on here inc JFM will say “ May “ need to pop up at officialdom and some time even though the link I posted suggest he should otherwise they assume the 90 s done .
PeteM “ arh the rules say over 90 and he’s never actually exceed 90 ever .So it’s ok for him to carry on living lavishly in Venice and paying no tax .( excluding local holiday property stuff ) .

 

[billskip]

I've read the link. What do you think is burdensome (it seems to be a formality to me)?

Which bit of your nationality does not exempt you am I misunderstanding?

 

[DAW]

Porto ... If you look at the detailed regulations in most countries that have adopted the 90-day registration approach, leaving the country for a short period of time does not reset the clock. The underlying principal is a stay exceeding 90 days within a fixed period such as 180 days, or a calendar or tax year, with anti-avoidance and abuse provisions written into the legislation to prevent the circumstances you are referring to.

Almost all countries which have. a 90-day visitors visa (e.g. US, Australia, etc.) have similar approaches where a short trip across the border (e.g. to Canada/Bahamas, or New Zealand) to reset the clock can be disregarded by immigration and the visit regarded as continuous.

It's very dangerous to rely on public information websites as if they are gospel. In many cases they aim to summarise huge volumes of complex legislation and regulations accumulated over years into something that is readable and understandable by the average person who is acting in good faith and not embarking on a tax evasion scheme. They miss out on the nuances and provisions intended to catch such people. At the end of the day, the decision to grant permission to stay is a discretionary one and if they think someone's behaviour is abusive they will deny permission and pursue them for taxes.

 

[petem]

Nothing to do with burdensome...nothing to do with Brexit...its to do with the law/ requirements of the country...please name a country where it's legal to go and spend more than 90 days in 180 without any obligation or legal requirement...not just UK people ...please give an example.

I've never said that there are EU countries where registration is not required, indeed I suspect that all EU countries require some form of registration if you spend more than 90 days there.

 

[petem]

View attachment 159392
Which bit of your nationality does not exempt you am I misunderstanding?

Please provide a link and not a screen shot.

 

[billskip]

Please provide a link and not a screen shot.

I really cant be arsed with it anymore........

 

[jfm]

A small thread drift.
I understand that, after registering in a country and after the magic 183 days, you can (to a certain degree) elect which country you pay tax in. According to the tax treaty set between your registered countries. I dont think that registering in a country, automatically means you pay tax in that country. This doesn't apply to me - just something I read a long time ago and it is probably complex subject. I hope I haven't opened another can of worms.

Hurricane, you're correct when you say ...

I don't think that registering in a country, automatically means you pay tax in that country.

... but the rest of your post is very incorrect. You cannot elect anything under any of the perhaps 1,000 standard model treaties that exist on the planet. It is a complex subject and the legal status/significance of tax treaties is widely misunderstood and misstated on the internet. it is pointless to guess on this topic

 

[jfm]

The worms have just stated to crawl out of the can.
I’m not sure you can elect which country you pay tax in after 183 (nights I remember) It’s about where the income is earned.
I also believe that the US has their own (advantageous) rules which are different from what is internationally recognised.
There are double taxation agreements to help people to not pay tax twice.
All from memory, I’ll stop there.

It's not simply "about where the income is earned". Sometimes it is, but at least half the time it isn't. This isn't a subject that is good for half-cooked analysis

 

[jfm]

Very brave to open up this topic!!! First point to make is that every situation is unique, so any comments below are intended to be general and illustrative only.

183 days of presence is not the only test for determining tax residency. Many countries have much lower thresholds and factors such as ownership of property, presence of dependant family members, concentration of business and other financial interests, and evidence of presence and tax residency elsewhere are also relevant. Once you fulfil the requirements for tax residency, you generally have to report your worldwide income to the tax authorities of the country in which you are deemed to be tax resident. Some countries are happy for you to report only domestically sourced income, but these are in the minority. Note that reporting income is not the same as paying tax to that authority.

If you spend significant time at an overseas home (or boat) that you own but still spend significant time in the UK, it would be easy to find yourself tax resident in both the UK and the country you are visiting, resulting in the requirement to report your worldwide income to both tax authorities. It's less common, to find yourself tax resident in two or more third party countries, but not impossible.

Income is generally taxable in the country from which it is sourced ... which is usually (but not always) where the income is generated, work is performed or service is delivered, rather than where it is supplied to or from where it is paid. This is generally not something on which you can make an election. The rules for determining the source of income for tax purposes are complex, vary from country to country, and are dependent on the nature of the duties. Depending on the nature of your work, if you routinely work remotely from a holiday home (or boat) in Spain or France you may be required to report this to the local tax authorities and account for any taxes due on income or profits that you earn, even if you are not tax resident in Spain or France. There are exceptions if the overseas work is only incidental to your duties and the work performed in a home country, but working remotely over an extended period of time falls into a distinctly grey area.

Once you have paid all of your taxes locally, the role of the tax treaty is to ensure that you do not pay tax twice and get relief for the taxes paid overseas when you report your worldwide income in the country (or countries) in which you are tax resident. In simple terms, you calculate the taxes that would be payable in the country where you are tax resident, and then you deduct from this any taxes already paid in other countries where the income was generated. If after deducting taxes already paid there is a net tax liability (because your home country rates are higher) then you usually have to pay the additional taxes. If you have overpaid taxes (for example because the rates in the foreign countries are higher) you are not usually able to obtain a refund or offset these higher taxes against your other liablities. There are some circumstance where it's possible to elect to have income earned in one country taxed in another, but these are generally very limited and subject to restrictions.

Some countries ... such as the US ... require their citizens to report worldwide income and account for taxes on that income regardless of where they are tax resident. It's one of the reasons why tax shelters such as Monaco are not particularly interesting for US citizens.

While there is a degree of similarity between the approaches in European countries, the US is quite different in many respects ... some advantageous and some disadvantageous. As mentioned above, US citizens in principle have to pay federal taxes equivalent to what they would pay in the US regardless of where they are actually resident, but there are many more deductions and opportunities for efficient tax planning. For non-US citizens, the US has a tax residency requirement once you go over an average of 120 days of presence per year, (measured over a three year period) but this can sometimes be waived if you can demonstrate to their satisfaction that you are not working or running a business in the US and are tax resident somewhere else. Swings and roundabouts ...

As mentioned at the start, every circumstance is unique so apologies in advance if any of the above is incorrect or does not apply.

That's a very good summary But this is a can of worms and a massive thread drift

 

[jfm]

Nothing to do with burdensome...nothing to do with Brexit...its to do with the law/ requirements of the country...please name a country where it's legal to go and spend more than 90 days in 180 without any obligation or legal requirement...not just UK people ...please give an example.

You want examples?

The UK. Pre brexit, a French person (say) could come to UK without needing to register with any UK authority by reason of having stayed 91 days.

Every EU country, where the person staying for 91 days is working as an employee in the country they are visiting, there is no requirement to register by virtue of staying 91 days (nor may there be, because EU law prohibits it) .

 

[jfm]

So ideally you don’t wanna pop up on some EU s states tax radar .
If you read the link I posted in post #103 ( Italian make your presences known ) even after 90 days they expect or assume or drop you into residency status .Sure you might want to reg a car etc , but also it’s a slippy slope downhill into there tax regime.
Of which is crippling with there wealth tax(s)on WW assets .Same in France a wealth tax on French assets , maybe WW I haven’t looked for a while .Some one will correct me wether it’s WW or just Fr ? .

But really you don’t wanna imho want to be snared in either of those two eu states , end up a tax resident .

Thats why it’s doubly important to be aware of over stays and stay clear of any roving spotlights .The 90 day thing .

In certain cantons in CH you can get a fiscal deal .lump sum deal .

In Italy you could get a flat tax of iirc 20% for a period of 17 yrs if you relocate to certain regions .You need to do your own due diligence on both of these check the numbers and regions .The regions are imho not the better ones as they are trying to attract big spenders to boost the economy in said regions .


So no ones commented on my post #94 .
Let me be hopefully clearer .
Austrian PP holder retired with a 20 M flat over the Austrian / Italian border . Buys a €25 M Venetian palazzo .
Every 89 th day he drives back to his Austrian 20 m flat ,checks on the mail etc .His mother by chance lives there too .
So he spends 4/5 days a year in Austria the rest in his palazzo ,with a nice Riva at the bottom of his tiny garden on the grand cannal .

What do you think the Italian officials will do about his residency status tax position?
My point is they will do him come at him and use the default 90 in 180 as if he is a 3 P .


The majority of you on here inc JFM will say “ May “ need to pop up at officialdom and some time even though the link I posted suggest he should otherwise they assume the 90 s done .
PeteM “ arh the rules say over 90 and he’s never actually exceed 90 ever .So it’s ok for him to carry on living lavishly in Venice and paying no tax .( excluding local holiday property stuff ) .

You're writing more garbage that is off the point. Sure if someone spends too long in another country they might become liable to tax there, and the trigger point can be less than 90 days in some circumstances, but that is a completely separate topic. The pushback against you Porto is simply in relation to your assertion that the 90 days limit applicable to UK folks after brexit isn't much of a change from the rules that existed pre brexit.