The other thing is that only the tax office argues foreigners can’t have domicile in Taiwan (for tax purposes) because only HHR can prove that. Other government institutions have procedures which require! the foreigner to be domiciled without being in Taiwan for 183 days that year. They use the entry exit documentation to determine whether you are domiciled in Taiwan or not. They even acknowledge such discrepancy with the tax office, but it Taiwan every government entity can interpret the law as they wish. One need to sue them in court for wrong interpretation of the law.
6 Likes
The non-discrimination clauses of the treaties that have them tend to be broader than that. Here’s the first part of the one for the UK (emphasis added):
Citizens or nationals of a territory shall not be subjected in the other territory to any taxation or any requirement connected therewith, which is other or more burdensome than the taxation and connected requirements to which citizens or nationals of that other territory in the same circumstances, in particular with respect to residence, are or may be subjected.
I don’t think you can do this, according to the standard legal definition, Taiwan’s definition (Civil Code Articles 20–24), and the tax office’s interpretation that foreigners can’t be domiciled here anyway.
3 Likes
But you could argue that is isn’t more burdensome for foreigners as it is the same tax rate by the end of the year. Also, it could be argued that the differences lead to more burdensome treatment of citzens over foreigners due to the fewer days required to meet tax residency for for citizens.
Yes, you can only technically have one domicle if matters reach a court under international private law. However, this only occurs when when there is a dispute. But in the absence of a dispute it is possible to meet two countries rules on domicile independently which creates a conflict of laws, if no dispute exists then this could be advantageous in some areas (immigration/citizenship laws) apart from tax residency hence tax treaties.
Read the whole text please. I already bolded some parts for you. It doesn’t necessarily need to be more burdensome, it can also be “other”, and it also refers to the connected requirements, particularly those for residency, not just the tax rate itself.
Again, it’s pretty clear that a person can only have one domicile, irrespective of whether there’s a dispute. What you’re talking about here is someone having an ambiguous (but still single) domicile, and in that situation there are processes for trying to agree on where it is and where the person should be taxed.
Yes. And as someone who worked in the tax profession in Australia there are some key things to point out.
If she were to rent her own apartment in Japan rather than living with a family, she wouldn’t have her domicile considered to be Australia.
But instead she lives with a “host family.”
As part of this I presume she also has all of her belongings in Australia too. - this only applies to a very small proportion of people.
Overall unless you’re someone who is only here for one year AND live with a host family you would not be considered a tax resident of Australia.
Oh and one more thing… sell your car so you don’t have vehicle registration there too.
Yeah, so Taiwan is definitely not the only country whose laws are sometimes a bit ambiguous and first need to be clarified by a judge.
Only that in Taiwan, the tax officials argue that foreigners cannot have a domicile or “permanent place of abode” at all because they cannot have household registration.
I would hope that in that case, the other country (be it Australia or another one), would still recognize a foreigner having a domicile in Taiwan - but I wouldn’t count on the Taiwanese authorities to support that in any way unfortunately…
To prove residency in Taiwan to another country one can go to NIA and get a document
外國人居留證明書
CERTIFICATE OF RESIDENCE IN ROC
3 Likes
This one might be more suitable, issued by the tax office:
The first 183 days of each year they will not issue that document for the current year though as you found out.
its the TW govt. Its there but it is not…its not there but it is
I’m more thinking about a situation in which two countries “claim” you as a tax resident and a double-taxation agreement comes into play.
In this case (from what I understand), the two countries are supposed to start a process of mutual understanding to determine which country has the right of taxation by following the criteria and checking the tie-breakers (e.g. domicile, days of residence, …).
I am not sure if Taiwan would just argue “Oh, they don’t have a domicile here [because they’re a foreigner]” and then the result of the process would be that the other country has the right for taxation if they actually claim a domicile exists…
Of course, this wouldn’t apply to cases where someone cuts all ties with their home country - but people who live in both countries (but their real center of life would be in Taiwan) could suddenly find themselves in a position having to pay their taxes to the other country because Taiwan “voluntarily” gives away their right of taxation based on domicile and the other country will gladly fill this position…
2 Likes
Yes, true, but that’s still the one that relates to tax residency. Using the one from immigration to show another country you’re resident here would rely on the other country not being aware that Taiwan has multiple definitions of residency for foreigners, where we can be non-resident residents (and are non-resident residents for the first half of each year).
1 Like