Inexplicable red tape bores taxpayers; cut it out

After the 2011 flood disaster, the government allowed owners of flood-damaged houses to deduct taxable income for rehabilitation expenses. One of my friends did so, stating expenses of nearly Bt30,000, but her tax refund was delayed because tax officers had no idea of the maximum allowable deduction. Later, they got their act together: this year, no question was asked and she received a refund a month after filing.

Another friend of mine had a bigger headache last year, concerning the filling in of the form. Aside from a permanent job, she earned money from several other freelance jobs. Before 2011, she combined all sources of income as taxable income without stating any expenses involved with the outside jobs. That was how she had filed for years. In 2011, an officer at a Bangkok tax office told her that proceeds from other jobs should be filed in another category that allowed her to deduct the income with some expenses. According to the calculation, she was entitled to a big refund.

Four months later, she was asked to show up at another tax office, where a senior officer told her that the form was incorrectly filed. The pre-2011 method was correct and he filed in a new form for her. But with the changes, resulting in a no expenses deduction, there was an extra tax to be paid. What was worse, she had to pay 7.5 per cent interest per month for the extra tax, which should have been paid in March. Regardless of her insistence that it was not her responsibility, as the original form was completed by the first tax officer, she had to pay the fine.

It was a small sum, but it caused resentment towards the Revenue Department. Two tax officers at two tax offices should have the same knowledge, as tax issues involve all income earners. Through the computerised system, we can file tax forms anywhere, including via the Internet. And if the tax bureacrats had worked faster, the fine would have been smaller. I know that taxpayers’ benefits are not what they care about. And I sympathise with the country’s 6 million-odd taxpayers.

Government bodies need to work harder in preparing their workforces for the future. I was, however, impressed with the Land Transport Department’s success in outsourcing its vehicle check-up services to private companies. And it turns out that these private companies apply the same standard set of rules, causing no confusion to vehicle owners.

Some state agencies have shown improvement in their public services. In my column in December, I complained about the service at the Metropolitan Waterworks Authority’s (MWA) Min Buri branch, when water supply to my house was unexpectedly cut and I had to visit the branch and pay Bt600 to get reconnected (http://goo.gl/W09oT). I was surprised to get a phone call from an MWA customer relations officer on the same day as the column was published. She asked for details and promised to look into the problem. In a second phone call, half an hour later, she had the answer. She said the MWA’s computer log showed that my bank, which was responsible for the automatic debit, sent an electronic message saying the account was no longer applicable.

It annoyed me a bit that she could not produce any evidence of the bank’s message. Without this, I could not force my bank to take responsibility for the mess and the Bt600 reconnection fee. The officer expressed her understanding, saying that the same thing had happened to a client of another bank, but that bank had eventually taken responsibility. Unable to do anything about the fee, she instead promised to work with my bank to resume the automatic debit as soon as possible. I had no time to chase for compensation but the matter was put to rest because of her phone calls.

When we pay something, we expect something in return, and no fuss. With efficient work processes and staff, government and state agencies could make our lives a lot easier.

Imagine a day when the government allows us to deduct taxable income for the purchase of environmentally friendly household items – to support its aim of cutting carbon emissions. Could the Revenue Department make a better effort to keep up with the long list of questions from taxpayers? 

A big doubt is how this department, and others, will cope with the greater complexities brought about when the Asean Economic Community takes effect in 2015. With the freer flow of labour, I could have a permanent job in Bangkok but with some other workk from a Jakarta-based company. Can all tax officers nationwide explain clearly how I will be taxed?