AH, here we are, nearly 5/12 of the year is over; the weather is still tolerable in China's Pearl River Delta for me but it'll soon change as the heat and humidity becomes, well…..unbearable. And yet one learns to put up with it as I have here in Asia for the past quarter of a century. Yes indeed, I've been here that long and while California used to be home, I am a stranger back on the shores where the sun sets over the Pacific instead of rises as it has for me for the past quarter of a century. Whether it be Hong Kong, Guangzhou, Bangkok (where it is always hot) or Tokyo (where when it is nice, it is very, very nice but otherwise it is either too hot, too cold or too wet….but at least it's got live baseball!), I can live within the cultures of choice and travel convenience to work at the ever befuddling U.S. tax system.

I obviously love being a tax cynic. Where I can be funny, I try to be, too. I'd love to be cynical and funny about the renegotiated India Mauritius tax treaty but then this column is for international matters not India's domestic tax matters…..but grandfather clausing all those Mauritius offshores prior to April 2017? Come on, now……why haven't I seen anything cynical written about this?

O.K. When I chose potpourri as a tax topic for this month, I meant it - a little bit from many of the jurisdictions I follow.

Hong Kong's first.

I did something I've never done in all these years I've been resident in Hong Kong: I filled out all the tax forms required before they were due: I closed my business books the last week of March (adhering to the British ‘instilled' 31 March end of fiscal year) and was able to prepare and file the Salaries Tax return and the Corporation tax return by the middle of April. Last week, mid-May, I also filed our individual income tax returns. Truly, these are simple forms to fill out and yet I have American clients who won't even look at the forms - as they truly are from a culture where if you get a letter from the government - any government - you turn it over to a professional to handle it for you. Hey, who am I to complain if I am being paid to do something so simple?

Anyway, a quarter of page two of this morning's South China Morning Post was devoted to Electronic Filing in Hong Kong. The government advertises their system as safe and easy. While nothing is safe, anywhere, anymore, I went online - www.gov.hk/etax - and yes, as a permanent resident of Hong Kong, I easily signed up for my taxpayer identification number (yet another item to add to the list of things I must remember - we are succumbing to overload memory loss because of the necessity of keeping track of all those user names and passwords. But I did write it down, this time……and hopefully, at some point in the future, when I need that number, I'll even remember where I wrote it down.

Regardless, either a Residency card or a Permanent Residency card entitles you to a number that is worthwhile: hey there, those of you who are reading this and are not bothering with your HK taxes yourself - try it - it is simple…..you can use your number to file for extension of time if you need it, make estimated payments, receive all your notifications from IRD through email. U.S. e-Filing is an entirely different matter. No matter what the IRS says, I do not recommend the frustrations you are going to encounter, e-Filing U.S. stuff - especially if you are in China and have to contend with the Great Firewall of China. But with decent internet, if you have Hong Kong tax matters to attend to, then try their e-Filing system - it works!

While the source is Hong Kong (the South China Morning Post, 24 May issue), the subject is the PRC. Within China Briefs, Premier Li Keqiang stated in a microblog that nationwide implementation of the VAT should ensure that the tax burdens would be reduced across all sectors. Now I am sorry, Premier Li but this just isn't the case - some sectors are paying more as a result of the termination of their 6 percent business tax and imposition of either 11 or 17 percent VAT. For instance, what about those in China who happen to belong to my profession - we generate tax returns and financial statements. True, we now pay that output VAT but what can we possibly offset against it when we do not have any input VAT? I have nothing against the national VAT in China - it does make sense but for those businesses that have no input VAT, then hearing Premier Li say we'll all have less taxes to pay does tend to hurt. Perhaps that is why Li said ‘should' instead of ‘would'?

And then there's the 2 May article in the FT which had nothing to do with taxation in China and yet has everything to do with municipal taxation in the future. Lucy Hornby, in Beijing, reported “China lease expireees prompt property rights angst.”

The state owns all the property. Fixed term land use rights were sold, not property: That Guangzhou, PRC apartment we live in ain't forever: the developer purchased a 70 year ‘right' which we have along with our apartment. If that property right were purchased from the Guangzhou municipality in 1990, then we currently have 46 years left for our apartment. No one that I know pays any attention to the years left - there is a waiting list for our unit because of schools. But what happens as we approach 2060? And how are you going to implement a property tax system in the future without taking into consideration the time left of land use rights ownership. I've mentioned before that there will be some foot dragging insofar as the first phase of developing a base for property taxation - the national land registry. Let's face it - there is likely to be widespread violation of multiple property ‘ownership' throughout the country. Officials, both big time and the petty bureaucratic types are likely all involved to one extent or another. That's why we've not heard much about progress towards the development of a registry that keeps track of all the land in China. O.K. So much for China in this potpourri of tax for the month. Onwards to Thailand!

Once upon a time, not so very long ago, I was not hesitant about being cynical about the government in Thailand. Now I hesitate.

General Prayut Chan-o-cha, as head of the National Council for Peace and Order, is junta head of the country. There's a referendum scheduled a couple of months from now regarding a proposed new constitution. Only one cannot comment upon it. The constitution aside, the National Council for Peace and Order has made some significant changes to taxation in Thailand and a 21 May Bangkok Post article summarized two years of ‘accomplishments', tax-wise, under the junta.

As proposed, the inheritance and gift tax laws were a good introduction to this form of taxation. Alas, the National Legislative Assembly watered down the rates to negate much of the goals of this tax……such is life. At least this tax has been incepted. The National Legislative Assembly also watered down the tax rate proposed for a land and buildings tax, a form of property tax to expand the tax base beyond the income tax as the primary form of revenue that the country raises. Perhaps the junta should have known: the last time anything significant was done to change the land and buildings tax in Thailand was 1932 - all subsequent attempts at change have one thing in common: they've failed!

But nothing was watered down regarding a corporate tax rate reduction - this is significant. Likewise, while the bands within which personal income tax payers fell went in their favor although not as much in their favor as they had hoped. All in all, tax changes by the junta have been one of their notable accomplishments. They need to accomplish more, though, in many areas.