mfd101

44 minutes ago, glegolo said:

When you gives the empression that you are confirming somthing, that is a stunt

 

glegolo

Under Australian law, the person who signs a stat dec knowing it is false may be imprisoned for 4 years. The policeman, lawyer, public servant, school teacher and other honourable people who WITNESS your signature on the document bear NO responsibility for the substance of the document.

This is no different from the system that applies in 101 civilized countries all around the world.

3 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Won't make any difference, as it's becoming clearer that income letters will soon be history. Thailand no longer cares that you can prove, verify, and bond that your income is a million bucks. They want to verify that at least some of that money is coming to Thailand. And income letters don't verify that aspect of one's income.

Well, that's what we currently think or suppose. We don't actually know. All we can do at this stage is read the Thai tea leaves.

15 minutes ago, GarryP said:

 

AUD 849 x 2 = Baht 40,270, which is under the threshold. 

 

If you don't mind me expanding on that (so that noone can be in doubt): $A849 x 26 = $A22074p.a. = $A1839 per month. At currently around 23.5฿ to $A, that = 43228฿ per month. Which is way less than required by Thai Immigration.

I should be astonished if the Brit economy was EVER going to overtake Germany's, since about 1890.

53 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

No. That's something else.

Notarised documents in the French Embassy are only documents that you would have to sign in France in front of a notary or a judge, but that you sign at the Embassy because you are in Thailand. These are mainly (only?) for divorce, testament and real estate buy/sell.

This is an application of a law voted in 2017 and that concern all French embassies and consulate all over the world.

This has nothing to do with the "certification of income" letter for Thailand 

Yes, you're right. My quick glance a couple of days ago took that in plus reference to 'déclaration de revenus'. But that's their tax return, not their embassy letter for the Thais.

While there are various bits of information designed for tourists in Thailand, I can see nothing on the site about long stay/retirement etc in Thailand and no reference to Embassy letters in support of income declaration for Thai Immigration.

2 comments I hope are useful:

(1) For those puzzled by the signer being 'Pro Consul', it's simply old-fashioned [British!] bureaucratese for 'for and on behalf of' - ie the occupant of the post of Consul has delegated (either informally and temporarily, or more likely formally & permanently) certain functions to a more junior officer;

(2) Reading the Thai Immigration document as mentioned above produces a nice example of the ambiguities involved if you're interested (as I potentially am) in the monthly income path. First the alien who goes that path "Must have evidence of having income of no less than Baht 65000 per month". No mention of it appearing in a Thai bank account - that's mentioned only in regard to the bank seasoning path. BUT: Under 'Documents to be submitted' it has "3. Evidence of income such as a retirement pension, interest or dividends; AND/OR 4. Account deposited (saving/fixed account) certificate issued by a bank in Thailand and a copy of a bankbook".

So the issue revolves around the AND/OR and how your/my particular office chooses to interpret or enforce it. Obviously, if there is no further helpful advice to be had from Thai Immigration, then the SAFE avenue would be to do the AND not the OR! You would be within your rights to do the OR [ie no funds in Thai account] but that just might not wash with Comrade Somchai down the road.

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

If I recall correctly, race relations between white New Zealanders and Maoris are widely regarded as one of the more successful interactions between an indigenous population and its colonisers.

Well that's no doubt the Pakeha view of things. If you were a Maori you might have a different view.

Certainly the NZ of my youth in the 1950s & 1960s was VERY racist. But of course they were convinced they weren't. "We're very proud of OUR Maoris." I remember my father having a discussion with one of my mother's brothers about 'What would you do if your daughter came home with a Maori?'. I have a BIL there still who's an out-&-proud-&-loud racist ... I could tell many tales.

Of course, as others have commented, you can find such people in every country in the world. But don't let any Kiwi tell you how morally superior they are to the rest of the world ...

1 minute ago, soalbundy said:

They want something that looks as if it could be reasonable proof, more can't be expected anywhere of anything so asking for legal verification is pointless, why bother. They accept your passport as real. Reasonable proof as in the embassy saying we've seen his docs he has this income (as long as the embassy really is looking at the docs)

I agree, but it seems [still to be clarified] that the Thais don't. That is, what seems like reasonable verification to you & me is not actually proof & therefore not sufficient - so it seems - for the Thais.

4 hours ago, frodo77 said:

I have to provide documents to prove my income before my Canadian Embassy will issue the proof of income letter.

So how do the documents you provide 'PROVE' your income? If everyone could manage that magic proof, there wouldn't be a problem!  I assume you mean that the documents you provide SUPPORT YOUR claims about your income, but it's hard to see how they PROVE anything.

Which is the nub of the problem: the Thais say they want something which noone in Thailand can give them, short of a 1-month wait as assorted police forces and taxation agencies around the world leap into action with thousands of new employees whose sole job is to fix Thailand's immigration problems ... It could be of course that the Thais don't really want PROOF at all: it's just a mistranslation which the embassies could point out and it would all then just go away as a misunderstanding!

4 hours ago, logres212 said:

Just found this statement on the Australian Embassy website. Looks as though everything remains the same, for now anyway.

We understand that the British Embassy in Bangkok will no longer be providing British nationals with letters confirming their income from 1 January 2019.

The Australian Embassy does not issue income letters. Our notarial services include the witnessing of Australian statutory declarations for Australian citizens, or for use in Australia. This process remains unchanged.

.

Soon to be OBE, I should think.

When I did my stat dec at Fortress Australia a month ago, the only thing that was different from a year ago was that they kept my Federal superannuation [CSS] statement COPY this year. Didn't study it though before completing business with me.

1 hour ago, KiChakayan said:

I insert the link, for those who read French, 

It is right at the top in the grey boxes.

https://th.ambafrance.org/Attestations-certificats-declarations

Ha ha. Well, no nonsense with the French, parbleu! Just get on with it, mes amis.

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

If the majority in N. Ireland would prefer to join S. Ireland, surely that's good news?

 

I'm pretty sure the majority in the rest of the uk would be happy to see a united Ireland - as long as this is the preference of the majority in N. Ireland?

Yes, Britain a whole lot better off without Ulster, I should have thought. Not so sure the South would be better off though ...

Oh goodie, let's bring in lots of our homeland currencies to change, thereby driving up the Baht again ...

41 minutes ago, nausea said:

The figures are quite astonishing. - 14m views. I think someone has a problem. Reality hits. Hopefully, the powers that be will withdraw from the confrontation. I have serious doubts that the army of young conscripts will continuue to obey orders if push comes to shove.

Turning 'hits' or 'likes' into real action in the streets is a big leap, though not impossible.

When my b/f was still a conscript in 2012 or 2013, the soldiers were ordered to vote for Suthep & co. But the boys were mostly from Isaan and, surprisingly enough, they knew which side was up and voted for Yingluck ...

It begins (at least here in the village schools) with the inability of anyone in authority (eg primary/elementary school teachers) to cope with QUESTIONS. A question calls into question the authority figure's skills, leadership, clarity, intelligence ... How DARE you ask a question, you vile child! Get out of my class!

My b/f displays the same attitude on a daily basis. You talk too much . Cleate ploblem.

Rote learning has a lot to answer for. I remember an Indonesian PhD student in engineering at one of the Queensland universities. He commented in the media that the hardest thing for him in going to Australia for his doctorate was learning to think for himself. This had never been taught or encouraged before.

36 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

this poisonous US base in Okinawa...

... has helped to keep the peace in the whole region for over 70 years. No reason why it can't continue to do so, but it does require ALL parties to be sane, intelligent & well-informed. [The latter of course is what espionage is for - to keep the peace.]

And the one thing dictatorships can't cope with (even the Chinese!) is the multi-headed hydra of modern communications - internet, Twitter, Facebook and all the rest. Chop off one head and 5 more pop up ...

Usofan allies and friends in the western Pacific repositioning themselves for a more complex future. Even Canberra is scratching its head & wondering how to wriggle a bit more cleverly ...

Had my first visit ever this morning, from Kap Choeng Immig. They didn't actually come to our house but went to the Headwoman's house up the road & rang to ask us up there. Headwoman signed a paper with our details on, they checked my p/p, took a photo of me & my b/f and that was that. All very friendly - smiles & jokes, wais and handshakes at the end.

The fact that we have a local policeman BIL no doubt helps ...

18 minutes ago, Enoon said:

 

His speech will have been seen and approved by HM beforehand.

 

Some will say that it was delivered on her behalf.

 

Now you know where this is going.

 

 

 

Gosh, conspiracies everywhere! You can't even trust an HM these days!

Winner takes all, and gets to redefine the meanings of words [cf Usofa]