jerrymahoney

And then according to Jack: I left out one word... Should have stated "MOST Folk using agents don't have the 800k

Yes. This was posted a different topic from a Police Order. (You're welcome) Now what do you think would make the 'competent officer' be of the opinion that a 'legitimate reason' as mentioned above exists -- Is it that the retiree in question supports a wife, kids, extended family, and orphans at the local wat OR Is it that he paid a hefty bribe?

Yes -- same as with the 65K+ baht per month FTT deposit no minimum balance required for retirement. But in conversations in person and online I have had over the years, the biggest downside in not using the agent assisted / no 800k baht in the bank / sin nam jai, the 'gifts of good will' approach is that you don't get to tell everyone how smart you are.

So why is there the need for an agent?

What I know is that nothing will happen if the Thai RTP Immigration have to arrest themselves. The only way something might happen is if the Revenue Department sees all this as tax fraud

So 1000+% gratuities are just fine. It's been swell.

It's called a bribe and most of the money likely ends up in mule accounts. But I was waiting for you to go into plausible deniability mode

Yes 1900 baht and a nominal fee to the agent. So where does the other 10,000 or so baht go?

To the above. This is the ministerial regulation as in the Police Order: 5. In the case where an alien applicant does not meet the full qualifications stipulated by the criteria herein or in other cases not specified in this Order but a competent officer equivalent to or higher than inspector is of the opinion that the alien has legitimate reason for staying in the Kingdom of Thailand, the application shall be forwarded to the Commander of the Royal Thai Police or an authorized competent officer for further consideration of the alien's application. https://www.thaiembassy.cz/uploads/download/EwgNBPpX8T2vY5jxRdR.pdf _______________ So I will presume that, while the 'competent officer' has the 'discretion' to waive most of the nominal requirements, he/she cannot waive the fee schedule. This was a Act promulgated (1979) by the late King Bhumibol and as such specific requirements as enacted cannot be treated as such piffle.

You can get personal if you like -- but I don't see any way given the regs that anyone in a capacity of "discretion" as in Section 35 can LEGALLY charge more than 2000 baht for the privilege.

I will put it again for you as I did page 6 this topic: And as per Section 35 of the Immigration Act (1979) as you roughly reference above, if a 'competent official' chooses to waive the nominal extension requirements, he or she is allowed to do so to the tune of 2000 baht as stipulated in item 3 of the Immigration Act (1979) fee schedule.

They were your words. No my words were: And just who uses mule accounts. Someone who deals with large amounts of unreported cash money that they would have a hard time explaining the source of that money. Like someone who receives large amounts of cash from a "reputable agent"

According to The Cleveland Clinic: How can I prevent kidney failure? Though kidney failure and CKD aren’t reversible, you can take steps to help preserve your kidney function. Healthy habits and routines may slow down how quickly your kidneys lose their ability to function. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/17689-kidney-failure So I will guess the Cleveland Clinic and Mayo Clinic would be greatly interested in anyone who has documented evidence of reversal of kidney damage as described above this topic.

You have not done your research -- you have not read the Immigration Act (1979) even though I have posted a screen shot this topic. Here is your fact From Section 35: Each application of an alien for extension of temporary stay shall be made in the form and with payment of fees as prescribed in the Ministerial Regulations. This is the ministerial regulation as in the Police Order: 5. In the case where an alien applicant does not meet the full qualifications stipulated by the criteria herein or in other cases not specified in this Order but a competent officer equivalent to or higher than inspector is of the opinion that the alien has legitimate reason for staying in the Kingdom of Thailand ... AND THIS IS THE PAYMENT OF FEES (AT 3.):

Foreigners Face New Hurdles in Opening Thai Bank Accounts MikeandDow replied to webfact's topic in Thailand News Yes sadly the law is the law, and you need to research the Law it is up to the immigration officer to grant the visa or not (with or with out money) and that is the Law !! Monday at 09:36 AM

But I have not questioned that. There are 2 parts to Section 35 and your" discretion comment is only related to the first instance.

You keep saying to do your research and the law is the law but you never state what the law really is. You are paraphrasing Section 35 of the Immigration act and I have have posted a screenshot directly from that Act and you have no comment on that.

Your 2 interrogatives are not what I wrote.

Yes I noted that. But sometimes there are a few casualties along the way.

Maybe the one who also told you: The people on the take will find new ways to do it.

I was just relaying a conversation with a US Consular official.

I had a 30 second chat with the US Consular official at the last-go-round Embassy Outreach - Khon Kaen before the letters stopped. He said the letters were being stopped by the US Embassy for mostly 2 reasons: The Embassy realizes that many US citizens falsely claim their 65K baht monthly income and, It came as great surprise to Thai Immigration when they realized that the US Embassy was not, in fact, certifying that the US citizen's sworn statement was true by some evidentiary method.

Judge Chutkan declined to issue a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) as in the above FOX link. This is the final paragraph of that ruling: Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight. In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard.

It was so nice of him to let the older man have a seat: