JimGant

I'll be trying this "pudding" in about 6 weeks. I will ask at the Chonburi office if it is possible before I plan my dependents visa run trip to Penang.

Good show. If they turn you down, ask if it might be done in Bangkok.

Where is it written that it doesn't go into effect until 2013?

See HERE, Page 11

As far as the Thai bank info, don't they need our SS numbers to comply with the law?

Yeah -- or your passport number, which I think I gave them when I opened my account.

it still seems over the top to involve foreign banks in internal US tax matters.

Yeah, Switzerland feels your pain. However, most tax treaties involving the US incorporated provisions for sharing information to help identify tax cheats.

I am offended that this is being trivialized...........

.......while others of us are amazed at the "sky is falling" mentality.

Unless you're a tax cheat -- with a $50k account -- please chill out.

I am going to wire 40k USD into my Thai account in a few days and I will report if there is any change from before (i.e. no questions on amounts below 50k and asking me what I was using it for on amounts over that).

This new law doesn't go into effect until January 2013.

If the 30 percent is withheld, do you think that will be recorded as an IRS tax payment that you could receive back as a refund when you file your taxes assuming you don't owe it?

Sure. That's why they explicitly call it "withholding." It's just as they do for non resident aliens earning dividends in the States -- withhold 30%. Then, if this is wrong due to tax treaty (as it would be with Thailand, where the treaty says, I believe, 10%), you file your tax form to recoup the overwithholding amount. Yes, you're inconvenienced -- and not paid interest for their use of the money. But you do get it back -- assuming you're not a tax cheat.

The beauty of this is that tax cheats won't be filing. But they're now new members of the 30% tax bracket....up from zero.

And the Thai-US tax treaty does provide for sharing information with the IRS. So, don't look for Thailand digging in like Switzerland, with US-owned accounts no longer welcomed.

And, if Thailand is sharing the information with the IRS -- and you're sharing the required information with your Thai bank -- there shouldn't be any 30% withholding. Only if the IRS now sees suspicious activity, and/or now notes your name coincides with a stack of 1099s with no matching tax return, will you become interesting enough to require a 30% pledge against your next tax filing.

You are comparing two different situations, and immigration treats the requirements for those different situations differently.

I guess you've seen an example of this, and if that was at Bangkok Immigration, then you would appear to be correct. If it was up-country somewhere, I would say there's still a chance you can do this in Bangkok (based on what we know about conversions related to marriage extensions).

Why? Because the 'sameness' of all the situations, namely: The applicant meets all the requirements for a one-year extension of stay -- except for not having a Non Imm visa. And its just because of these situations that the TM86 and TM87 avenues for in-country Non Imm visas came along. And they don't mention anything about meeting financial requirements.

Proof is in the pudding, however. I just haven't seen any pudding here.

Any real-life examples of dependents not being able to convert to a Non Imm visa?

The dependent has to get a non-immigrant visa at a consulate outside of Thailand. They are not converting to a non-immigrant visa but applying for one.

Why? Nothing written says this.....

Ok, thaiphoon provided the following quote from Thai law:

It is written into Police Order 777/2551:

2.20 In the case of a family member of an alien who has been permitted temporary stay under clauses 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6,2.7, 2.10, 2.12, 2.13,2.4, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, 2.21, 2.22,2.26,6.29 of this Order (applicable only to parents, spouse, child, adopted child or child ofhis/her spouse):

Permission will be granted for a period of not more than 1 year at a time.

(1) The alien has obtained a temporary visa (NON-IM);

But here's a quote from paragraph 2.22 of the same police order, this paragraph related to the requirements for a retirement extension:

(1) The alien has obtained a temporary visa (NON-IM);

(2) The applicant is 50 years of age or over;

(3) Proof of income of not less than Baht 65,000 per month; or......

And you'll also see the identical "obtained a temporary visa (NON-IM)" for paragraphs related to marriage extensions, skilled workers, studying religion, etc.

My point is: we know, at least for married-to-a-Thai and retirement extensions, that you can receive the necessary Non Imm visa (or at least its equivalent) at Immigration offices within Thailand -- if you meet the criteria for the subsequent extension for married-to-a-Thai or retirement. Why, then, can you NOT get the same treatment if you meet the criteria as a dependent of an alien on extended stay? There's nothing in the law that precludes it....

But it wouldn't surprise me that some, if not all, Immigration offices won't do conversions for dependent extensions. After all, married-to-a-Thai conversions are only done in Bangkok, while retirement conversions are apparently country-wide.

That's why I was looking for specific examples. Maybe just maybe, you might be able to convert the wife's tourist visa, saving a trip out of the country. And maybe, if done at all, it is only in Bangkok....

Barring conclusive evidence it can't be done anywhere, I would think it would be worth a try.

Come on, get a grip. This is all about adding "muscle" to get back-taxes from tax cheats. If you don't have over $50k in Thai accounts, you're not even on the radar, let alone a "person of interest."

And to become the latter, you'll have to be not only over that $50k threshold, but also be real non-cooperative when asked for personal information. At that point, if I were your Thai bank cooperating with the IRS, I'd shut you down -- long before any question of 30% withholding becomes a possibility.

And will it be too costly for Thai banks to cooperate with the IRS? Not if the threshold is $50k, which will weed out most of us bums from consideration. And then, since it won't be too costly, I think Thai banks will want to stay in the US's good graces, and thus go along with all of this.

Obviously the IRS is taking a chapter from Thailand -- and trying to identify the "unusually rich" folks. If your 1040 (or lack thereof) shows you as a low earner -- but your Thai bank reports a fat bank account, that should raise a flag. And, of course, the first thing the IRS will look for is whether you've paid taxes on the now-reported earnings from your fat bank account. Next, they'll see if you've filed your TD F90-22-1, reporting that you had over $10k in Thailand (nice, stiff income source for Uncle Sugar with the fines for not filing this form). And, finally, when this is implemented ((12/31/2012), you'll have to report foreign accounts over $50k on your Form 1040 (but you'll still have to file the TD F90, as this is for a separate branch of the Treasury from the IRS). Go figure.......

So, unless you're a tax cheat -- and a pretty blatant one at that -- don't worry about any 30% withholding. (Which just happens to be the only IRS flat tax, normally used for withholding on FDAP income of nonresident aliens.) No, Uncle is after much bigger fish than us. And when he finds some obvious slimy fellas, that 30% withholding tool is actually kind of slick.

But if you haven't filed your TD F90 yet (or ever), looks like a good time to see the light. Otherwise, relax (and SWIFT as much as you like -- only the newly identified tax cheats will have SWIFT transfers affected).

(1) The alien has obtained a temporary visa (NON-IM);

Hmmm. That's the exact wording in Police Order 777/2551 for virtually every situation where someone wants to obtain a one-year extension of stay (for marriage, retirement, work, education, etc.). But, with the relatively recent TM86 and TM87 routes for obtaining Non Imm visas in-country, I see nothing that differentiates a dependent needing a Non Imm from any of these others........ And, on face value, there shouldn't be any difference -- as all these one-year extensions are similar, particularly in that they all need the Non Imm "baseline" from which to issue the one-year extensions. Why one situation would require leaving the country to obtain a Non Imm -- and the others would not (via conversion in-country) -- makes no sense.

However, as we all know, making sense with immigration dictates isn't necessarily the rule.

Any real-life examples of dependents not being able to convert to a Non Imm visa?

Note your spouse must start the process for her own extension of stay from Non-O visa; conversion from tourist visa/visa exempt entry is not an option for a dependant's extension of stay.

What a bummer. If coming from the US, it's becoming impossible (based on some negative reports, and no positive reports) to get a Non Imm O just for meeting age and pension retirement requirements. So, a farang couple coming to Thailand to retire would need to convert to a Non Imm in Thailand; but if the dependent cannot do so, a trip abroad for a Non Imm O becomes a clumsy necessity.

Other countries *do* have less stringent provisions for issuing Non Imm O visas than the US.....

Thaiphoon, is the dependent non-conversion something that's been reported -- or is there something in the written law that states this? Just wondering is this might be Immigration Office specific.....

Remember that ignorance is not a defence under the law.

Does anyone reading all this actually carry his passport while in Thailand, IAW Thai law? (Other than Eureka, of course.)

If you meet the conditions for retirement extension of stay (money in bank 2 months or 65k income letter) Immigration may do both in one step. If you do not have the 2 months the extra time of the new 90 day stay allows that to happen.

This is where I question Bangkok's lack of accommodation.

The examples I saw were for folks going the "income" route. Thus, no need to say 'come back' after your money has aged 2 months (a la money in the bank, vice income, route). Nevertheless, they had these folks come back 2 months later. Maybe just falling back into old habits of 'no extension until last 30 days of your 90-day permission period.'

Would be helpful if others could report their results of 'conversions to Non Imm visas' at their particular Immigration office.

One thing seems for sure -- conversions for extensions based on marriage have to be accomplished in Bangkok. Not so, however, for conversions related to retirement extensions.

I'm very clear on what occurred in my case, and it did NOT involve any 90 day interim visa prior to the start of my retirement extension.

Jfc, understood. You already had a Non Imm visa from which to implement your retirement extension from ("O" or "B" suffix irrelevant). Thus, no need to for an in-country conversion to a Non Imm visa (your so-called "90-day interim visa"), obtained by either converting from a 30-day visa exempt entry (form TM87) or converting from a Tourist Visa (form TM86).

I can't profess this same one-step process would work for someone starting with a tourist visa. Keep in mind, I was going in with what already was a non-immigrant visa

Again, understood. When going to Immigration for an initial retirement extension, after having entered Thailand on a Non Imm visa, that should always be a simple one-step process (for retirement extensions, anyway; marriage extensions get more complicated). Only when entering on a 30-day stamp, or tourist visa, would the two-step process come into play, since the first step involves getting an in-country Non Imm visa. But, as said, some immigration offices will do the conversion -- and extension -- same day. Only Bangkok comes to mind as requiring a two-step route.

When they issued my retirement extension, they dated it as one year from the end of the 90 day entry stamp I had received at the airport. So even though I did my paperwork at Immigration in early Sept 09, the one-year extension stamp was marked one year from middle Sept. 09 to mid Sept. 2010.

Right. As I said, your retirement extension started from "the end of the 90 day entry stamp" -- not from the "date of issue." Thus, you now have to deal with your next retirement renewal 15 months down the road -- which may or may not coincide with your travel plans in and out of Thailand.

I think we're saying the same thing. It just that terminology on this subject has gotten so convoluted.

"Dates are a little funky (a specific day of the month is normally shown), but this appears to be a multi entry Non Imm O-A. A single entry visa would have expired in the June-July 2009 timeframe."

A single entry would be good for 1 year, not 90 days.

Wrong! A single entry Non Imm O-A visa is VALID for only 3-months (multiple-entry is VALID for one-year). VALID meaning: It can't be used after the "use by" date. (DUH) Which, again, is 3-months from issue date for a single entry Non Imm O-A visa.

Yes, both a single entry and a multiple entry Non Imm O-A will get you a "one year permission to stay" stamp -- as long as entry is made before the visa expires.

Again, if OP had a single entry visa, it would have a "use by" date sometime in June-July.

I think the OP established he has a multiple entry visa and has the answer he needs.

He established that *after* my post, so I wasn't piling on -- if that was your drift

I thought I had read here about being able to go straight from a tourist visa to a retirement extension just thru one visit to the local immigration office -- not the two-step process you describe.

You did. But not all allow this. Bangkok apparently still does not allow "one-day shopping," as Parvis (above) and several others have reported. And, to add agony to having to come back in the last 30 days of your new 90-day permission period, several have reported that you have to obtain a new "income statement," as the one you used initially is kept by Immigration -- thus requiring a new income statement 60 days or so later.... (Parvis?)

Now, others have reported "one-day shopping" at Jomtien, Phuket, and Chonburi. And, CMBob also got same-day treatment at his Immigration office over a year ago. He doesn't say what office, but assuming "CM" in his name means something, I guess we can assume Chiang Mai (?).

The extension of stay based on retirement is good for one calendar year from the date of issue,

Actually, not from the date of issue, but from the expiration date of the 90-day permission period being used as your starting point for your initial one-year retirement extension. So, whether you enter on a Non Imm visa, thus getting a 90-day stamp at the airport -- or converting to a Non Imm O at Immigration -- which also gets you a 90-day stamp -- your one-year extension period begins at the expiration of the 90-day stamp.

This can make planning for subsequent retirement renewals problematic -- as this will be 15 months down the road, possibly a month of the year when you'd planned to be away. A few years back, your initial one-year extension began on the date you last entered Thailand on a Non Imm visa. (In the days before TM86/87 in-country conversions.)

So, if the OP plans to convert a Tourist Visa in Bangkok, it might pay to call-up the honorary consulates to see if any will issue a Non Imm O based on being retirement eligible. As mentioned, Houston won't. And I asked the same question to Portland a few weeks back. They never responded (which means what?).

And if contemplating a Non Imm O-A visa, forget LA -- they'll only issue a single-entry variety, which severely cuts the utility. The others (NY, DC, and Chicago) that will issue O-As still, I believe, issue multiple entry varieties.

But, a Tourist Visa, with conversion in Thailand, looks to be the way to go in most scenarios.

As said a Non Imm O Visa would be easier

You can't get a Non Imm O visa in the States just for being "retirement eligible" in Thailand (i.e., being over 50, with the required amount of finances). I asked that question to Houston a few weeks back (after the O-A visa evaporated) and got a resounding "no."

Definitely the MFA consulates (run by Thais) won't do it. Possibly there's a maverick honorary consulate out there. But, that's probably doubtful after this last "tightening up" exercise over the honorary consulates.

Yes, couldn't buy land if married to a farang when we got married in 1980. Hence, she kept her maiden name, and was a "miss" on all subsequent documentation (passport, ID card, etc). And she still is a "miss" on these (maybe the next Thai passport renewal will allow a "Ms" designator -- or no designator at all, like her US passport).

Never saw any need to register the marriage in Thailand, as there has never been any need to present ourselves as married to Thai authorities. As long as the US Air Force and Social Security administration know we're married (for medical, BX, and survivor benefits), we're good-to-go.

I guess holding herself out as a "miss" could be construed as fraudulent. But, since this has caused no ill-gotten gain, doubt it would ever be an issue.

And, should married ever become advantageous in Thailand (legally speaking, of course ), our US marriage certificate, duly dated to 1980, should establish sufficient bona fides.

Obviously she has a will -- to hand over her estate to me -- as far as that goes in Thailand.

the process of moving and exchanging foreign currency these days is not as clear cut and straightforward as simply moving funds from point A to point B, those differences are not trivialities.

Good point. The OP has abandoned -- or has thrown his hands up -- so let's open this up.

CM, you say you use HK as a conduit of sorts to convert Sterling to Baht. And this is feeless, at least in HK. So, in HK you convert your Sterling to HKDs -- then, HKDs to Baht? Is this latter part in HK,or in Thailand? And where in Thailand does the money end up -- and what, if any, fees apply?

I guess, everything else being equal, you'd come out ahead if you could avoid fees. But, I just can't imagine you're getting a better GBP/THB exchange rate by using the HKD as an intermediary.... Are the arbitrageurs asleep?

Anyway, just curious. Oh if you could give us some numbers with these transactions, it might help clarify.

And, for what it's worth, your procedure coincides with the rest of us in advocating "don't buy baht in the motherland." Unfortunately, the "offshore/onshore" thingy gets convoluted when you add additional shorelines into the equation.

I am pretty sure you will find our services to be the lowest cost and most convenient,

Ian, who is "our?" Do you work for Bangkok Bank? If so, in what capacity?

Not to be nosy, but it might be helpful should I need a future 'go to' person for Bangkok Bank questions.

Thanx.

"I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that large numbers of folks who visit the financial forums on TV can't read..."

Yeah, me too. Take the following:

"...case in point is right now where the range of USD/THB TT rates from eight Thai banks (onshore) is 32.50 to 32.60 yet XE (offshore) shows 32.69 ..."

Well, here's what you see on the XE site:

"Are your currency rates "buy" or "sell" rates?

Answer: The rates in our free information services are neither "buy" nor "sell" rates. Instead, they are mid-market rates derived from the mid-point between the "buy" and "sell" rates from global currency markets. Our free information services always list the mid-market rate because it indicates the value of a currency that is not weighted towards buying or selling."

So, your "32.69" mid-market has no relevance, except that, by definition, it will *always* be higher than the "buy" rate for baht. And even if XE gave a 'buy' rate, it would be a generality. Exactly what rate you'd get would depend on which US bank you were buying baht from. Unfortunately, there are no nice charts that give USD/THB rates for US banks. The baht is just too thinly traded to warrant such. (Incidentally, and just as an example, BB for 4 March, the computed mid-point for US Notes is 32.63; but the "buy" rate is 32.29. Some difference.)

"Just out of curiosity, did you read posts number 17, 19 and 20?"

Yep. Per the previous paragraph, they have no relevance in making a case for offshore exchange of MAJOR currencies. Just out of curiosity, did you read post 12?

"I think the issue was/is onshore versus offshore, regardless of the point of origin."

No, Jingthing's correct. The OP was interested in USD/THB conversions. Interjecting Hong Kong and Singapore to widen the offshore discussion was strictly thread hijacking. Not surprisingly, the OP has not re-appeared.

"for the record: -not everybody uses a bank located in the Greatest Nation on Earth™."

Great point, Naam. The OP, however, does use such a bank.

"I give up, honestly I do!"

Promises, promises.

Do the wire from chase even though now its 40 bucks as there is no other way better, safer, or cheaper.

Much discussion on this subject. As you have a Bangkok Bank account, the cheapest way to send money is via the ACH system thru Bangkok Bank NY, not a "40 buck" SWIFT wire.

Read THIS

Per the above, it costs $5 to send between $100-$2000; $10 to send above $2000. The fee on the Thai side is exactly the same as a wire transfer, namely .25% (no more than 500 baht).

Quite a savings compared to 40 bucks for a wire transfer.

With Chase, who has an ACH middleman, you'll also have to pay $3 for them to do an ACH transfer (many banks, like USAA, do their own ACH transfers, thus no additional cost). Still, $13 (or $8) is way better than $40.

Chase ATM cards charge $3 per transaction, plus a 3% foreign transaction fee. (See HERE) Add the 150 baht Thai ATM owner fee, and you'll quickly see an ACH transfer is greatly superior (even a SWIFT transfer would normally beat the Chase ATM card). Only if you had an ATM card from a few select financial institutions (like Schwaab Brokerage), which add no fees -- and "eat" the Visa/MasterCard network foreign transaction fee -- could you beat an ACH transfer for the cheapest way to convert your dollars to baht.

An option I have seen discussed is to withdraw the money at the Thai bank at a teller window, showing your American credit card, without any fee and no amount limit involved. Don't know if this still works.

Possibly a "debit" card. But, cash advances with "credit" cards are always loaded with fees by your issuing bank, plus instant interest charges. And, Thai banks like SCB, even charge a usurious exchange rate for cash advances with credit cards.

it all depends what rate your [uSA] bank is offering

Which will always be worse than the rate you'll get in Thailand. The baht is thinly traded in the US -- the dollar is widely traded in Thailand. Thus, better (read: market) exchange rates in Thailand.

Unless you know the dollar will tank during the one-day SWIFT transfer time frame to Thailand, send dollars.

beacause exchange rates and ebanking and fees not among the best

Exchange rates shouldn't be a concern, unless you're buying baht over the counter, or depositing a check. And even here, the "buy/sell" rates are pretty similar among the large banks.

But most of us send money to Thailand, not carry it. And with electronic transfers, all Thai banks will give you the TT rate, which only fluctuates a few satang amongst the large banks. And most also charge a fee of between 200 and 500 baht per international electronic transaction.

So, actually, the cost of turning farang money into baht is influenced primarily by the fees your farang bank charges, the wire/electronic transfer fees, and the credit/debit/ATM card fees charged by the Visa and MC networks. Basing your decision for a Thai bank on exchange rates doesn't quite make sense, at least to me.....

For Internet Banking, Bangkok Bank has been fine with me. All my utility bills are direct debited; I can send money on-line to employees' accounts; and any charges are too small to factor. But, I suppose I'd be happy with any Thai bank's 'ebanking,' as they all do pretty much the same thing, as far as I can tell.

I obtained a retirement visa from the Thai Embassy in Washington DC in March 2009. The visa stated it was good to enter before April 2010.

I flew to Thailand in May 2009

Dates are a little funky (a specific day of the month is normally shown), but this appears to be a multi entry Non Imm O-A. A single entry visa would have expired in the June-July 2009 timeframe.

I don't know about Phnom Penh, but each consulate can -- and usually does -- differ in its requirements. For example, here's the (partial) requirement for a Tourist Visa, as posted on the Thai Embassy Washington website:

A copy of round-trip ticket or itinerary paid in full

- A copy of recent bank statement or evidence of adequate finance

A recent thread on this forum points out the excessive requirements for a Tourist Visa obtained in Dubai.

So, your problems may begin with just getting your Tourist Visa. Getting thru Swampy should not be of much concern.

recently things have gotten very tense. Are you even aware of that?

Yeah, hopefully that Dalai Lama fellow will go to Disney World next time -- and not the White House.

It's interesting that the interviewer of Soros, Fareed Zakarias, had an article on China/US relations in the Washington Post recently that seemed fairly balanced. Certainly, not alarmist. Here's the lead-in paragraph:

Despite the recent squall in U.S.-Chinese relations, both countries have powerful reasons to cooperate with one another. These have grown over the past two decades, a progression that both countries seem to recognize.

For the full article, see HERE

(You may need to subscribe to see.)