Just Received Some Bad News For US Citizens. No More Income Affidavits.

[Thaidream]

1 minute ago, namatjira said:

ts all so easy to do.....so man up Forrest....put your money on the table....do you really think it’s fair that some people were able to reside here by this method ?

Of course it is fair- the Immigration law is clear there is an income method and as of this post there still is.  I have used it many times as well as money in the bank. Never lied on any document and the vast majority of people of all nationalities do not lie either.

[namatjira]

Going by the amount of responses on this topic it appears many have lied, and therein lies the problem........

 

[harpman88]

14 minutes ago, fforest1 said:

Chang Mai is a well know problem place for visas...I would avoid myself...

Ive been dealing with them,as Ive said,for 12 years now. Ive never had any problems whatsoever. Besides,that sheds no light at all on the matter at hand..ie.the income letter situation going forward.

 

You have a new notification

fforest1 quoted you in a topic: Just Received Some Bad News For US Citizens. No More Income Affidavits.

[Thaidream]

2 minutes ago, namatjira said:

Going by the amount of responses on this topic it appears many have lied, and therein lies the problem........

Been doing extensions for decades- I don't know one person who has lied and I know many people from many nationalities. For Americans it's a federal crime to lie on a sworn  statement and for everybody-  It's a crime to lie to the Thai police including an Immigration Officer.

[KiChakayan]

11 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Been doing extensions for decades- I don't know one person who has lied and I know many people from many nationalities. For Americans it's a federal crime to lie on a sworn  statement and for everybody-  It's a crime to lie to the Thai police including an Immigration Officer.

Ok then, but where is lies the problem. For most people who "didn't lie" is it such a problem to transfer 800,000 Bahts to a Thai bank account, and live off this account for the 8 months following their visa applications?

Maybe all this is just a case of old geezers (like me) who get grumpy when one tries to change their routine. Further, extension based on the 800,000 deposit will make their lives a lot easier.

[Thaidream]

1 minute ago, KiChakayan said:

k then, but where is lies the problem. For most people who "didn't lie" is it such a problem to transfer 800,000 Bahts to a Thai bank account, and live off this account for the 8 months following their visa applications?

Maybe all this is just a case of old geezers (like me) who get grumpy when one tries to change their routine. Further, extension based on the 800,000 deposit will make their lives a lot easier.

Some people have the 800K; some don't. Some like me have it but do not want to place it in a Thai bank for personal reasons. 

 

Some of us have  way more than 65,000 Baht per month and as long as there is a method of Thai Imm allowing income stream- many of us choose to do it that way.

 

It is also possible Thai Imm could  ask people who do have 800K locked up in a Thai bank to prove their income stream.  When one starts opening the door to changes at Thai Imm- they then start looking at everything.

[namatjira]

Well I hope they figure out a way to verify their income with Thai immigration.....for those that have families and have bought real estate.....and these are the people that are the most vulnerable...

there really is no need to fear the Thai banking system....

hope it all works out ..... have to wait and see how Thai immigration will approach it.......they are generally pretty decent and would also not wish to see families ripped apart......there will be loopholes for those affected....

[marcusarelus]

8 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Some people have the 800K; some don't. Some like me have it but do not want to place it in a Thai bank for personal reasons. 

 

Some of us have  way more than 65,000 Baht per month and as long as there is a method of Thai Imm allowing income stream- many of us choose to do it that way.

 

It is also possible Thai Imm could  ask people who do have 800K locked up in a Thai bank to prove their income stream.  When one starts opening the door to changes at Thai Imm- they then start looking at everything.

Most people call a minimum in a bank a deposit.  Locked up is what you get if you violate a law.  A stream implies movement a bank deposit is static.  800,000 in the bank is 800,000 in the bank regardless of when it got there.  Mine got there 20 years ago - it is not streaming it is sitting earning interest.  

[DogNo1]

As of January 1, 2019, Thai Immigration cannot reasonably require an affidavit of income from the US Embassy so I will not have one.  I will have proof of 65,000 baht equivalent deposited into my American checking account when I attempt to extend my stay at the end of March.  Under the present requirements, that should be acceptable.  

I think that the withdrawal of the embassy affidavit has caused consternation among people who cannot show proof of the required 65,000 per month in retirement income.  Unless immigration announces a change, proof of receiving that amount monthly should suffice.  If it doesn’t, I will return to Japan before my present extension expires and arrange to meet any new requirements but I can’t imagine Thailand kicking anyone out without giving them an opportunity to meet new requirements if there are any.

[Jingthing]

As yet, there is no indication that an immigration officer will not accept proof of retirement income into a foreign bank account.  The police order has never mentioned that an income affidavit from an embassy is required.  The assumption that the proof of retirement income accepted thus far will not be accepted without an income affidavit is not supported by fact.  Without the income affidavit, the types of income paid into the foreign bank account may now be more closely scrutinized to ensure that they are regularly paid into the foreign bank account from legitimate retirement sources such as Social Security, state retirement systems such as CALSTRS, retirement annuities, etc. but there has been no official change in the proof of income requirements.  

Keep hope alive. Show up now with no embassy letter and no dice partner.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Cruzn]

4 hours ago, elviajero said:

400K does not apply in this case.

 

If only one of them is over 50 they need 800K in the bank and the other needs none. The partner under 50 can ‘piggyback’ the extension of stay of the other.

 

If both over 50 they have the choice of;

1. both getting extensions in their own right, in which case they both need 800K in separate accounts;

 

2. OR either can get an extension of stay with 800K in the bank and the other can ‘piggyback’ that extension without any money in the bank.

With respect to #2 from above, not clear what you mean by "piggyback".

[marcusarelus]

2 minutes ago, DogNo1 said:

As of January 1, 2019, Thai Immigration cannot reasonably require an affidavit of income from the US Embassy so I will not have one.  I will have proof of 65,000 baht equivalent deposited into my American checking account when I attempt to extend my stay at the end of March.  Under the present requirements, that should be acceptable.  

I think that the withdrawal of the embassy affidavit has caused consternation among people who cannot show proof of the required 65,000 per month in retirement income.  Unless immigration announces a change, proof of receiving that amount monthly should suffice.  If it doesn’t, I will return to Japan before my present extension expires and arrange to meet any new requirements but I can’t imagine Thailand kicking anyone out without giving them an opportunity to meet new requirements if there are any.

No new requirements.  You need an embassy letter and can get it from most embassies just not the US and UK.  

[galt67]

41 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Been doing extensions for decades- I don't know one person who has lied and I know many people from many nationalities. For Americans it's a federal crime to lie on a sworn  statement and for everybody-  It's a crime to lie to the Thai police including an Immigration Officer.

2

While you "don't know one person" I do. And, based on MANY comments on these threads so do others.

 

My theory: At least 20% of affidavits are fraudulent.

[Pattaya46]

18 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

When one starts opening the door to changes at Thai Imm- they then start looking at everything.

At least 5 years that this door is closed, and I really hope that this embassy's decision will not open it (!) because IMHO that could only lead to stricter rules. 

[Thaidream]

1 minute ago, Pattaya46 said:

At least 5 years that this door is closed, and I really hope that this embassy's decision will not open it (!) because IMHO that could only lead to stricter rules. 

I agree completely- and the longer Thai Imm continues to keep its current police order as law- there will be ways for all current methods of extension. 

[elviajero]

5 minutes ago, Cruzn said:

4 hours ago, elviajero said:

400K does not apply in this case.

 

If only one of them is over 50 they need 800K in the bank and the other needs none. The partner under 50 can ‘piggyback’ the extension of stay of the other.

 

If both over 50 they have the choice of;

1. both getting extensions in their own right, in which case they both need 800K in separate accounts;

 

2. OR either can get an extension of stay with 800K in the bank and the other can ‘piggyback’ that extension without any money in the bank.

With respect to #2 from above, not clear what you mean by "piggyback".

For example.

 

Husband has 800K in the bank and is granted a 1 year extension of stay. Once the extension is issued his wife can apply for an extension as a family member (spouse). 

 

The wife’s extension will be issued on the basis that her husband has been granted permission to stay, and will be for the remaining time of the husbands permission to stay.

[JackThompson]

47 minutes ago, namatjira said:

do you really think it’s fair that some people were able to reside here by this method ?

Why would it not be fair?  Anyone with the the 65K Baht/mo income and over-50 could stay using this - so no one was unfairly treated. 

Was it unfair that some may have put 800K Baht in the bank, then lived on a measly 20K Baht /mo, which they receive from a pension? 

 

50 minutes ago, namatjira said:

Going by the amount of responses on this topic it appears many have lied, and therein lies the problem........

The only thing the number of responses shows, is that many had the required-income, were using the income-method, but may be unable to do so in the future. 

If/when TI presents a reasonable system to show ALL income types (not just Pensions / SS), and allows for these funds having been deposited to foreign-accounts, then you could draw a conclusion from objections to that system.

 

Somehow, I doubt that is the system we will see implemented.

[namatjira]

What was not fair is that by use of the affidavits issued some stayed with no 65 k a month and no 800 k deposited.

again, this is the reason why all this has come about

[JackThompson]

1 minute ago, namatjira said:

What was not fair is that by use of the affidavits issued some stayed with no 65 k a month and no 800 k deposited.

again, this is the reason why all this has come about

I am not aware of any investigation showing this - but, agree that anyone lying on the affidavit was cheating, just as anyone using an agent to fake the 800K is cheating.    The problem is the uncertainty of how to show foreign-income paid into foreign-accounts (the status-quo) in the future.

[elviajero]

6 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Please do not confuse/smear us with a handful of people willing to commit a fraud/perjury felony with embassy-staff. 

We are not the income-fakers - those people use agents, and are rewarded with "no hassle" extensions by immigration.  The screws are being put to the honest folks, as usual.

I doubt it’s just a “handful”!

 

A system that allows people to swear they earn x income and don’t need to provide any proof is wide open to fraud.

[JackThompson]

12 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I doubt it’s just a “handful”!

 

A system that allows people to swear they earn x income and don’t need to provide any proof is wide open to fraud.

That risks a felony-charge, for Americans.  Only a fool would do this for an extension.  A system that allows agents to openly advertise faking money, clearly setting up an incentive to deny honest-applicants, is the primary source of fraud.

[Thaidream]

34 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The problem is the uncertainty of how to show foreign-income paid into foreign-accounts (the status-quo) in the future.

I don't really see this as a problem if Thai Imm will simply sit down and realize that most people travel with Debit cards which access their bank accounts.  Almost all pensions are paid into an account by direct deposit. Other income is paid in by check or by deposits of some type.

 

Every form of income has some backup  letter from some source- Government-Private Company- Rental Agent- Stock/investment broker.

 

Every bank-wherever issues a bank statement- showing all deposits and source- easily matched to an accompanying letter from the source payer.  Most show a debit column and the location of the debit.

 

A citizen in Thailand gets access to their monies either by a bank transfer into a Thai bank or simply pulling out the needed funds via an ATM machine.  The proof is either -a Bank Account in Thailand or the Debit cards which match the  Bank Account info.

 

All of the above is  better proof than an Embassy Letter which doesn't really verify anything.  The letter was simply a convenient tool in which Thai imm deluded itself into thinking -a letter with an Embassy stamp was  100%  authoritative. Every now and then a few offices asked for  added docs. Apparently everyone was able to show the proof as  Thai Imm  has allowed the letters for Eons.  

 

Fast Forward to where we our now- a meeting held with all embassies in attendance- a discussion in which Thai Imm asks or comments on verification process; further  comments from embassies- well we really don't have 100% verification- UK and US pull the plug. Who knows what was really said- the chicken or the egg routine.

 

I read it this way- if Thai Imm and the Thai Government have and want an open door policy for foreigners to retire in Thailand and/or  have families  stay together- they will find a way to proceed easily by  simply going forward with all the ways one can prove income -wherever it is (foreign bank deposits/Thai Bank deposits; Thai streams of income with foreign owned business etc) They have never needed the  Embassy Letter but now  the Thai Imm  offices will need to  instruct their  IOs how to proceed - simple training with pictures. It's not brain surgery. In fact , if they accept  Letters from all the rest  of the foreign embassies- they only need to learn a bit of info about the US and UK systems.  Yes-  Thai Imm might have to work a little harder.

 

However- if Thailand wants to restrict Immigration and limit the number of people who retire  in Thailand and  control Thai-Foreign marriages- they will adopt policies and procedures which do just that. We all know what they could do-it's be discussed  many times.

 

I still believe- the Thai Government and Thai Imm want to have a foreign retirement program and want Thai -Foreign families to have a way to stay in Thailand  and that  policies will develop on this basis. If the reverse  were true- the bad publicity would affect the investment climate and the tourism industry. For me- the glass is still full until proven empty.

Edited November 1, 2018 by Thaidream

[Maestro]

14 hours ago, elviajero said:

It is an extension of stay for people that do not work (retired) and want to live in Thailand. Why would it mention anything about applicants that are working abroad?

 

Currently, immigration do not insist on knowing the type or source of income, but it is meant to be pension/investment (passive) income. If they were to start insisting on knowing the source I am certain they would not allow income from employment.

 

If it were meant for people not retired they could just call it an 'over 50's extension' or similar.

 

As I wrote before, some embassies will insist on proof of retirement before issuing a non 'O' based on "retirement", fortunately immigration don't.

 

 

I suspect that "retirement" is the wrong word used in the English translation of paragraph 2.22 of Police Order  327/2557 and the respective paragraph in previous police orders on this subject.

 

Nonetheless, it can be argued that, for example, the oil and gas worker who alternates four weeks working outside Thailand on an oil rig with four weeks living in Thailand is not, in fact, "spending the rest of his life" – the Thai term used in the Police Order – in Thailand and therefore, if hairs be split, does not qualify for an extension of stay under paragraph 2.22, not even with correctly seasoned 800k Baht in a Thai bank account, nor does the "snowbird" who spends the winters in Thailand and the rest of the year in other parts of the world, but it appears that so far, immigration has not interpreted it this literal way.

[elviajero]

27 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

That risks a felony-charge, for Americans.  Only a fool would do this for an extension.  A system that allows agents to openly advertise faking money, clearly setting up an incentive to deny honest-applicants, is the primary source of fraud.

How many Americans have been prosecuted for a false declaration!

 

The British embassy will accept any document (easily faked) without checking it’s validity and without the same threat of prosecution.

 

I think you're being rather naive if you think people will not exaggerate an income regardless of any threat of prosecution; and many people are adept at using photoshop!

 

 

 

[HAL9000]

11 hours ago, Cruzn said:

Could someone clarify the distinction between the 400,000 and 800,000 baht accounts?  I understand that the 800,000 is required for one individual.  But if there is married couple, both Americans, is it 400,000 each or 800,000 each?  Thanks!

The Thai extension of stay based on marriage is for marriage to a Thai person. If an American couple is here, there has to be an extension of stay related to the reason you are here.

[JackThompson]

6 minutes ago, elviajero said:

How many Americans have been prosecuted for a false declaration!

 

The British embassy will accept any document (easily faked) without checking it’s validity and without the same threat of prosecution.

 

I think you're being rather naive if you think people will not exaggerate an income regardless of any threat of prosecution; and many people are adept at using photoshop!

How many Americans have been shown to have faked their incomes?   If were a traffic-ticket type misdemeanor-charge, that would be another story.

 

I do not doubt that there are criminals willing to break laws.  This does not mean you treat all people like criminals.  We can only hope the new-standards will be clear, and can be met by all those who were telling the truth in their income-affidavits. 

But, if the standards are changed to deny some of those people income-based extensions, then we have to ask why - and the answer not because an organization who routinely accepts faked income applications from agents has a moral objection - though they might resent the criminals not paying them off, as part of their annual crime.

[elviajero]

4 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

How many Americans have been shown to have faked their incomes?

Probably none, because no one checks. That’s the point. A threat of prosecution when the applicant knows there is no chance of being caught is no deterrent.

 

The fact that immigration are now asking the embassies to validate the income suggests they beleive there is a problem with fraud. 

[Dante99]

I think there is a distinct possibility that TI will make the verification of the income method very easy for them to do, they do not want a complicated time consuming process.  So it will either be easy for most everybody or it will eliminate many who do not meet a very short list requirements which do not include the wide range of ways income can be received.

[Thaidream]

32 minutes ago, elviajero said:

The fact that immigration are now asking the embassies to validate the income suggests they beleive there is a problem with fraud. 

I/m not so sure that is the case- if the Thai Imm had evidence of fraud why didn't they notify the  US Embassy- there is an FBI unit attached to the Embassy. Instead- the Thai imm appears to want the letter for everyone.  I suspect there are other reasons for all this and it has to do with a lack of communication between Embassies UK/US and Thai imm.

[Mike Teavee]

10 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

I/m not so sure that is the case- if the Thai Imm had evidence of fraud why didn't they notify the  US Embassy- there is an FBI unit attached to the Embassy. Instead- the Thai imm appears to want the letter for everyone.  I suspect there are other reasons for all this and it has to do with a lack of communication between Embassies UK/US and Thai imm.

TI wouldn't have any evidence, the IO would ask for proof of what was on the form & either it didn't exist at all (So it couldn't be shown) or it had different numbers (so you would have to be a moron to show it).

 

Even if somebody did show invalid docs they could just say they were missing something... & even if they didn't, the IO wouldn't know to (or how to) raise it to the FBI so would just send them on their way telling them to come back when they had the correct documentation.

 

IF you hand-on-heart believe that nobody abused the system I've got a bridge for sale.

 

Edited November 1, 2018 by Mike Teavee