Australia joins the UK and USA with withdrawal of income verification

[merijn]

8 minutes ago, sambum said:

NO! What others in this topic have "said" is totally irrelevant. What the British Government and The British Embassy have said is totally relevant. After all, they are the the ones that are responsible for issuing the letters. From the Gov.UK website:-

 

"This letter has previously served as a supporting document for obtaining a Thai retirement or marriage visa. The British Embassy Bangkok is stopping the certification of income letters because it is unable to fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements to verify the income of British Nationals."

 

Have you ever heard of the Data Protection Act?

 

By the way, in this matter, I do not think that the British Embassy has behaved at all properly in this matter - apparently they have known about the forthcoming problem since MAY, and the first we hear about it is OCTOBER, and even then we get the news through a radio programme - nothing official until people start complaining.

 

The Data Protection Act should not be a issue as your authorize the embassy to do the verification,

The Dutch have the same legislation but when applying for the income certificate you authorize them to contact the Dutch tax department if required.

They changed their sop (same as some other countries) so they where able to comply to the new TI requirements which where supposedly communicated to them by the TI i while ago. 

 

 

[Pattaya46]

24 minutes ago, sambum said:

NO! What others in this topic have "said" is totally irrelevant. 

Thanks for them 

 

24 minutes ago, sambum said:

Have you ever heard of the Data Protection Act?

Not read the Australian one, but I would bet that as most western ones it forbid direct access from a governmental service to the database of other governmental services.

It does NOT forbid this service to use the data of others services as long as you authorise them to do so and/or give them yourself these data.

 

11 minutes ago, merijn said:

The Data Protection Act should not be a issue as your authorize the embassy to do the verification, //

Exactly.

Edited November 6, 2018 by Pattaya46

[tropo]

2 hours ago, sambum said:

As stated earlier - valid for 6 months, but 3 Embassies are stopping issuing them in the next couple of months - British Embassy are not accepting applications after 12th December.

It's not that cut & dry. What people state here is of no practical consideration until it has been tried and tested, and even then it could be specific to the Immigration Office attended.

 

Already one Immigration Office, namely Phuket, has refused to accept an income letter (last week)... and that letter was fresh.

[tropo]

54 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

drink tea and wait, something has been blown up out of all proportion, there will inevitably be a reaction from TI and a compromise found, something along the lines of ''for those foreigners whose embassies no longer issue letters the following proof of income will be accepted......... It just isn't the first 'things to do' on their list, unseemly haste would mean loss of face.

I am not as confident as you seem to be that TI will accommodate specific nationalities, assuming the other embassies will continue to issue income letters.

[tropo]

50 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

After which a compromise will have been found, no need for speculative scare mongering.

It goes both ways. There's also no need for excessive optimism. Better to accept the worst and prepare early. I will be getting my next income letter 6 months early and be making monthly 65k into my Thai bank account. If that doesn't work, I'll have to bank the 800k. There's no point being caught with your pants down.

[merijn]

14 minutes ago, tropo said:

Already one Immigration Office, namely Phuket, has refused to accept an income letter (last week)... and that letter was fresh.

If the person is from the effected countries it will be only accepted with the government pension certificate as mentioned before.

The letter was probable rejected as it was not supported by the (new) required supported documents.

 

Edited November 6, 2018 by merijn

[NanLaew]

58 minutes ago, cleverman said:

I  have a military pension, over 80000, and the cash ,800000, what pisses me off is that the embassy will not ,after Jan., accept the proof positive of my pension. Centrelink accept my proof, tax man accepts my proof, banks in Oz accept my proof!

Maybe the question needs asking in a different way, so here we go.

 

What does Thai Immigration NOT accept?

 

Clue: the answer is in the last sentence of your own post.

[tropo]

14 minutes ago, merijn said:

If the person is from the effected countries it will be only accepted with the government pension certificate as mentioned before.

The letter was probable rejected as it was not supported by the (new) required supported documents.

 

LOL> "as mentioned before". You're just surmising as are the other people who mentioned it before (over the last 75 pages). Pretty much everything you just said is wrong.

Edited November 6, 2018 by tropo

[Wanderlust]

It seems to me that the trend at the immigration offices is towards requesting back up evidence and documentation to go with any embassy letter/affadavit/statutory declaration; if that continues and becomes the norm, whichever country the applicant comes from, then the embassy documents become redundant; in that scenario no embassy would bother to have the service available, and citizens that saw others getting their extensions without them would question their need to have one. Especially if they are able to just produce a Thai bank book/letter/statement showing the required deposit every month. While I empathise with those who are being left high and dry by the likely changes, it does make a lot of sense from a reduction of bureaucracy and streamlining of the system aspect. I hope immigration will be flexible for those left in a perilous position by what transpires.

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, malt25 said:

If that is the case, why do they specify an income amount ? If they wanted to see tangible money coming into the country wouldn't they scrap the income component & demand the 400,000 or 800,000 deposited & seasoned in a Thai bank account ?

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand your comment.

I was replying to a comment made by someone that immigration have always accepted letters that are 6 months old. They don't always, and they sometimes ask for back up proof.

[NanLaew]

56 minutes ago, tropo said:

Already one Immigration Office, namely Phuket, has refused to accept an income letter (last week)... and that letter was fresh.

If it's the single, commonly reported instance of refusal in Phuket to date, I understand that the applicant was unable to show the Immigration Officer the proof of having sufficient funds which they are entitled to do. There's enough instances of random requests from random IO's to see the paperwork that secured any embassy letter. The savvy Brit and Aussie will typically take the same paperwork used to secure the letter or stat dec with him to show the IO 'just in case'. Since Americans do not have to show or even collate any provenance for their sworn affidavit, this applicant got caught short.

Edited November 6, 2018 by NanLaew

[tropo]

5 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

If it's the single, commonly reported instance of refusal in Phuket to date, I understand that the applicant was unable to show the Immigration Officer the proof of having sufficient funds which they are entitled to do. There's enough instances of random requests from random IO's to see the paperwork that secured any embassy letter. The savvy Brit and Aussie will typically take that with him to the IO 'just in case'. Since Americans do not have to show or even collate any provenance for their sworn affidavit, this applicant got caught short.

That particular applicant (I tried to find the post again - does anyone have a link?) was given no other option for his next extension. It was 800k seasoned, and that's it. He wasn't given this illusive 65k bank deposit option.

[sambum]

32 minutes ago, Pib said:

"If," repeat if TI immigration started accepting foreign income documents without an accompanying embassy letter such as monthly/quarterly pension statement, annual tax return, etc., would you be able to provide such docs? 

 

If not that would imply you can not meet the monthly income requirement of X-amount.  Instead you would need to use the big deposit in a Thai bank option.

The examples you quote are the type of documents usually submitted to the British Embassy before they issued the letter, so in most circumstances, yes, people would be able to supply them. The big problem would be for them to be accepted by Immigration,(TI) as for the most part they do not understand written English. So once again, as has already been suggested, these documents may need to be translated into Thai, and notarised by a qualified person, but before that happens, you need to know if they would be accepted by TI. Until there is something forthcoming from them, we can make suggest all the different options in the world, or alternatives to the "money in the Thai bank" system but they will mean zilch unless OK'd by TI!

[sambum]

53 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Thanks for them 

 

Not read the Australian one, but I would bet that as most western ones it forbid direct access from a governmental service to the database of other governmental services.

It does NOT forbid this service to use the data of others services as long as you authorise them to do so and/or give them yourself these data.

 

Exactly.

So there must be some other reason for the British Embassy in particular to say they are unable to verify the letters - any ideas? Apart from "Can't be bothered" or "Not enough manpower" or "Not enough time"?

[OJAS]

2 hours ago, sambum said:

So there must be some other reason for the British Embassy in particular to say they are unable to verify the letters - any ideas? Apart from "Can't be bothered" or "Not enough manpower" or "Not enough time"?

 

A letter which Sarah Peth at the Embassy emailed to me a few days ago included the following paragraph which you are free to make of (in particular the passage which I have shown in bold) as you see fit!

 

The British Embassy in Bangkok currently issues a pension letter as a supporting document for British nationals applying for a Thai retirement or marriage visa application or extension of stay. The Thai authorities have confirmed that they want the British Embassy to verify the income of British nationals, which unfortunately we are unable to do, as consular officers are not verification experts. We would refer such requests to the issuing authority. Therefore, the current letter does not fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements so we need to stop issuing it so it is not misinterpreted as verification.

Edited November 6, 2018 by OJAS

[sambum]

2 hours ago, tropo said:

It's not that cut & dry. What people state here is of no practical consideration until it has been tried and tested, and even then it could be specific to the Immigration Office attended.

 

Already one Immigration Office, namely Phuket, has refused to accept an income letter (last week)... and that letter was fresh.

I don't believe they refused to accept the letter - I think they asked for additional information.

 

And I agree with you regarding different offices - different rules. Shouldn't be that way and hopefully the new boss should be looking at those sort of anomalies, but don't hold your breath - TIT!

[sambum]

4 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

No. That's YOUR point. Others in this topic have said that the Embassy could do it and that there is nothing illegal in verifying your income from documents you show them.

Point. 

Excerpt from an email received a few days from the British Embassy by another poster (OJAS) :- 

 

"The British Embassy in Bangkok currently issues a pension letter as a supporting document for British nationals applying for a Thai retirement or marriage visa application or extension of stay. The Thai authorities have confirmed that they want the British Embassy to verify the income of British nationals, which unfortunately we are unable to do, as consular officers are not verification experts. We would refer such requests to the issuing authority. Therefore, the current letter does not fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements so we need to stop issuing it so it is not misinterpreted as verification"

Edited November 6, 2018 by sambum

[melvinmelvin]

8 minutes ago, sambum said:

Excerpt from an email received a few days from the British Embassy by another poster (OJAS) :- 

 

"The British Embassy in Bangkok currently issues a pension letter as a supporting document for British nationals applying for a Thai retirement or marriage visa application or extension of stay. The Thai authorities have confirmed that they want the British Embassy to verify the income of British nationals, which unfortunately we are unable to do, as consular officers are not verification experts. We would refer such requests to the issuing authority. Therefore, the current letter does not fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements so we need to stop issuing it so it is not misinterpreted as verification"

what a weird response from B embassy

 

[gk10002000]

18 hours ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Stump up the cash and put it into a Thai bank and get the letters from the Bank that immigration require.

Either that, or, change visa, or leave for another place.

Some people prefer not to tie up about$25,000 USD in cash.  That is a fair amount of cash that many people and basic blue collar working class pensioners may have difficulties coming up with.   Some people prefer to keep it safely invested in their home country, which at the same time alleviates the need to report accounts totaling over $10,000 USD held in foreign countries, which some people prefer. regardless of how easy it may be to report.  I certainly would not trust any measurable sums of money in Thailand.  Just my preference.  I think the Thais need to work out a proper income verification process for foreigners and coordinate that with foreign embassies.   There are so many sources of income from pensions, social security, Military, passive income from stock and bond dividends and interest, rents, etc.  Not an easy problem to solve, but it can be solved.        

[Patriot1066]

 

9 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

Some people prefer not to tie up about$25,000 USD in cash.  That is a fair amount of cash that many people and basic blue collar working class pensioners may have difficulties coming up with.   Some people prefer to keep it safely invested in their home country, which at the same time alleviates the need to report accounts totaling over $10,000 USD held in foreign countries, which some people prefer. regardless of how easy it may be to report.  I certainly would not trust any measurable sums of money in Thailand.  Just my preference.  I think the Thais need to work out a proper income verification process for foreigners and coordinate that with foreign embassies.   There are so many sources of income from pensions, social security, Military, passive income from stock and bond dividends and interest, rents, etc.  Not an easy problem to solve, but it can be solved.        

I doubt they will change it and here you get interest in the UK we don’t.

[sambum]

1 hour ago, gk10002000 said:

Some people prefer not to tie up about$25,000 USD in cash.  That is a fair amount of cash that many people and basic blue collar working class pensioners may have difficulties coming up with.   Some people prefer to keep it safely invested in their home country, which at the same time alleviates the need to report accounts totaling over $10,000 USD held in foreign countries, which some people prefer. regardless of how easy it may be to report.  I certainly would not trust any measurable sums of money in Thailand.  Just my preference.  I think the Thais need to work out a proper income verification process for foreigners and coordinate that with foreign embassies.   There are so many sources of income from pensions, social security, Military, passive income from stock and bond dividends and interest, rents, etc.  Not an easy problem to solve, but it can be solved.        

Where there's a will - there's a way!

[tropo]

4 hours ago, sambum said:

I don't believe they refused to accept the letter - I think they asked for additional information.

 

And I agree with you regarding different offices - different rules. Shouldn't be that way and hopefully the new boss should be looking at those sort of anomalies, but don't hold your breath - TIT!

I would never expect any conformity between immigration offices now or in the future. All I hope for is that Jomtien will remain one of the most friendly of them all.

[Joe Mcseismic]

4 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

Some people prefer not to tie up about$25,000 USD in cash.  That is a fair amount of cash that many people and basic blue collar working class pensioners may have difficulties coming up with.   Some people prefer to keep it safely invested in their home country, which at the same time alleviates the need to report accounts totaling over $10,000 USD held in foreign countries, which some people prefer. regardless of how easy it may be to report.  I certainly would not trust any measurable sums of money in Thailand.  Just my preference.  I think the Thais need to work out a proper income verification process for foreigners and coordinate that with foreign embassies.   There are so many sources of income from pensions, social security, Military, passive income from stock and bond dividends and interest, rents, etc.  Not an easy problem to solve, but it can be solved.        

What people "prefer" to do or not is irrelevant. Eventually, TI is going to want to see the lump sum, or 12 monthly payments in a Thai bank. Immigration holds all the cards in this game and they don't care about your preferences.

[Patriot1066]

2 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

What people "prefer" to do or not is irrelevant. Eventually, TI is going to want to see the lump sum, or 12 monthly payments in a Thai bank. Immigration holds all the cards in this game and they don't care about your preferences.

That about sums it up comply properly or leave seems the almost binary choice, preference doesn't come into it, but I guess there will be some work arounds?

[gk10002000]

2 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

What people "prefer" to do or not is irrelevant. Eventually, TI is going to want to see the lump sum, or 12 monthly payments in a Thai bank. Immigration holds all the cards in this game and they don't care about your preferences.

What people prefer or can do is very relevant.  The Thais decision will lose many expats if they require things that many ex pats just can't do, and that were initially attractive to the expats.  The foreign embassies need to get more pro actively involved in this and work out some reasonable solutions.  One has to always be concerned about a "money grab".  There is no way somebody should have to make 12 monthly payments.  Many people get income quarterly (stock dividends for example).  And regular transfers cost money.  And many people do travel home once or twice a year and could easily carry back $10K USD at a time or more.  The lump sum exposes a foreigner to potentially losing that money through various possible reasons.  And even more ridiculously, the 800k thai baht in a bank typically sits there.  So what is the foreigner living on?  Some officers have asked and expect to see the 800k being drawn down, some don't.  The 800K baht doesn't prove one has the means to live, especially if one is not using it!  It is almost an oxymoron

[blackhorse]

What people prefer or can do is very relevant.  The Thais decision will lose many expats if they require things that many ex pats just can't do, and that were initially attractive to the expats.  The foreign embassies need to get more pro actively involved in this and work out some reasonable solutions.  One has to always be concerned about a "money grab".  There is no way somebody should have to make 12 monthly payments.  Many people get income quarterly (stock dividends for example).  And regular transfers cost money.  And many people do travel home once or twice a year and could easily carry back $10K USD at a time or more.  The lump sum exposes a foreigner to potentially losing that money through various possible reasons.  And even more ridiculously, the 800k thai baht in a bank typically sits there.  So what is the foreigner living on?  Some officers have asked and expect to see the 800k being drawn down, some don't.  The 800K baht doesn't prove one has the means to live, especially if one is not using it!  It is almost an oxymoron

What are you on about? TI Have announced nothing.

Better go hassle your embassy, they are the ones that made an announcement and NOT TI. !!

[Joe Mcseismic]

Still some ostriches with their heads firmly buried in the sand, I see, not to mention a few straw clutchers.......

Well...........if it makes you feel better..............for the present.

Edited November 6, 2018 by Joe Mcseismic

[Joe Mcseismic]

When will people understand that probably the embassies and definitely Thai immigration couldn't give a small furry rodent's back side, what any of us think. Neither of them care about your "economic" contribution, difficulties, or personal circumstances.

Doesn't all the xenophobic comments and actions in the media, which play to the domestic audience very well (which is why it's done) give you a clue as to Thai officialdom's thinking?

Do you think the The Country That Has Never Been Colonized will ever listen to representatives of a foreign power?

 

Mark my words. 400k/800k seasoned in a Thai bank, or 40k/65k in a Thai bank every month. You don't have to be Nostradamus to see that.

 

[ukrules]

21 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Mark my words. 400k/800k seasoned in a Thai bank, or 40k/65k in a Thai bank every month. You don't have to be Nostradamus to see that.

I wouldn't be so sure about the 40k/65k per month method.

 

I suspect it will be lump sums only. This is just a hunch of course.

Edited November 6, 2018 by ukrules

[soalbundy]

43 minutes ago, ukrules said:

I wouldn't be so sure about the 40k/65k per month method.

 

I suspect it will be lump sums only. This is just a hunch of course.

That could be a future requirement for new applicants, for those already here using the income method I can imagine nothing changing, there will be a natural thinning of the ranks.