FYI - U.S. Consulate Chiang Mai town hall meeting November 20th Chiang Mai University

[CMNightRider]

Thank you so much for your informative report.  Let's hope Thai Immigration won't implement depositing money in their banks as the only way of showing sufficient funds for their retirement visa. ????  

[bkk6060]

7 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

Thank you so much for your informative report.  Let's hope Thai Immigration won't implement depositing money in their banks as the only way of showing sufficient funds for their retirement visa. ????  

I certainly hope they do.

[zydeco]

On 11/21/2018 at 11:42 AM, JackThompson said:

But explaining an IRS 1040 with all its associated forms, plus business-records showing receipts for the income reflected, doesn't seem remotely probable.  I just imagine the conversation, "No, the 'adjusted-gross-income' used to determine tax-liability includes deductions (including standard, not itemized) which do not reflect any actual reduction to my gross or net income."

And who wants to turn their social security number and tax records over to Thai Immigration???

[hargri]

I also use TransferWise and the deposits to my SCB account do not show FTT. That's because TransferWise send the funds from a Bangkok Bank a/c making it a 'local bank transfer'. Easy enough to print off the TransferWise invoice which confirms the amount transferred to whichever bank plus account number and will tie up with the pass book.

[JackThompson]

15 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Income earned here from investments and etc can be proven by a Thai tax return. For marriage extensions income from working here is allowed and the proof is by payment of taxes. 

For those without a "state pension," perhaps a Thai tax-return could be a good way to get backup documentation to support our bank-statements showing monthly foreign-transfers.  It would be nice if the xfers alone were good enough - but I am skeptical they will be (hope I am wrong).

 

Many nations have dual-tax treaties, so paying taxes here, instead of there (or less there) might not increase the total amount due - only add the burden of the additional Thai-tax paperwork.

[JLCrab]

7 minutes ago, hargri said:

I also use TransferWise and the deposits to my SCB account do not show FTT.

So maybe you might have to decide, if the FTT is actually required, whether the difference between Transferwise and SWIFT is worth it each month if it saves you from having to go the 800K baht in the bank route. Maybe the IMM folks will say that they only want to look at a passbook and are not interested in print out statements from Transferwise or anyone else.

[hargri]

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

So maybe you might have to decide, if the FTT is actually required, whether the difference between Transferwise and SWIFT is worth it each month if it saves you from having to go the 800K baht in the bank route. Maybe the IMM folks will say that they only want to look at a passbook and are not interested in print out statements from Transferwise or anyone else.

I don't think that comparing bank name, account number and transaction value on two documents is an onerous task. Unlike some on here I have always found immigration at Jomtien to be pretty efficient at sorting paperwork. I have witnessed problems but that has tended to be when said paperwork is missing or poorly presented. I also don't think there is much point in trying to second guess what may be required in future. I know that I can provide them with far more convincing evidence than the embassy letter in an easy to understand format. Just need them to confirm their requirements and I will tweak it as necessary or, if required, consider the alternatives you mention.

[ubonjoe]

27 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

For those without a "state pension," perhaps a Thai tax-return could be a good way to get backup documentation to support our bank-statements showing monthly foreign-transfers.  It would be nice if the xfers alone were good enough - but I am skeptical they will be (hope I am wrong).

There is no requirement for the income to be from a state pension or a pension of any kink. The mention of a pension is only an example of the types of income not a fixed rule. The police order states "such as" before the types of income.

I think their primary concern is that it not earned here.

33 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Many nations have dual-tax treaties, so paying taxes here, instead of there (or less there) might not increase the total amount due - only add the burden of the additional Thai-tax paperwork.

That would depend on the amount of income you are declaring here. And how much earn in your home country.

If doing the extension based upon marriage you would only need to bring in the minimum 40k baht into the country and declare it. The tax would not be very much after deductions and the first 150k baht that is not taxable.

[JackThompson]

13 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

There is no requirement for the income to be from a state pension or a pension of any kink. The mention of a pension is only an example of the types of income not a fixed rule. The police order states "such as" before the types of income.

I think their primary concern is that it not earned here.

Agreed on this - I am concerned about them saying, "Show us where this money comes from."  The pension-folks can pull out a pension document or similar, which is fairly straightforward.   By contrast, I would have a stack of foreign business-records and foreign tax-returns.

 

Quote

That would depend on the amount of income you are declaring here. And how much earn in your home country.

If doing the extension based upon marriage you would only need to bring in the minimum 40k baht into the country and declare it. The tax would not be very much after deductions and the first 150k baht that is not taxable.

That is what I am thinking, exactly.

Edited November 24, 2018 by JackThompson

[JLCrab]

16 minutes ago, hargri said:

I don't think that comparing bank name, account number and transaction value on two documents is an onerous task.

But as you say it is a task and a task that they do not have to perform if you come in with the FTT in the passbook.

[Max66]

They want your money in their bank .  That's it. I have my $$ in stocks ,bonds, CDs and mutual funds invested in my country that earn a hell of alot more than what I get here in a 3rd world thai bank. Im not going to start tearing apart my portfolio for this .

Bottom line is that they dont want foreighners here..(unless their chinese.) Lol

I've heard many times, thais dont like foreighners but love the money.

 

[mfd101]

5 minutes ago, Max66 said:

They want your money in their bank .  That's it. I have my $$ in stocks ,bonds, CDs and mutual funds invested in my country that earn a hell of alot more than what I get here in a 3rd world thai bank. Im not going to start tearing apart my portfolio for this .

Bottom line is that they dont want foreighners here..(unless their chinese.) Lol

I've heard many times, thais dont like foreighners but love the money.

 

Fine, so you'll be saying goodbye then, will you?

[JLCrab]

5 minutes ago, Max66 said:

Bottom line is that

The bottom line for me is that -- if the extension by  monthly income method is to be preserved at all -- the IMM folks will want to have a procedure that is about as easy as was the embassy affidavits and, if they have to go through some complicated convoluted mechanism, it won't happen at all.

[jacko45k]

3 minutes ago, Max66 said:

They want your money in their bank .  That's it. I have my $$ in stocks ,bonds, CDs and mutual funds invested in my country that earn a hell of alot more than what I get here in a 3rd world thai bank. Im not going to start tearing apart my portfolio for this .

Bottom line is that they dont want foreighners here..(unless their chinese.) Lol

I've heard many times, thais dont like foreighners but love the money.

 

Then why do they offer visa waivers, and cheap retirement extensions at all?

If your portfolio is sensitive to a $25000 withdrawal it is very limited. I can understand early withdrawals having US tax implications 

Heck if hell of a lot more isn't covering a $25,000 one off payment you can't afford Thailand!

[hargri]

7 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

The bottom line for me is that -- if the extension by  monthly income method is to be preserved at all -- the IMM folks will want to have a procedure that is about as easy as was the embassy affidavits and, if they have to go through some complicated convoluted mechanism, it won't happen at all.

I trust you're not forgetting that some immigration offices are already requesting back up evidence for the income claimed in the embassy letters. That would require additional work and there doesn't seem to be a problem there.

Edited November 24, 2018 by hargri

[Sheryl]

I can't really imagine that they will ever accept 65k comming into a Thai bank account alone as prove for income, this is way too easy to fake (If they do accept this i really wonder what this change was for)
I send myself 65k from my foreign account, withdraw it as cash and send it back to my foreign account, quite easy and cheap to do with for example https://www.dee.money/
Just repeat this every month and the bank book shows 65k income per month. With the current buy / sell rates for USD and fees listed on their website this would then cost 810THB per month.

Obviously they will look at the whole statement and its activity....as many IOs already do.

If you send the entire amount or even most of it back each month it will raise questions as indeed it should -- since you are then apparently living off of "other" income not in the bank which strongly suggests illegal activity.

Presumably most people on retirement extensions aren't working in Thailand nor conducting illegal activities off the books and actually spend money out of their bank accounts to buy food, oay rent and utilities etc etc. Their bank statements will show that -- not only regular deposit in, but regular in country drawdowns on the funds.

If some people for whatever reason want to send back say 15-20k a month and live off the rest I don't think that will be a problem.

But all these people talking as if they do not need to spend a single baht in Thailand and would want to send the entire amount straight back out again.....one does truly wonder what they are up to here......

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Pattaya46]

41 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

The bottom line for me is that -- if the extension by  monthly income method is to be preserved at all -- the IMM folks will want to have a procedure that is about as easy as was the embassy affidavits and, if they have to go through some complicated convoluted mechanism, it won't happen at all.

Yes, so the more I think about it, the more I think they will change nothing. They will continue with Income Letter with people from most countries. Others will have to go to the 400/800k option or visa such O-A.

[onera1961]

8 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

..one does truly wonder what they are up to here......

They're up to no good ????

[JimGant]

20 minutes ago, hargri said:

I trust you're not forgetting that some immigration offices are already requesting back up evidence for the income claimed in the embassy letters. That would require additional work and there doesn't seem to be a problem there.

Now, that's a circular argument. The reason Immigration began requesting back-up evidence was because they suspected that the income letters were reflecting bogus income. You think reviewing all this additional supporting paperwork was no big deal? It was big enough to cause the termination of income letters by embassies who couldn't comply with doing the income verification themselves -- that would allow Immigration to not have to review additional documentation. Which was becoming highly inefficient, when it was no longer feasible just to glance at an income letter.

 

Quote

That would require additional work and there doesn't seem to be a problem there.

It was such a problem that income letters are now history. JL is right on -- Immigration is not going to be in the supporting paperwork game. This is the real reason embassy income letters (at least for some) have been torpedoed.

[Unify]

Having attended this meeting as well, I have a few points to add.

 

1) for those complaining that they haven't seen any changes, it's my understanding that they are scheduled to take place January 1st. So, you wouldn't see anything new until that date.

 

2) these changes are potentially good news, as they mean we may not have to have money in Thai banks. I'll believe it when I see it, and I know US officials can not speak for Thai immigrantion, and we haven't heard it confirmed from another source. This year, I'll do the 800k, and we'll see how it shakes out.

 

3) we will no longer have to pay the $50 fee for the affidavit. That's good.

[oobar]

On 11/21/2018 at 1:00 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

FWIW, every time my Embassy pops up on the income letters issue, I get the distinct sense that the Embassy people doing the talking or writing on said subject have never actually personally had to deal with Thai Immigration as a private citizen.

 

Since they're all on diplomatic status, I don't know if they even have to set foot into an Immigration office themselves, or more likely, have a staff person that bundles up all their passports and documents and takes care of all the formalities. 

 

All I can say is, their expectations of Thai Immigration don't seem to match very well with what the common citizen folks have to deal with year in and year out.

 

Absolutely correct, TallGuy.  At the American Embassy, they have no clue.  The (hugely expensive) taxpayer-paid perks for embassy personnel and their dependents cushion and protect them from the bureaucratic tediousness faced by those of us who look after ourselves.

[phuketrichard]

41 minutes ago, Unify said:

Having attended this meeting as well, I have a few points to add.

 

1) for those complaining that they haven't seen any changes, it's my understanding that they are scheduled to take place January 1st. So, you wouldn't see anything new until that date.

 

2) these changes are potentially good news, as they mean we may not have to have money in Thai banks. I'll believe it when I see it, and I know US officials can not speak for Thai immigrantion, and we haven't heard it confirmed from another source. This year, I'll do the 800k, and we'll see how it shakes out.

 

3) we will no longer have to pay the $50 fee for the affidavit. That's good.

you NEVER had to pay $50... Only if u wanted one an they still offer notarizing services for $50 for other reasons.

I for one, ( since my extension is due mid July) will wait and see what method immigration comes up with to show the 65, 45,000 baht/month pension

Rather then speculating on.......

[dabhand]

4 hours ago, hargri said:

I also use TransferWise and the deposits to my SCB account do not show FTT. That's because TransferWise send the funds from a Bangkok Bank a/c making it a 'local bank transfer'. Easy enough to print off the TransferWise invoice which confirms the amount transferred to whichever bank plus account number and will tie up with the pass book.

I had the same Transferwise/SCB issue over transfers from the UK. So I opened a Bangkok Bank account a couple of days back (very easy process) and then arranged for a TW transfer. As others have noted, this shows up on the App as an International Transfer and I would expect the bank book, when updated, to have the FTT code.

 

Obviously no certainty on whether income proof for extension renewal purposes will remain as an option for extension purposes, but it does seem that a transfer to BB from TW would be less of a problem for IO checks.

[hargri]

17 minutes ago, dabhand said:

I had the same Transferwise/SCB issue over transfers from the UK. So I opened a Bangkok Bank account a couple of days back (very easy process) and then arranged for a TW transfer. As others have noted, this shows up on the App as an International Transfer and I would expect the bank book, when updated, to have the FTT code.

 

Obviously no certainty on whether income proof for extension renewal purposes will remain as an option for extension purposes, but it does seem that a transfer to BB from TW would be less of a problem for IO checks.

If the disbursement to your Bangkok Bank account is made from TW's Bangkok Bank account you may find the same situation as me. Perhaps you could let us know as I also have a BB account. Cheers!

[SiamAndy]

15 minutes ago, hargri said:

If the disbursement to your Bangkok Bank account is made from TW's Bangkok Bank account you may find the same situation as me. Perhaps you could let us know as I also have a BB account. Cheers!

I recently opened an account with BK Bank and also used Transferwise. I just updated my Bankbook and indeed the Transferwise transaction shows as FTT.

[kingstonkid]

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

It has been required by immigration for some time now if they asked for backup proof for proof of income from an embassy,

Although not stated in the rules it can be assumed that pension and other income would be from abroad when apply for extensions based upon retirement and marriage. 

Income earned here from investments and etc can be proven by a Thai tax return. For marriage extensions income from working here is allowed and the proof is by payment of taxes.

It's money that I get a tax statement for so and the Thai government gets the tax money. So it almost the same. I have to pay income tax to the government

[Lacessit]

Australians and Brits are similarly affected. None of us like having to stick 800,000/400,000 baht in a Thai bank for 3 months to satisfy Immigration requirements.

The principle is we should be able to prove our ability to support ourselves in Thailand. That could be solved very simply if TI accepted evidence of assets in our country of origin - I could do it with a Centrelink statement, or my annual income tax return. However, I can't see that level of rationality or sophistication happening with the Thai authorities.

[ubonjoe]

42 minutes ago, kingstonkid said:

It's money that I get a tax statement for so and the Thai government gets the tax money. So it almost the same. I have to pay income tax to the government

For an extension based upon retirement or marriage you could use it for all or part of the income requirement.

You need to show proof of the source of it.

[bkk6060]

16 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Australians and Brits are similarly affected. None of us like having to stick 800,000/400,000 baht in a Thai bank for 3 months to satisfy Immigration requirements.

The principle is we should be able to prove our ability to support ourselves in Thailand. That could be solved very simply if TI accepted evidence of assets in our country of origin - I could do it with a Centrelink statement, or my annual income tax return. However, I can't see that level of rationality or sophistication happening with the Thai authorities.

You are wrong and your bad mouthing of Thai authorities on this is just unfair and unjust.

Sure, if it all were that simple but are you aware of the asset possibilities and have you been reading all of the 1000's of posts regarding this?

People with 401 k's, 457 b's, rental properties, retirements, savings accounts. stocks, bonds, god I can go on and on. A tax return is actually the worst way to verify any of this I believe.

 

So no, they mostly will not have the "sophistication" to figure it out.  It is probably why many people in the world, particularly in the US hire experts to do their taxes.

Just to add, if it is so easy then why are so many of these governments now getting out of the business???

 

[JackThompson]

8 hours ago, Sheryl said:

If some people for whatever reason want to send back say 15-20k a month and live off the rest I don't think that will be a problem.

In theory, that would be fine, since the law requires "income" - allowing for expenses both here and abroad.  After all, if you go on a trip to Vietnam with some of your "income," are you supposed to deduct that from what you report as having to Thailand?  Of course not - it is "gross income" being reported. 

 

That said, folks would be wise to make any money sent-back look like "regular spending" and send money back via a different method/ account - because real-life with immigration, in many cases, is only tangentially related to what the law actually says.  Don't give them an opportunity to find a "problem" that only an agent can solve.