Denmark Embassy Has Stopped Doing Pension Letters

[JohnnyBD]

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 11:29 AM, Wanderlust said:

I do have a question for you though - you would have had to get both a medical and a police check in your home country, and I believe the amount required in the bank is lower for applying in your home country, so why did you not apply in your home country?

I thought about your question and wanted to respond to you. If you were living in the US and planning to live in Thailand and you lived near a Thai Embassy, it would probably have been just easy to do in the US. If you were getting an O-A visa then you would have probably needed to get medical & police reports, so that would have been a little extra work & cost. Up until now (2019), you didn't need to have money in a Thai bank because you could have used the income affidavit. For me, the reason I did not do in my home country, was I had already taken a trip to Thailand and had put a deposit down on a condo (rental) and got my income affidavit while in BK, so when I went back to US to get my stuff, the last thing I wanted to do was wait around in the US to apply for a visa. When I flew back, I moved into the condo, went to TI and applied for the 90-day & 1-yr extension both at the same time. And, it was easier to do my yrly extensions here with the income affidavit even though I go back to the US every Dec for a 1 month visit. Again, the last thing I want to be trying to do is fooling with a visa in the US while I'm on holiday. For me, it's easier to do here. I know TI is making it more difficult, but I can use either the 400k marriage, the 800k retirement or the income method (if they ever decide on the rules) since I have company pension & government pension. Good luck to you and whatever way is easier for you...

Edited November 18, 2018 by JohnnyBD

[OneeyedJohn]

A couple of years back I flew to the UK, from my door to the hotel in Cardiff it took 24 hours. The next morning I went to the consulate in Cardiff, Wales and applied and paid and got a 1 year marriage visa. 

It took all of 30 minutes.

I now had 30 days in the UK to do what the hell I liked, but the only reason for going there was to get that visa.

I had been on 301 days overstay, paid the 20,000 baht fine and had to get out within 7 days.

[jimn]

21 minutes ago, OneeyedJohn said:

A couple of years back I flew to the UK, from my door to the hotel in Cardiff it took 24 hours. The next morning I went to the consulate in Cardiff, Wales and applied and paid and got a 1 year marriage visa. 

It took all of 30 minutes.

I now had 30 days in the UK to do what the hell I liked, but the only reason for going there was to get that visa.

I had been on 301 days overstay, paid the 20,000 baht fine and had to get out within 7 days.

Shame you didnt get a ban

[KhunFred]

I would think that Australia and Denmark might have more negotiating clout than the United States. We Yanks are not appreciated because of many of our government's actions. FATCA is a good example. Imagine being told that you have to report every American account opened with your bank, even if it violates local laws. US meddling is wearing thin with many countries. I think we will need the European countries and Australia to negotiate something acceptable to all parties.

[Thaidream]

1 hour ago, KhunFred said:

I would think that Australia and Denmark might have more negotiating clout than the United States. We Yanks are not appreciated because of many of our government's actions. FATCA is a good example. Imagine being told that you have to report every American account opened with your bank, even if it violates local laws. US meddling is wearing thin with many countries. I think we will need the European countries and Australia to negotiate something acceptable to all parties.

While I would agree about the US and its onerous rules- the best negotiating strategy is for the US/UK/AU to  come together and get  a single negotiating position and then  ask for a meeting with Thai Imm to go over the positions and seek a negotiated settlement.

While the above is going-on a first step must be issuing the letters until 30 June 2019 -good for 6 months which would carry everyone to end of December 2019. As part of the initial  negotiation, Thai Imm would notify all their offices- that the letters are still good until the end of December 2019 and that there was a solution being worked on.

 

As part of the negotiation- each  country will need to have an open forum discussion with it's citizens explaining what the original issue was and how to  meet Thai Imm's issue. the citizens need to also make sure the Embassies truly understand the different types of income streams and how their decision to end the letters impacts on everyone. I don't believe they fully realize  how complicated this is and what I fear is they don't care.

 

IMO Thai Imm  is not going to do anything unless the Embassies make the first move.  The report from CW indicating  IO's 'blame' the embassies  shows that they believe they have been slighted and  if people are complaining - they need to complain to the Embassies.

\While I find it absurd that 2 entities like Thai Imm and the Embassies cannot work this out- we have to remember  that Thai Imm is in charge of how they run their Immigration protocols and therefore the Embassies need to approach them. I still believe something has been lost in 'translation' .  

 

The Us Embassy  indicated in their announcement that hey had met with the Immigration Commissioner and  his team and  the Embassy agreed to ease the transition. 

 

Well, so far the transition is not going well since everyone who uses the income method doesn't know how to do their next extension. It's time the Embassies were notified of these problems by sending emails  to them.

[lungbing]

The embassies already have a common position.  It's called "We don't give a damn about our citizens".

[evadgib]

5 minutes ago, lungbing said:

The embassies already have a common position.  It's called "We don't give a damn about our citizens".

...& here's me thinking all along that data protection & privacy had something to do with it. Cheers for clarifying ????

[North]

27 minutes ago, lungbing said:

The embassies already have a common position.  It's called "We don't give a damn about our citizens".

Sadly I think, this is the way it is, at least with the danish embassy and ministry of foreign affairs.

[soalbundy]

24 minutes ago, evadgib said:

...& here's me thinking all along that data protection & privacy had something to do with it. Cheers for clarifying ????

They could have carried on just certifying the documents (without a caveat) like the Germans, seems to work for them....up to now anyway, nothing on their embassy website to indicate they are stopping the letter and a few days ago the IO accepted the letter without comment, in fact the extension was given far quicker than usual.

[Pib]

39 minutes ago, lungbing said:

The embassies already have a common position.  It's called "We don't give a damn about our citizens".

The embassies do have a limit on how far they will go to assist and help their citizens. 

[soalbundy]

1 minute ago, Pib said:

The embassies do have a limit on how far they will go to assist and help their citizens. 

yeah, we've seen it.

[Misab]

One expects an embassy to serve its citizens, they should not be there to bother them.
It's not correct when the embassy writes that it cannot guarantee income. If the embassy thinks that they can not rely on the amounts stated by its citizens, they may ask their citizens to enter the embassy and to draw the annual report and the preliminary estimate from tax, which most people can do via the Internet so that the Embassy can see that the amounts are correct.

[Psychic]

7 hours ago, Thaidream said:

Absolutely correct!!  Many of us have put a great deal of funds into A Condo and a house plus taking care of Thai Mother in Law; Father in Laws and extended families.  I was going to invest in  a new car for the wife and buy a used one for the in laws.   That won't be happening now or in the future. In fact, i doubt I will ever  make a large, hard purchase in Thailand again. My  Thai spouse while disappointed understands completely and believes that if this is not solved amicably- foreigners will not spend  money investing in Thailand.

 

I simply cannot trust any system that is in place and I am sure I am not alone.

 

I blame both the Embassies and Thai Imm for this fiasco- more so the Embassies as they simply refused to negotiate an agreement and understand how Thai bureaucracy works and thinks.  It's called Diplomacy and they have failed miserably- leaving the citizens as the scapegoats.

 

At the very least- there could have been a one year validity of Embassy Letters negotiated which would  give citizens a chance to adjust to this change.  The Danish Embassy is especially egregious simply cutting their citizens off abruptly. The 1 year interval could have allowed  people to  marry; to sell assets; to borrow funds or to move out.

As of this  minute- we have no real guidance; no real interest any longer  by our Embassies in  working with us for a reasonable solution and we are left with reports by our citizens on what happens to them when they actually visit  a Thai Imm office.

 

 

Yes, basically what I posted in another thread.

 

I am still fairly young as far as relocating to Thailand is concerned.

 

We are set up here now and lead a fairly comfortable life.

 

The plan, such as it was, was to let investment income grow tax free and take periodic withdrawals to build a pool, buy a new car, upgrade the house etc.

 

These would be timed to minimize tax expense as other government sources of income come on stream.

 

If it becomes necessary I will pull enough to make the lump sum payment. But that will be my large big expenditure here.

 

The money that would have come here will accrue in my home country. The withdrawals will go into non-sheltered accounts and when I depart this mortal coil my executor will get it sent to my wife.

 

So the money ends up in Thailand but (I hope) a long time from now and I keep some powder dry in case somebody else has a "good idea".

 

For the TVF cynics, the reason I posted the information about my friend was to make a general point.

 

He is not the type to surf the internet constantly seeking information on non-announced policy changes.

 

Imagine this 78 year old who has spent large amounts of money in Thailand over the years is one of the affected nationalities whose extension is renewable in February.

 

He walks into his embassy to get his usual letter. Gets told that they aren't issuing them anymore. Goes to see TI that tells him that is the only officially permitted way of verifying income. 

 

And by the way, you don't have time to season the funds if you bring them down.

 

Yes, to me that's pathetic.

 

But to take it to a macro level, the reason there is a thriving expat community here is simply because there are a lot of expats.

 

Expats attract expats.

 

A lot of us here have ties. We will find a way, if at all possible, to remain here. This is now our home even if we are treated like tolerated " guests" by the government.

 

Here's another friend story. Go ahead and pick it apart cynics.

 

He has about two and a half years until he gets a 120,000 company pension.

 

His plan was to rent out his place to students during the school year (approximately September to June) live in Thailand during that time, possibly buying a condo and maybe getting some rental income from that and buying a car, furniture, TV etc.

 

But he's read this stuff and he has no intention of putting 800K in a Thai bank. Yes he can do it but this is a significant amount of money and would have went a long way towards his major purchases.

 

The bottom line is he simply doesn't need the aggravation and is looking at other countries.

 

Another couple of former coworkers were thinking of doing a similar sort of thing although most were not going to settle here but simply rent.

 

They're not anymore.

 

So, over the course of time the expat community shrinks. And that shrinkage gets more extenuated every year. If I know a bunch of people in Thailand, I'll go to Thailand.

 

If most of the people I know are going to, say, Mexico. I'll go to Mexico.

 

Let's say Thailand loses 100,000 expats who spend over their time here 1,000,000 baht a year on average.

 

That's 100 billion Baht a year. You are beginning to talk about some serious change. Won't even talk about the "multiplier effect".

 

But the immediate thing that comes to mind is all those lovely new condos being built with no buyers or tenants.

 

I suspect the latest changes to visas is a sign that there is a marked decline in western tourism already although these words can never be spoken.

 

Again the Thai government has an absolute right to control immigration but I'd really like to see a serious study about the economics of western immigration here done before they make policy decisions.

 

Maybe somebody has one, but I've never seen it.

 

It always seems to come down to somebody having a "good idea" without any kind of in depth study as to the long term implications of implementing said "good idea".

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2018 by Psychic

[Tanoshi]

6 hours ago, Jingthing said:

What's British for when pigs fly?
 

Dodging the shit.  ????

[Tanoshi]

On ‎11‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 11:06 PM, Psychic said:

My friend who lives well, has 3 golf memberships, lives in a 15 million baht condo relies on an income statement.

He probably spends less than 65000 every month.

Last year he bought a new SUV for about 1.5 million.

He is fully capable of putting 800K in the bank but chooses to earn about 80K abroad.

Do you really want to put an individual like that in a position where he cannot extend his visa by any recognised means because his embassy pulls off the immediate withdrawal of income letters he has used for the last 18 years?

 

That's what you want to do to a 78 year old man who has poured 10's of millions of baht into the Thai economy?

 

I'm in shock and tears, literally.

That worry is going to interfere with his choice of clubs.

 

Have you considered starting a 'go fund me' page for him!

[elviajero]

On 11/16/2018 at 4:06 PM, Psychic said:

He is fully capable of putting 800K in the bank but chooses to earn about 80K abroad.

 

Do you really want to put an individual like that in a position where he cannot extend his visa by any recognised means because his embassy pulls off the immediate withdrawal of income letters he has used for the last 18 years?

**** "CHOOSES" ****

 

Next ...

[Psychic]

10 minutes ago, elviajero said:

**** "CHOOSES" ****

 

Next ...

Yes, chooses because that was one of the option granted to him under Thai law 

 

Next..OK make an official announcement or continue to allow established precedent.

 

It is not a difficult thing to do.

 

Do you have a problem with people meticulously following the law or do you simply revel in other people's problems?

 

 

 

 

[elviajero]

2 minutes ago, Psychic said:

18 minutes ago, elviajero said:

**** "CHOOSES" ****

 

Next ...

Yes, chooses because that was one of the option granted to him under Thai law 

Next..OK make an official announcement or continue to allow established precedent.

It is not a difficult thing to do.

Do you have a problem with people meticulously following the law or do you simply revel in other people's problems?

Your 'friend' doesn't have a problem. He has the *** choice *** to use the 800K method.

 

My concern is with the people that do not have a choice. 

[Psychic]

51 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

 

I'm in shock and tears, literally.

That worry is going to interfere with his choice of clubs.

 

Have you considered starting a 'go fund me' page for him!

No but he would be quite upset if he went golfing tomorrow and was told that from now in he could only putt with his driver.

 

"But why?"

 

"New policy".

 

Unfair to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

 

So go fund yourself.

 

????

Edited November 18, 2018 by Psychic
Wrong target.

[Psychic]

18 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Your 'friend' doesn't have a problem. He has the *** choice *** to use the 800K method.

 

My concern is with the people that do not have a choice. 

What if he doesn't?

 

What if his investments are locked in allowing, for instance, an annual withdrawal?

 

The example was supposed to be general. People have a multitude of different circumstances.

 

I think this whole thing is being handled very shabbily.

 

Yes, he has the funds to bring to Thailand and, no doubt, if he has to he will.

 

But as I write in a previous post what happens if he is temporarily unable to access those funds or is unable to meet the timeline for the seasoning.

 

Your sarcasm suggests that you simply don't give a rat's ass about people who while complying completely with the laws might be put in a very difficult decision.

 

I was simply stating that an elderly man doesn't need to be through the stress, after being the epitome of a model "alien" for many years of having to struggle to find a solution to a problem that has been caused but not addressed by the Thai government.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2018 by Psychic

[elviajero]

9 minutes ago, Psychic said:

What if he doesn't?

 

What if his investments are locked in allowing, for instance, an annual withdrawal?

 

The example was supposed to be general. People have a multitude of different circumstances.

You made a specific comment about your friends circumstances, not a general comment, and you said; "He is fully capable of putting 800K in the bank".

 

He lives in a country with temporary permission to stay. Anyone putting all their eggs in that basket should have a contingency for when things change, because the only guarantee is that things will change. It sounds like your friend is being inconvenienced at worst, unlike others with genuine problems due to this change.

 

[Tanoshi]

55 minutes ago, Psychic said:

But as I write in a previous post what happens if he is temporarily unable to access those funds or is unable to meet the timeline for the seasoning.

Sell his 1.5M SUV he chose to buy.

I can think of a lot of expats that wish they had his problem.

 

 

Edited November 18, 2018 by Tanoshi

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Psychic said:

Again the Thai government has an absolute right to control immigration but I'd really like to see a serious study about the economics of western immigration here done before they make policy decisions.

There are 2 different mind-sets on this I have seen posted here:

One relies on a macro-economic perspective, without regard to individuals.  They will claim it isn't enough to matter - though your guestimate indicates the amount may not be insignificant. 

My own position, is that every group of Thais who loses their jobs, because even one more expat left due to immigration-restrictions, is an avoidable tragedy.

 

Not only do the stories of "don't go there anymore" spread among expats about Thailand (and those were rampant, even before this embassy-letter business), but a similar dynamic occurs among Thais, when some govt-agency arbitrarily cuts off their incomes by removing their customer-base. 

 

This policy-shift towards self-supporting expats is a net-negative from every angle, and amazing no one in power has enough insight to see this, and stop it.

[Psychic]

28 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You made a specific comment about your friends circumstances, not a general comment, and you said; "He is fully capable of putting 800K in the bank".

 

He lives in a country with temporary permission to stay. Anyone putting all their eggs in that basket should have a contingency for when things change, because the only guarantee is that things will change. It sounds like your friend is being inconvenienced at worst, unlike others with genuine problems due to this change.

 

OK, tried to turn this from his specific issues to a general statement that everyone has different issues but you seem focussed on the specific.

 

I am, generously, allowing you to avow that you can see that this is going to cause serious issues for people in different circumstances.

 

If I misunderstood I apologize and applaud your empathy.

[Psychic]

26 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Sell his 1.5M SUV he chose to buy.

I can think of a lot of expats that wish they had his problem.

 

 

Or if he only has 400K available go find a Thai girl to marry?

 

Fulfilling all the dark suspicions of the Bangkok elite.

 

No, he will comply with the law when they tell him what it actually is.

 

As will I.

 

I won't ask the wife for our wedding ring and the jewellery I have given her over the years. Although I have no doubt she'd sell it.

 

You are asking (hypothetically) an elderly man to sell his means of transportation to find newly required funds. Should other people have to sell their homes?

 

Who raised you?

 

 

 

 

[Psychic]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

There are 2 different mind-sets on this I have seen posted here:

One relies on a macro-economic perspective, without regard to individuals.  They will claim it isn't enough to matter - though your guestimate indicates the amount may not be insignificant. 

My own position, is that every group of Thais who loses their jobs, because even one more expat left due to immigration-restrictions, is an avoidable tragedy.

 

Not only do the stories of "don't go there anymore" spread among expats about Thailand (and those were rampant, even before this embassy-letter business), but a similar dynamic occurs among Thais, when some govt-agency arbitrarily cuts off their incomes by removing their customer-base. 

 

This policy-shift towards self-supporting expats is a net-negative from every angle, and amazing no one in power has enough insight to see this, and stop it.

Yes, JT, this is the economic "multiplier effect" I spoke of earlier.

 

You don't just lose the money expats are injecting in the system you are losing all the knock on effects of this expenditure.

 

It's a long time since I studied economics but I believe it is the inverse of the tax rate.,.thus if the Thai tax rate is 10% the total effect of 100 billion is a decrease of 1 trllion in total spending annually since there is little or no savings.

 

As I said, this starts to add up to serious money.

 

Anecdotally, there is a Swedish community in Chaam, more Norwegian in Hua Hin.

 

These are mostly older people and for the last few years it has significantly decreased.

 

A lot of factors. Mostly age or death but they are not being supplemented by "younger" arrivals.

 

There might have been, at one time, a culture of people encouraging their slightly younger friends to come but now they don't have "slightly younger" friends.

 

The younger people don't really want to sit around with 70 and 80 year olds.

 

My much maligned friend told me that an island in Vietnam has changed most of their signage to Russian.

 

Guess where the Russians are going?

 

I love this country and its people. But the ministry of "good ideas" the same ministry that thinks they can create a "Thai Riviera" around a Gulf of Thailand polluted with plastic and raw sewage simply by wishing it is so is doing a disservice to their people.

 

I applaud any measures to modernize the society. But everything seems to be based on "wishful thinking".

 

I tend to take a macro view on most things.

 

So everything you want to achieve takes money.

 

So, as I said, why would you do anything that would reduce revenue, like reducing your expat population.

 

I'll give you a small example. There is a team competition in Bangkok in March.

 

My friend is coming, 2 of his friends from Australia are coming. Mostly because I live here and one of the Ozzies has a Thai wife.

 

They are slightly nuts but I fully expect them to spend between 500K and 1 million baht in the 3 or so weeks they're here.

 

So simply by being here I and the Australian man have generated more than the lump sum.

 

It is a small example but it points to the run on effects of having expats here.

 

I always find it so strange in these threads that there are people who are so "I'm OK Jack" who don't seem to recognize that there are implications for Thailand.

 

It feels to me, that despite their protestations, they simply don't care about the country.

 

I assume most of them are not married with children here, else they might.

Edited November 18, 2018 by Psychic

[melvinmelvin]

46 minutes ago, Psychic said:

Yes, JT, this is the economic "multiplier effect" I spoke of earlier.

 

You don't just lose the money expats are injecting in the system you are losing all the knock on effects of this expenditure.

 

It's a long time since I studied economics but I believe it is the inverse of the tax rate.,.thus if the Thai tax rate is 10% the total effect of 100 billion is a decrease of 1 trllion in total spending annually since there is little or no savings.

 

As I said, this starts to add up to serious money.

 

Anecdotally, there is a Swedish community in Chaam, more Norwegian in Hua Hin.

 

These are mostly older people and for the last few years it has significantly decreased.

 

A lot of factors. Mostly age or death but they are not being supplemented by "younger" arrivals.

 

There might have been, at one time, a culture of people encouraging their slightly younger friends to come but now they don't have "slightly younger" friends.

 

The younger people don't really want to sit around with 70 and 80 year olds.

 

My much maligned friend told me that an island in Vietnam has changed most of their signage to Russian.

 

Guess where the Russians are going?

 

I love this country and its people. But the ministry of "good ideas" the same ministry that thinks they can create a "Thai Riviera" around a Gulf of Thailand polluted with plastic and raw sewage simply by wishing it is so is doing a disservice to their people.

 

I applaud any measures to modernize the society. But everything seems to be based on "wishful thinking".

 

I tend to take a macro view on most things.

 

So everything you want to achieve takes money.

 

So, as I said, why would you do anything that would reduce revenue, like reducing your expat population.

 

I'll give you a small example. There is a team competition in Bangkok in March.

 

My friend is coming, 2 of his friends from Australia are coming. Mostly because I live here and one of the Ozzies has a Thai wife.

 

They are slightly nuts but I fully expect them to spend between 500K and 1 million baht in the 3 or so weeks they're here.

 

So simply by being here I and the Australian man have generated more than the lump sum.

 

It is a small example but it points to the run on effects of having expats here.

 

I always find it so strange in these threads that there are people who are so "I'm OK Jack" who don't seem to recognize that there are implications for Thailand.

 

It feels to me, that despite their protestations, they simply don't care about the country.

 

I assume most of them are not married with children here, else they might.

I think I get your message and understand it.

 

But now, ask yourself, is this of any interest or consequence at all for the real decision makers in Thailand? 

 

Farang in /  farang out - keeping lots of families in Isaan alive, including extended family

Does not interest decision makers at all.

Why? It has no impact on their wealth. they are just a low noise in the running of LoS

 

 

[Maestro]

Removed off-topic posts and the replies to them.

 

[JimGant]

Quote

The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. — George Bernard Shaw

Ah, Maestro's posting suffix seems so pertinent here. The only thing the Thais have said so far -- and which has created all this turmoil -- is they want income verification. Probably they only wanted 'good faith effort' but the embassies apparently thought they heard 'absolute' verification. Subtleties certainly can be lost in translation.

[Tanoshi]

22 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Ah, Maestro's posting suffix seems so pertinent here. The only thing the Thais have said so far -- and which has created all this turmoil -- is they want income verification. Probably they only wanted 'good faith effort' but the embassies apparently thought they heard 'absolute' verification. Subtleties certainly can be lost in translation.

Income letters/affidavits/stat decs have always been issued and accepted on good faith and based on the truthfulness of the applicant.

Guess who spoiled that by abuse.

'Verify' or 'verification' translates perfectly well in Thai and English.

 

It's not that the Embassies won't, it's the fact they can't 'verify' your information.

Verification involves the process of establishing the truth, accuracy, or validity of something.

The same Data Protection laws that prevent me from verifying your personal details and information, also prevents any other third party from doing the same, unless you go through the correct legal process, which can be time consuming and costly.