well if Denmark cannot legally do it then the rest of the EU can't

bad news

3 hours ago, Aforek said:

The two owners of the very  known computer shop in Hua hin are from Denmark 

( sorry, don't remember the name, but everybody on TV knows them ) 

So they are retired?

10 hours ago, chickenslegs said:

I think you are probably correct.

 

But, it's hard to understand why the Danish Embassy would leave their citizens in such a mess when others have at least given their people a bit of time to organise their next extension.

 

Yes, I agree. But maybe the other shoe hasn't dropped yet and TI will no longer accept any embassy letters/affidavits to extend visas after 1 January.  Then we will all be in the same boat!

5 minutes ago, pookiki said:

Yes, I agree. But maybe the other shoe hasn't dropped yet and TI will no longer accept any embassy letters/affidavits to extend visas after 1 January.  Then we will all be in the same boat!

 

seems to be what hua hin IO are saying already if latest posts can be trusted

 

14 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

well if Denmark cannot legally do it then the rest of the EU can't

bad news

 

would put a LOT of pressure on IO to come up with a solution if all US/UK/EU/AU expats are affected

 

thats a lot of rich westerners scrambling for funds..

 

or looking elsewhere 

 

 

5 minutes ago, pookiki said:

Yes, I agree. But maybe the other shoe hasn't dropped yet and TI will no longer accept any embassy letters/affidavits to extend visas after 1 January.  Then we will all be in the same boat!

If they won't accept letters then they will stipulate what they will accept as proof of income. Their own regulations state proof of income of 40/65k per month is required for a visa extension, there is no mention of an embassy letter (in the regulations) so there would only be the need for all IO's to drop the demand for an embassy letter.

4 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

If they won't accept letters then they will stipulate what they will accept as proof of income. Their own regulations state proof of income of 40/65k per month is required for a visa extension, there is no mention of an embassy letter (in the regulations) so there would only be the need for all IO's to drop the demand for an embassy letter.

.........and that money to be in a Thai bank for easy verification.

 

Just finished it off for you.

2 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

.........and that money to be in a Thai bank for easy verification.

 

Just finished it off for you.

that isn't stipulated, they would have to change the regulations but that could happen of course. From December onwards I will be transferring 65k per month to BKK bank to prepare for this.

Now it is well time that Thai Wife,Husband,Girlfriend,Boyfriend and Children to react. And go out on facebook+++ and write, and write to the Immigration of the BIG problems they get in the future with these requirements from Immigration in Thailand. This is going to be BIG BIG problems fore many many Thai/Farang family already from today.

1 hour ago, onera1961 said:

I did not get non-immigrant O visa. I got one year non-immigrant O-A visa. Every time I enter Thailand, I get permitted to stay stamped for one year...…..……. I have to get an extension at the immigration inside Thailand or a new O-A from my home country (USA). 

You didn't need the 3 mth O visa because you got your visa in the US, not everyone does that. There's only a few Thai embassies in the US. I flew in visa-free for 30 days then got my 3 mth & 1-yr both at the same time in Thailand using the income affidavit from US embassy. It was much easier for me to do here... no police report & no medical were required.

9 minutes ago, nasa123 said:

Now it is well time that Thai Wife,Husband,Girlfriend,Boyfriend and Children to react. And go out on facebook+++ and write, and write to the Immigration of the BIG problems they get in the future with these requirements from Immigration in Thailand. This is going to be BIG BIG problems fore many many Thai/Farang family already from today.

I think most people have 400/800k to put them in a bank. Maybe some just didn't want until now because they don't trust Thai banks, but if they are forced to do it they will do it.

So there are probably only a few percent of people who stay in Thailand and don't have 400/800k to put on a Thai bank account, these few percent will probably change to agents or multiple non-o visas now.

8 minutes ago, jackdd said:

I think most people have 400/800k to put them in a bank. Maybe some just didn't want until now because they don't trust Thai banks, but if they are forced to do it they will do it.

So there are probably only a few percent of people who stay in Thailand and don't have 400/800k to put on a Thai bank account, these few percent will probably change to agents or multiple non-o visas now.

Turn around on it, there are few percent that has the 400/800 and put on a bank.

 

19 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

If they won't accept letters then they will stipulate what they will accept as proof of income. Their own regulations state proof of income of 40/65k per month is required for a visa extension, there is no mention of an embassy letter (in the regulations) so there would only be the need for all IO's to drop the demand for an embassy letter.

They don't have to stipulate any alternative for proof of income ……….. that's an assumption.

There is no mention of an Embassy letter, income in a foreign bank, Thai bank or cash in hand.

 

Unless Immigration issue a new directive, then it leaves the funds (400 - 800K) deposited in a Thai bank as the only alternative

59 minutes ago, a977 said:

This is not true the Australian Embassy can enter a persons tax file number or their Centrelink number and bingo up comes that persons file including the brand of toilet tissue they use and probably the last time they went. It is just pure laziness on the part of the Embassy to not do this, I have sent yesterday a email to the Embassy to this effect, still awaiting a reply, maybe email fell into the too hard basket. 

What makes you think the Embassy would have access to the ATO or centerlink data. The embassy is a representation of the Australian government in Thailand, they are not a branch of the ATO or centerlink. I cant lodge my tax return or enquire about my pension at the Embassy. A bit of a strange assumption that the embassy has a computer in the corner with full access to all government and citizen data.

1 hour ago, stanleycoin said:

I don't believe any good will come from all this,   for any ex pats.

it's just playing into the hands of Thai immigration, to invent a few more hoops, jumps and rolly pollies for us all,  regardless of what root you go down, money or income.

All could have just been left alone. 

 

 

 

 

With their increasingly deafening silence on this whole matter, I am now beginning to wonder seriously whether the Immigration Bureau's ultimate objective is to have the seasoned bank balance method be the strict order of the day for proving finances at annual extension of stay time.

 

Which they could achieve by simply sitting on their hands and doing nothing while more and more embassies withdrew their income confirmation services - meaning that the monthly income method would, in effect, eventually wither and die on the vine without the need for the Bureau to issue new directives.

 

12 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

This is due to the fact that the Embassy in Bangkok is legally unable to fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements to guarantee the future level of pension/income for Danish Nationals.

Thais are looking for guarantees of future income, not current?

17 minutes ago, nasa123 said:

Turn around on it, there are few percent that has the 400/800 and put on a bank.

 

But what you say is just wrong.

There are many statistics about this, just google something like "median net worth retirement" then you will see that the median for retirees in western countries is somewhere in the millions of THB, so most of the retirees can afford 800k on a Thai bank ????

 

11 hours ago, thequietman said:

The Brits actually checked. Oz and USA didn't.

The Brits actually checked what?

24 minutes ago, OJAS said:

With their increasingly deafening silence on this whole matter, I am now beginning to wonder seriously whether the Immigration Bureau's ultimate objective is to have the seasoned bank balance method be the strict order of the day for proving finances at annual extension of stay time.

 

Which they could achieve by simply sitting on their hands and doing nothing while more and more embassies withdrew their income confirmation services - meaning that the monthly income method would, in effect, eventually wither and die on the vine without the need for the Bureau to issue new directives.

 

You're absolutely right... TI doesn't need to do anything and we can't make them. TI can just tell any applicants showing up that they need 400k/800k 3 mths seasoned in a Thai bank account. It's their country... they can do anything they want...

4 minutes ago, jackdd said:

// the median for retirees in western countries is somewhere in the millions of THB, so most of the retirees can afford 800k on a Thai bank ????

Except that - IMHO - many of retirees in Thailand choose to come live here because life is a lot cheaper and they are in the bottom of the graph with - sometimes - not enough to live in their home country !

Even if there are some "rich" retirees here, I would not be surprised to read that the media income for retirees in Thailand is way below 800'000... sadly.

Well no surprises here.  I did say on another thread that when I extended my stay just over a week ago that in answer to the question "Is this just the British, American and Australian embassies?", the answer was categorically "No.  ALL embassies! Next year you need to have 800K in the bank."

 

Other embassies will follow suit but my guess is whether they do or don't, the Thai Immigration will refuse letters from ANY embassy.

I will repeat myself again, as I have said many times - expect more to follow and likely  all of the rest.

 

Those nationals that think their respective embassies who have so far not made announcements and will continue to issue these letters/affidavits need to plan now, it should be fairly obvious that the facility is coming to an end.

 

It has also  been reported from some Immigration offices that they will only accept a Thai seasoned bank balance for 12 month extensions going forward - of course that might change

Take a step back and look at the whole picture. Clearly it has been decided by the Thai authorities that changes must be made. Thailand like any other country is run like a business for the greater good for its own people. Thailand does not want or need foreigners living here like poor Thais do...it makes no economic sense. They only want high net worth foreigners. I believe this is only the start. The message is clear, if you are poor, go back and be poor in your own country and not Thailand.

10 minutes ago, smedly said:

It has also  been reported from some Immigration offices that they will only accept a Thai seasoned bank balance for 12 month extensions going forward - of course that might change

Those were replies to the question about whether they would accept an application without proof of income from an embassy. They of course gave that reply since at this time that is the only allowed proof.

12 hours ago, thequietman said:

Surely an immigration officer can look at a pension letter or a bank book and make the decision themselves to grant an extension.

This nonsense of having to send the application to Bangkok or CM is quite frankly a total waste of time and just pure bureaucracy. 

everyone needs to be clear before they apply what the rules are 100%

 

It is too late if you apply and it gets rejected because they won't accept your income proof, of course as has been mentioned already by someone - a proposal was made to approve a rejected application with a payment of 24kbaht

14 minutes ago, Bert Jones said:

Take a step back and look at the whole picture. Clearly it has been decided by the Thai authorities that changes must be made. Thailand like any other country is run like a business for the greater good for its own people. Thailand does not want or need foreigners living here like poor Thais do...it makes no economic sense. They only want high net worth foreigners. I believe this is only the start. The message is clear, if you are poor, go back and be poor in your own country and not Thailand.

Except for the fact that the average salary in Thailand for 2018 is just over 14,000 per month.

 

 

13 hours ago, pontious said:

No notice and a refund if you have not received it yet is extreme to say the least.

Our Dutch colleagues would have every right to be furious.

You mean Danish?

12 hours ago, Pib said:

The Danish embassy action is definitely harsh.  Their action will surely screw those Danish using the income letter for their annual extension and whose extension expires within 3 months.  Gives them no chance to season Bt800/400K in a bank for 3 months even if they had the Bt800/400K to immediately put in a Thai bank account.

 

And I don't know if this really pressures Thai Immigration to put out guidance ASAP as Thai Immigration will just say the Danish embassy should not have cut their citizens off immediately....should have done it like the UK/UK/AU embassies did it by giving everyone a few more months to get letters that should be valid for 6 months. 

 

Thai Immigration may just see this as a Danish self-inflicted wound.  Or maybe said another way, Poor Planning on Your Part (Danish Embassy) Does Not Create An Emergency For Me (Thai Immigration).

 

 

Let me restate above in pictures.

 

Danish Embassy Action

 

Thai Immigration Response 

 

 

 

35 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Except that - IMHO - many of retirees in Thailand choose to come live here because life is a lot cheaper and they are in the bottom of the graph with - sometimes - not enough to live in their home country !

Even if there are some "rich" retirees here, I would not be surprised to read that the media income for retirees in Thailand is way below 800'000... sadly.

Somebody who has a monthly pension/income of at least 65,000THB can't be too far in the bottom of the graph and would imho be able to (and should) save the 800k over a few years

47 minutes ago, jackdd said:

But what you say is just wrong.

There are many statistics about this, just google something like "median net worth retirement" then you will see that the median for retirees in western countries is somewhere in the millions of THB, so most of the retirees can afford 800k on a Thai bank ????

 

Doubtful conclusion from a suspect input that almost certainly doesn't apply to a majority of expats living in Thailand ...

10 hours ago, skatewash said:

But one must prove one's level of income each year, therefore it doesn't really matter about a future guarantee.  That would be a concern if the level of income were established one-time only but that's not the way it works.  So I agree that it was a very strange thing to mention in the statement.  If one could prove (guarantee) future income why would they need to prove that every year?  Surely one-time only would be sufficient.

 

Indeed. Even TI's 65k per month, for 12 months, is an historical statement. So if TI actually told the Danes that they have to certify "future income," of course they said, 'no can do, we're outa here.' Thus, it begs exactly what each embassy has heard from TI.... If the Brits also heard "future income," again, of course they can't verify this -- they can only do what they've been doing, namely checking/verifying the applicants' statements of income, presumably historical. And if anyone is home at TI, this should be "good enough."

 

So, are different Immigration officers telling different things to different embassies? Or is verification of "future income" really what they want? Or is something being lost here in translation?

 

Logic would dictate that "good enough" should prevail. And only those (US, Oz) not checking applicants' statements need to come up to the "good enough" level. But logic and Thai Immigration in the same sentence can often be a head scratcher.