Udon Thani 65,000 baht retirement extension rules

[JackThompson]

29 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Personally, I just stuck + 800k in a Thai bank years ago and don't use it. I love the zero %.

There are longer-term type accounts which pay better interest that immigration will permit.  The rule is, you must be able to withdraw the total principle at any time, and the only consequence of early-withdrawal is a loss in the interest paid.

 

32 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

but what is point of this income thing. If there was none would we see huge surge in dead beat farang sleeping on the streets. The vast majority of farang living here are abiding but countries laws, spend good money that comes from "home country" etc etc.

Agreed.  I don't see the point, beyond a tiny-fraction who will not pay for medical, run out of money, or get into legal-trouble.  Those cases could be handled by a form of insurance fee, charged to everyone applying for a permitted-stay (entry or extension), to cover any associated costs and get them home.  With that covered, the income-point would become moot.

[DrJack54]

Ha, JT and I agree on something. I think the suggestion of a surcharge on some sort of health insurance is an idea worth considering by immigration. I imagine its been done before, but i wonder how popular a thread with heading "suggestions to changes in visa rules" would be.

I actually believe if immigration sought out ways to improve some aspects it could be a win win.

I often praize Thailand for allowing people such as myself to live is this lovely place. At same time I think some of the "rules" leave me scratching my head. 90 day reporting springs to mind. But all this not related to OP, so will stop there

Edited November 20, 2018 by DrJack54
Error

[DPKANKAN]

On 11/19/2018 at 11:27 AM, robertson468 said:

 

Not the IO's opinion.  Here is a cut and paste from Thai Immigration Rules:

 

- A copy of bank statement showing a deposit of the amount equal to and not less than 800,000 Baht or an income certificate (an original copy) with a monthly income of not less than 65,000 Baht, or a deposit account plus a monthly income totalling not less than 800,000 Baht.

I wonder what their definition of 'income certificate' is??? I have my original UK government letter confirming my meagre UK pension, as well as my annual original letter from my pension fund advisers stating my yearly pension. We will have to wait and see!!!!

 

[Thaidream]

There is only one way to 'prove' one has an income of 65K per month and that is to provide some type of documentation that the income exists-  a pension letter from either government or private indicating source and amount;  a signed agreement  showing a home in which one is renting and the amount and term; a letter from a broker/investment house showing  amounts. This is primary proof.

 

Secondary proof is where the income goes- a bank account letter showing deposits and debits with amounts matching the primary proof or bank transfers to a Thai account or cash deposits into a Thai account or other proof of funds entering Thailand on a regular basis.  The direct deposits in your bank account match the  amounts on your primary proof letter. ( In other words if one gets  $1500 per month from a Government source-  your bank account (wherever it is) should show the same amount being deposited every month at the approximate same time)

 

Tertiary proof are tax returns;  Debit cards/slips;  Bank Books; viewing on line banking

 

This is the closest  either the Embassy or Thai imm can get to  100% due to Privacy Laws etc.  Once a bureaucracy understands this- they go with Primary; Secondary and Tertiary as backups and live with the fact that someone  could have falsified all of it.  Nothing is foolproof.

 

IMHO- all Embassy Letters should be reinstated using the following process

A.  An  Embassy Letter showing  total income amount and  source.

B.  the applicant appears in person with their Primary Proof in which the amounts on the source docs add up to the stated income .  

C.  All Embassies have their applicants sign- swear an Oath under penalty of perjury and then the Embassy signs off.  Each Embassy does outreach to accommodate those who live far from Bangkok.

D.  the citizen takes the letter to Thai Imm who then either accepts it as is or asks for  Secondary or Tertiary evidence from  a representative sample of applicants. Everyone best have  all possible docs available.

 

Will some slip through the cracks and not have the income- probably but in decreased numbers.  If some of these are suspected of working - so be it- eventually they will be caught if the labor department is doing their job.

 

Tighten up the Embassy letter situation through negotiation with Thai Imm  and everyone's issues are satisfied.  The Embassies can even raise the  fee  for the few extra minutes they may have to look at income proof and use a calculator.

 

In some cases Thai Imm, if suspicious, will have to spend some extra time looking through the documents.  In some cases- the applicant may have to have their 'proof' translated to English or Thai. 

IMO the above satisfies all stakeholders regardless of how the income is obtained or where it originates from as long as it is legal and can be documented.

[JLCrab]

2 hours ago, pastprime said:

Thanks ubonjoe!  exactly what i suggested few days ago ,but got it removed      even better to do it between direct debits   in and out within 48 hours   same 65000 doing the rounds   add a few more baht  for any charges later

As UbonJoe noted in an earlier post this topic, although the FTT in the passbook might be primary, the IMM folks might ask for a documented source of monthly funds as back-up just so same 65K isn't just making the monthly rounds.

[JLCrab]

17 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

B.  the applicant appears in person with their Primary Proof in which the amounts on the source docs add up to the stated income .  

This would be a violation of US State Department policy across Embassies/Consulates in 200 some countries with US diplomatic relations. Other than that, no problem.

 

Under US policy, a US citizen could maybe show up and say that he/she has in his/her possession docs that add up to verify e.g. 65K per month income,  but the Embassy/Consulate official would not be able to even look at those docs in any notary saying those are in fact the specified docs that are claimed to add up to 65K baht per month.

Edited November 20, 2018 by JLCrab

[Thaidream]

8 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

This would be a violation of US State Department policy across Embassies/Consulates in 200 some countries with US diplomatic relations. Other than that, no problem.

The Embassy signature and Oath do not state anything other than the applicant has sworn under Oath the information is true.  The notarial section of the Us Embassy Website indicates the same.

Actually- the correct form to us for this would be the General  Affidavit  and not  a pre-printed form currently in use.

 

I  have used the General Affidavit before for various things that was accepted in the US by courts; the Internal Revenue Department and an annuity Fund.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Thaidream

[bkk6060]

21 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

There is only one way to 'prove' one has an income of 65K per month and that is to provide some type of documentation that the income exists-  a pension letter from either government or private indicating source and amount;  a signed agreement  showing a home in which one is renting and the amount and term; a letter from a broker/investment house showing  amounts. This is primary proof.

 

Secondary proof is where the income goes- a bank account letter showing deposits and debits with amounts matching the primary proof or bank transfers to a Thai account or cash deposits into a Thai account or other proof of funds entering Thailand on a regular basis.  The direct deposits in your bank account match the  amounts on your primary proof letter. ( In other words if one gets  $1500 per month from a Government source-  your bank account (wherever it is) should show the same amount being deposited every month at the approximate same time)

 

Tertiary proof are tax returns;  Debit cards/slips;  Bank Books; viewing on line banking

 

This is the closest  either the Embassy or Thai imm can get to  100% due to Privacy Laws etc.  Once a bureaucracy understands this- they go with Primary; Secondary and Tertiary as backups and live with the fact that someone  could have falsified all of it.  Nothing is foolproof.

 

IMHO- all Embassy Letters should be reinstated using the following process

A.  An  Embassy Letter showing  total income amount and  source.

B.  the applicant appears in person with their Primary Proof in which the amounts on the source docs add up to the stated income .  

C.  All Embassies have their applicants sign- swear an Oath under penalty of perjury and then the Embassy signs off.  Each Embassy does outreach to accommodate those who live far from Bangkok.

D.  the citizen takes the letter to Thai Imm who then either accepts it as is or asks for  Secondary or Tertiary evidence from  a representative sample of applicants. Everyone best have  all possible docs available.

 

Will some slip through the cracks and not have the income- probably but in decreased numbers.  If some of these are suspected of working - so be it- eventually they will be caught if the labor department is doing their job.

 

Tighten up the Embassy letter situation through negotiation with Thai Imm  and everyone's issues are satisfied.  The Embassies can even raise the  fee  for the few extra minutes they may have to look at income proof and use a calculator.

 

In some cases Thai Imm, if suspicious, will have to spend some extra time looking through the documents.  In some cases- the applicant may have to have their 'proof' translated to English or Thai. 

IMO the above satisfies all stakeholders regardless of how the income is obtained or where it originates from as long as it is legal and can be documented.

Sorry, I know you put a lot of thought into your post but it is a waste of time.

The embassies are glad to be out of this business.  They are not going to change their minds and start again.

Your suggestions have definite merit, but income verification by the embassies who have bailed are or will soon be a thing of the past.

[JLCrab]

26 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

B.  the applicant appears in person with their Primary Proof in which the amounts on the source docs add up to the stated income .  

You said the person would show up at the US Embassy with their primary proof docs. TO the US Embassy notary, it makes no difference whether the docs are in the applicant's possession or in a hotel room in Vanuatu.

 

BTW thanks for your detailed policy and procedural suggestions but I am hoping they can work this all out before the end of the decade.

Edited November 20, 2018 by JLCrab

[Moonlover]

9 hours ago, Issanjohn said:

22 hours ago, Moonlover said:

From Immigration's point of view, a good argument in favour of monthly income evidence goes like this.

 

It is possible to borrow 800/400k for 2 or 3 months, (think agencies) but it's very difficult to borrow a continuous stream of 65/40k every month.

 

9 hours ago, Issanjohn said:

Borrow LoL ???? My monthly income is more than double both amounts per month thanks to my monthly pension payments I don’t borrow anything lol ????.  I don’t remember if you’re the same person I spoke to earlier who was deliberately putting out misinformation I’m sorry if you’re not that same person but still you ought to do a bit more research.  

 

I fall within Thai immigration laws for my extension. If you don’t fall with Thai immigration laws then you might want to leave the country and get a whole new visa  based on your own personal situation not based on everyone else’s situation, or maybe you should be rethinking whether or not you should even be living here.  

 

I’m not sure what you’re getting at as far as “borrowing money”.  If you’re having to borrow money from people to qualify for your extension then I recommend that you seek financial counseling and maybe you should consider just going home.  I don’t have to borrow from anyone for my extensions I’m retired.  Honestly I don’t have any idea what you’re talking about here no offense.  You sound like that same guy from yesterday but I don’t recall.  I don’t think I’ll be reading or replying to you anymore I prefer to chat with more intelligent people no offense maybe I’m missing something here I don’t know.  You’re post is just confusing but if you’re saying what it looks like you probably need to rethink your situation.  If you’re living here you shouldn’t have to be “borrowing” money for your extensions seriously.  

The first few words of my post read 'From Immigration's point of view'. Or did you miss that bit in your headlong rush to hurl this insulting and completely incorrect tirade at me?

[bkk6060]

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

 Personally, I just stuck + 800k in a Thai bank years ago and don't use it. 

The smartest, most efficient, less worrisome way to get thru all this.

Bite the bullet and move on for the rest of your time here.

[JLCrab]

I am still hoping before I would have to go the OA or 800K deposit route next JULY 2019 that the monlthy income option will be sustained. But it won't be contrary to what some are proposing on here because Rube Goldberg intervened:

[DavidB1960]

13 hours ago, fforest1 said:

If they might want to see 65,000 from overseas every month why were they ok with the income letter from the embassy for the last 18 years? Yes I did say 18 years......And why are they still ok with the income letter from all embassies except 4? Yes I did say ALL other embassies..

And why was income from any source ok?....There must be a lot more than a few farang that get income from property rental in Thailand and Thai stocks......Not accepting income from Thailand would be telling farangs to never invest in Thailand.....

 

So I not buying the 65,000 has to come from overseas....There is no history to support this at all..And it would scare farangs away from investing in Thailand....

 

And there is certinly no requirement for it in Thai Immigration Law for retirement extensions.

[JLCrab]

Whatever the regulations or Acts specify as to source of funds domestic or via foreign wire transfer or any other conditions on source of funds, those decisions might be made by Thai IMM strictly on the basis of administrative procedure if, what some people would like to see as the process, would make the average processing of an extension of stay go from maybe 5-10 minutes to 20 or more minutes which would lead to total gridlock in the IMM offices.

[sumrit]

15 hours ago, fforest1 said:

If they might want to see 65,000 from overseas every month why were they ok with the income letter from the embassy for the last 18 years? Yes I did say 18 years......And why are they still ok with the income letter from all embassies except 4? Yes I did say ALL other embassies..

And why was income from any source ok?....There must be a lot more than a few farang that get income from property rental in Thailand and Thai stocks......Not accepting income from Thailand would be telling farangs to never invest in Thailand.....

 

So I not buying the 65,000 has to come from overseas....There is no history to support this at all..And it would scare farangs away from investing in Thailand....

 

The problem is that a percentage of people don't have the required income, so resort to 'manipulating' their figures in order to get an income letter from their Embassy. TI are attempting to close the loophole by insisting on verification of a person's income. Unfortunately, TI wouldn't be able to confirm an income from the countless foreign documents different foreigners would produce. As the Embassies can't/won't verify the income, the next step would seem to be proving the money is brought into Thailand on a regular basis. I agree it hasn't been required previously but, as everybody knows, the system has been pretty lax in the past. As yet, we don't know what, if any, procedures might be put in place to satisfy TI. At the moment, showing an income has come from abroad on a monthly basis is pure speculation

 

TI appears to be trying to tighten the loopholes and making the system more secure. Only time will tell if they're successful but in the meantime, if it causes us problems, blame the people who have consistently lied about there income and/or used agents to supply a bank letter in order to gain an extension when they haven't had sufficient income/funds in the bank to be legal.     

[JackThompson]

16 hours ago, sumrit said:

TI appears to be trying to tighten the loopholes and making the system more secure. Only time will tell if they're successful but in the meantime, if it causes us problems, blame the people who have consistently lied about there income and/or used agents to supply a bank letter in order to gain an extension when they haven't had sufficient income/funds in the bank to be legal.   

I will think it far-fetched to put blame on some unknown-fraction of expats who were willing to commit a Felony to claim fake-income - absent any investigation or reports of referrals by TI for prosecution for such - while there are "no money extensions" (public-ads) on offer. 

 

Money is the motivation at the bottom of most actions in this arena, and stopping the letters will drive-up agent-money envelopes from a few fakers and the many legit.  I seriously doubt this letter-issue would have ever arisen without the financial-gain potential of forcing thousands more expats to agents. 

[DrJack54]

Been up here Udon last few days. When having a chat with guys that live here, I've been personally surprised of response the question, "what do you use for financial proof for annual extension". Reply... "oh I have an agent do all that".

Personally I have never used one, but now thinking there must be lots of people that do.

[sumrit]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

I will think it far-fetched to put blame on some unknown-fraction of expats who were willing to commit a Felony to claim fake-income - absent any investigation or reports of referrals by TI for prosecution for such - while there are "no money extensions" (public-ads) on offer. 

 

Money is the motivation at the bottom of most actions in this arena, and stopping the letters will drive-up agent-money envelopes from a few fakers and the many legit.  I seriously doubt this letter-issue would have ever arisen without the financial-gain potential of forcing thousands more expats to agents. 

It's the Embassies that are now refusing to supply income letters, the TI position and rules have not changed at all. Their requirements are still exactly the same as they've always been. All they've done is ask the Embassies to abide by the income letter rules that have always been in place. And their request is certainly not to catch all the law-abiding expats who have always been 'legal', it's to catch to ones that have been doing things illegally. 

 

You seem to think this is all down to forcing expats into using agents and being forced into playing tea money to the TI powers that be while I think it's more geared up to stopping all the fake income letters that some expats obtain. Let's just see how the income option pans out over the next month or two.

[sumrit]

35 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Been up here Udon last few days. When having a chat with guys that live here, I've been personally surprised of response the question, "what do you use for financial proof for annual extension". Reply... "oh I have an agent do all that".

Personally I have never used one, but now thinking there must be lots of people that do.

A more interesting question would have been, do you use an agent and pay their extra fees purely for your convenience or are these agents used to 'iron out' financial issues. 

[DrJack54]

23 minutes ago, sumrit said:

A more interesting question would have been, do you use an agent and pay their extra fees purely for your convenience or are these agents used to 'iron out' financial issues. 

Only a guess, but I'm thinking answer would be both. A lot of people don't have clue about visas etc. Yesterday I was talking to young fella in udon who has Thai gf and young baby. He mentioned they don't wish to marry (right now), I mentioned he could obtain non o based on parent of Thai child. He was ostounded. BTW in his passport he had 18 visa exempt and some extensions. Yes 18. But not all back to back. Still working uk

[JackThompson]

3 hours ago, sumrit said:

It's the Embassies that are now refusing to supply income letters, the TI position and rules have not changed at all. Their requirements are still exactly the same as they've always been. All they've done is ask the Embassies to abide by the income letter rules that have always been in place. And their request is certainly not to catch all the law-abiding expats who have always been 'legal', it's to catch to ones that have been doing things illegally.  

 

You seem to think this is all down to forcing expats into using agents and being forced into playing tea money to the TI powers that be while I think it's more geared up to stopping all the fake income letters that some expats obtain. Let's just see how the income option pans out over the next month or two.

 

If immigration had an issue with the letters, they could have read the text of ours (USA) sometime in the last decades, and published a "fair-warning," and stated time-frame for phase-out and "what's next."

 

If immigration really cared about "faked money," they could have quit accepting agent-money (at all larger offices) to ignore money-seasoning, for the specific purpose of permitting faked-money applications.  The fact they openly aid, abet, encourage, and profit from this ongoing fraud, makes any claim to "care" about the veracity of the letters - or financials in general - wholly non-credible, except in the context of the tea-money to be gained.

 

I have well over the needed income, but it is not from a pension.  I am skeptical I will be able to get an extension with no letter-option, but am doing mo-xfers from abroad, in hopes that I can.  In the meantime, I can only hope Non-O-ME Visas remain available in the region.  If I were forced to use an agent in the future, I could inadvertently be associated with criminals - something I am trying to avoid.

[nasa123]

The problem here in Phuket and another places in TH, you can NOT open a Bank account if you not have a B-visa + workpermite and registration where you live from Immigration, and that are in every Bank. The banks are afraid of money laundering and black money from abroad. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by nasa123

[skatewash]

2 minutes ago, nasa123 said:

The problem here in Phuket and another places in TH, you can NOT open a Bank account if you not have a B-visa + reg where you live from Immigration, and that are in every Bank. The banks are afraid of money laundering and black money from abroad. 

I know know-your-customer, FATCA, and other mostly US initiatives have made US citizens persona non grata at many banks, I still think you can get a new account without a B-visa.  You will most likely need a long term visa (non-imm O,B) and/or annual extension of stays.  You will also need to prove your residence, which can be obtained from the Phuket Immigration Office (300 baht at Phuket town) or from your own embassy or embassy outreach, or possibly if you have a yellow house registration book (tabian bahn).  If you have utility bills bring those.  In other words, make the due diligence that the bank is supposed to do when opening your account as easy for them as possible.  Your job is to give them a warm and fuzzy feeling about you, not the suspicion that you're up to something.

Also, I think you can really help yourself by going to particular offices.  For example, the staff at the main Patong branch (Rat-U-tit Road, not far from Jungceylon) of Bangkok Bank seems to have English speaking staff and are used to dealing with foreigners.  I had to show an actual US Social Security Card to prove my social security number (which I'm amazed I actually had at home) when I set up the account.  Instead of kicking up a fuss at needing to show such a thing (for their due diligence) I just went home and brought back the card.  Some things you can finesse with attitude, by making interacting with you a pleasant experience and not a visit to the dentist. 

 

You also may gain some sympathy if they understand you are opening the account and plan to have it long term, in fact, need to have it for immigration purposes, and that you will likely be keeping over 800,000 baht balance.  In other words, make it sound like you're not a waste of time given that they will have to do a lot of paperwork just because you happen to be a US citizen (FATCA stuff).  Ask yourself the question, "if I worked at a bank would I want myself as a customer?"  I know this strikes a lot of people as meaningless drivel but how do you explain that two people can go to a bank in similar circumstances and one gets an account and the other gets the runaround.  People who are a piece of work to deal with are candidates for being given the nearest excuse why it's not possible to help them.  It's a self-defense mechanism, they just want to get rid of the problem the quickest easiest way possible.

Go in assuming you'll be successful but assuming that you'll be asked for all sorts of things you didn't anticipate.  Work with them to help them open your account.  Don't teach them their job.  Be a mensch, not a hassle.  Give it a try, what do you have to lose?

[nasa123]

7 minutes ago, skatewash said:

I know know-your-customer, FATCA, and other mostly US initiatives have made US citizens persona non grata at many banks, I still think you can get a new account without a B-visa.  You will most likely need a long term visa (non-imm O,B) and/or annual extension of stays.  You will also need to prove your residence, which can be obtained from the Phuket Immigration Office (300 baht at Phuket town) or from your own embassy or embassy outreach, or possibly if you have a yellow house registration book (tabian bahn).  If you have utility bills bring those.  In other words, make the due diligence that the bank is supposed to do when opening your account as easy for them as possible.  Your job is to give them a warm and fuzzy feeling about you, not the suspicion that you're up to something.

Also, I think you can really help yourself by going to particular offices.  For example, the staff at the main Patong branch (Rat-U-tit Road, not far from Jungceylon) of Bangkok Bank seems to have English speaking staff and are used to dealing with foreigners.  I had to show an actual US Social Security Card to prove my social security number (which I'm amazed I actually had at home) when I set up the account.  Instead of kicking up a fuss at needing to show such a thing (for their due diligence) I just went home and brought back the card.  Some things you can finesse with attitude, by making interacting with you a pleasant experience and not a visit to the dentist. 

 

You also may gain some sympathy if they understand you are opening the account and plan to have it long term, in fact, need to have it for immigration purposes, and that you will likely be keeping over 800,000 baht balance.  In other words, make it sound like you're not a waste of time given that they will have to do a lot of paperwork just because you happen to be a US citizen (FATCA stuff).  Ask yourself the question, "if I worked at a bank would I want myself as a customer?"  I know this strikes a lot of people as meaningless drivel but how do you explain that two people can go to a bank in similar circumstances and one gets an account and the other gets the runaround.  People who are a piece of work to deal with are candidates for being given the nearest excuse why it's not possible to help them.  It's a self-defense mechanism, they just want to get rid of the problem the quickest easiest way possible.

Go in assuming you'll be successful but assuming that you'll be asked for all sorts of things you didn't anticipate.  Work with them to help them open your account.  Don't teach them their job.  Be a mensch, not a hassle.  Give it a try, what do you have to lose?

No problem for me a live here here in Phuket for 14 years, but for many many people its a big problem right now. No B-visa whit work permit no bank account, not helping whit O-Oa-extension+++. 

[kellio]

On 11/20/2018 at 11:03 AM, sgoodes said:

From what I've been told the Australian embassy has never issued income verification letters so can you tell me how you go about verifying this. At present I have an income statement letter from my employer, pay slips and bank statements. I'll be looking into retirement visa shortly. 

You're quit correct in that the Australian embassy never issued income verification statements.
Instead, they simple signed and stamped a form filled in by applicants which was in effect a statutory declaration by the person stating that they received an annual income exceeding the 800,000 baht required for a retirement visa.
In this way, the Australian embassy couldn't be accused of providing false documents because the onus was on the signer of the document and doing so was technically commuting an act of criminality if the declaration was false.