Well I'm going today to Oz Embassy to try and get the "witnessed" statutory declaration of my monthly income.

It's long before their published cut off date...will report later how it goes.

Pretty certain my local IO will accept it the same as last year.

Seems to me, that the Thai authorities should start to look at a scheme where they look at your track record and start to say 'This person has meet the necessary requirements for the past 5 years', so instead of granting an extension of one year why not make it two, and when you have been here for say 10 years make it a 5 year extension. Surely, if you have been here for that length of time you have proved that you can sustain yourself with your income no matter what it is!

1 hour ago, jessebkk1 said:

 

  I have houses, lands, cars, digital assets and companies valued at over 10 million US Dollars, however at this very second today I have less than 100k Baht in the Bank in total cash. You see how evaluation works?

 

 This issue with income letters has hit a section of the economy really bad, most of the foreigners affected are going to put big expenses on hold so they can prove the 800k in bank, so cars/houses/land etc sales will face a steep decline - hurting the already struggling local economy.

 

 I think for this income letter fiasco to have been made regardless how bad it will hurt the local economy reeks of desperation for foreign cash sitting in thai banks or really a bad judgement by the immigration, policy makers.

 

  As we speak, the thai government is embarking on construction of massive projects (for example BTS trains) that the don't the funds to complete and even when completed will generate very little income as most thais cant afford to use them.

 

 

So how many houses in the USA do you own that you will have to sell to come up with $24,000USD/ 800,000baht??? Or how many houses of yours in let’s say Phuket? 

2 hours ago, Hockeybik said:

They did not verify with the agency or bank or whoever was paying you, they only verified what you showed them. I think Thai Immigration wanted the embassies to verify all the way back to the source and you are not a valid source.

Please show the source that Thai immigration wanted the embassies to verify all the way back to the source.

16 hours ago, darksidedog said:

“However, the foreigner applying for the visa (or permit-to-stay) will still have to prove that they have the funds to stay in the country, such as by showing bank statements that prove the foreigner has B800,000 in a Thai bank account,” he said.
Read more at https://www.thephuketnews.com/income-statement-letters-from-embassies-no-longer-required-confirms-phuket-immigration-69438.php#IZF5tP7cSx8GQ7b0.99

So is that the only option? What about the 65,000 a month? Is that no longer an option? It seems that if we want to stay we have to put money into banks that many of us dont fully trust. I feel somewhat betrayed by the Embassies. You can guarantee they will not be there in our corner if/when our cash has vanished.

I hope immigration can come up with much firmer details on what is and isn't acceptable before crunch time comes, as I can already hear the squeals of pain and outrage.

Why does it have to be a Thai bank I wonder?

 

14 minutes ago, onera1961 said:

In the USA, banks take responsibility even if theft occurs using debit visa/mc in a foreign country. My Ally bank debit card was lost in a Hotel in Bangkok and somebody charged 50,000 baht and bought Gold. I reported and immediately they gave me access to the money and started their investigation. The investigation concluded after four weeks, that it was a theft. I did not have to report to police or anything else. I have 100% confidence in my US banks for credit cards and debit cards. Just a call to them sufficed. I have travelled all over the World with only $100 in my pocket, using credit cards and debit cards only

Then you may not be allowed into Thailand the next time you have $100 on you and some atm cards. FYI.

You also said it is not uncommon to have back theft in Thailand and that is pure BS. 

 

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Please show the source that Thai immigration wanted the embassies to verify all the way back to the source.

That is the very definition of verify, check with the source. 

5 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

 

That is the very definition of verify, check with the source. 

No. He is claiming it should be checked at the source, and pension statements etc. will not be accepted by the embassy as proof since Thai immigration does not accept that. And I think the latter part is simply not correct.

4 minutes ago, alex8912 said:

Then you may not be allowed into Thailand the next time you have $100 on you and some atm cards. FYI.

You also said it is not uncommon to have back theft in Thailand and that is pure BS.

I did not say it does not happen. But I said banks take full responsibility (unless it is a small town CU) even without a police report. All large baks in the US has their own very sophisticated fraud departments. They do their own investigation. 

I am on an O-A visa but I had never carried 20K with me. May be I should keep 20K baht also from now on. 

1 hour ago, Russell17au said:

I have been asked twice in the last 18 months for my passport at 2 different police checkpoints and they checked everything in it including the departure card, 90 day report date and the address receipt. How many of you carry a copy of them?

Where in what circumstances did that happen?

I'm interested to know as i the 30+ years living and travelling in Thailand i never has this happened to me.

I have a shrunk color laminated copy of my passport and visa/re-entry page in my wallet but never used it.

Clearly, what all 'retirees' who CAN ONLY rely on income (because they do not have 800k) to satisfy TI financial requirements need to know is what TI would accept in the absence of a Embassy 'Income letter'. For example, an annual tax return listing pension income, plus regular income being deposited in Thai bank accounts. 

 

If the only option is the 800k deposit, then I could see a surge in using Visa agencies to circumnavigate the requirement - and that is really not the way forward, IMO as there are hundreds of retirees who are honest and do have the required income 'proof'.

 

  

 

20 minutes ago, Derek B said:

Why does it have to be a Thai bank I wonder?

 

I bet with a little thought you already know the answer. ????

“It seems that if we want to stay we have to put money into banks that many of us dont fully trust. I feel somewhat betrayed by the Embassies. You can guarantee they will not be there in our corner if/when our cash has vanished.”

 

 

And that cash usually vanish by your trusted partner, partner brother, partner children or some other related. 

 

I have ave a piece of advice for those who still don’t know:

Do not use one single ATM account for everything (some farang do). Keep your big savings in a non-ATM account/accounts.

15 hours ago, nasa123 said:

But in Phuket and Pattaya ++ can you NOT open a bank account in any bank if you don't have a B-Visa and work permit. The banks here are afraid of money laundering and black money, so here are not Immigration in phuket with on their own rules.

Of course one can, maybe one has to try a few different ones. One doesn't need a non B  or work permit.

12 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No. He is claiming it should be checked at the source, and pension statements etc. will not be accepted by the embassy as proof since Thai immigration does not accept that. And I think the latter part is simply not correct.

Well, if source pension statements are not accepted as verification of income by the Embassy, then it's a sad world we're living in.

 

As it happens, I use my IR tax return with my pension income stated, and which is submitted by my accountant after checking all the P60s sent by the various organisations. The UK Embassy accepts that, and TI accepts the subsequent income letter.

 

I consider it's a failure of the English language comprehension in that the word 'verify' carries different meanings for both the Embassies and TI - the Embassy verifies that the 'proof' provided meets their requirement, and issues a letter to that effect, which up to now has been accepted by TI (because it lets them off the hook should any dishonest person make a false statement).  The Embassies don't need to verify the source, that's up to the applicant to supply it. IMO, it's a cost-cutting exercise, firstly by the UK following a FCO audit, and copied by other Embassies later.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, connda said:

“Of course this letter is no longer needed if the embassy no longer issues it,” Col Archeep explained to The Phuket News today (Nov 22).

 

This gets the mealy-mouthed, clap-trap, stupidest, contrived, nonsensical, Captain Obvious Award of the Week. 

And was he speaking in English when he said it?

16 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

The only thing coming from immigration I will pay attention to is when it comes from the Immigration Bureau not some head of a local office.

It is certainly lacking any useful information in IMO.

 

Joe, any update on the efforts of ThaiVisa to arrange an interview with the Immigration boss on all this?

 

46 minutes ago, cheshiremusicman said:

Seems to me, that the Thai authorities should start to look at a scheme where they look at your track record and start to say 'This person has meet the necessary requirements for the past 5 years', so instead of granting an extension of one year why not make it two, and when you have been here for say 10 years make it a 5 year extension. Surely, if you have been here for that length of time you have proved that you can sustain yourself with your income no matter what it is!

You're being rational again!

 

19 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

If the only option is the 800k deposit, then I could see a surge in using Visa agencies to circumnavigate the requirement - and that is really not the way forward, IMO as there are hundreds of retirees who are honest and do have the required income 'proof'.

so you're saying that there are some people that have abused of the income letter right??

42 minutes ago, Derek B said:

Why does it have to be a Thai bank I wonder?

 

So they can check it themselves and not have to rely on unreliable witnesses such as Embassies.

1 minute ago, MekkOne said:

 

so you're saying that there are some people that have abused of the income letter right??

No.

 

Go and troll someone else.

Few embassies have already said that they won't be issuing income letters. 

What other forms of income verification will be acceptable to you?

 

My preference  is 65K in a Thai bank. 

4 minutes ago, onera1961 said:

Few embassies have already said that they won't be issuing income letters. 

What other forms of income verification will be acceptable to you?

 

For me it is 65K in a Thai bank. 

Which they won't accept now!

8 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Which they won't accept now!

I am asking for people's preference. Not my individual case. I get O-A visa from the US and I have no problem. In thousands of posts in multiple threads, I did not find a consensus emerge that will satisfy all.

Long live the agents. ????

A bit off topic, but still….

As I understand it, what is needed, is 400.000 / 800.000 in a Thai bank for the last 3 month before applying for renewal of a 1 year permit to stay.

When you have been granted that permit, there is nothing stopping you to withdraw that money again. ( as long as you remember to put it in again 3 month before your next extension.)

Also that the 400.000 ( married to a Thai) can come from anywhere, and does not necessarily have to come from oversees.

I realise that it might be different from office to office, and is therefore only asking if this is right according to the immigration law.

 

An off topic post with an incorrect quote and replies have been removed removed

11 hours ago, Mark1066 said:

As far as I am aware, Thai immigration have demanded that embassies actually verify our income statements rather than simply notarise them and, so far, 4 embassies have said no, get stuffed. Nothing strange about that. They have not said they will not accept income letters from those 4 embassies, it is those 4 embassies that have said they cannot issue letters that comply with the demands of Thai immigration.

In order to issue income letters, the British Embassy ALWAYS required applicants to provide three months recent documents, such as pension advices, rental statements, dividend vouchers etc. to support the applicants' total income as shown in the letter.  Now, it appears that Thai Immigration are in fact suggesting that they do not trust these Embassies to do this properly and are asking them to even check that the documents presented are genuine.  This can only be done by the Embassy doing a lot more work by contacting the applicant's income sources, wherever they happen to be and clearly they are unable to do this.

 

Perhaps it is because the Thai authorities themselves are so corrupt that they assume all countries' Embassies are too, which is a real insult.  Thai Immigration are so inept that, despite all the controversy on this subject, and the distress it is clearly causing to many ex-pats, they cannot come up with clear instructions as to the way forward.  Many ex-pats currently believe that 800,000 in a Thai bank account is the only possible solution, but until Thai Immigration actually do their job properly and issue new instructions as to the exact  way in which ex-pats can prove an income of 800,000 per annum, either specifically with a minimum of 65000 per month paid into a Thai bank account, OR on average  ( say 40000 one month and 100000 the next and so on, totalling at least 800,000 for the year,) people will be in a state of limbo and not know how to proceed.

 

It is no good having each office coming up with its own solution.  We need a specific statement from Thai Immigration which is clear and concise and applicable to ALL OFFICES.  All the uncertainty in the past about Visas, Extensions, P30's and P28's and now on proof of income is totally unacceptable and Thai Immigration should be ashamed of themselves in the manner in which they treat visitors to this country and ex-pats in particular, not to mention the ridiculous 90 day reports, which should be replaced by a requirement to notify any permanent CHANGE of address within (say) 48 hours , under penalty of a fine of (perhaps) 5000 bahts.  Surely this would achieve the required objective without all the work by Immigration and the hassle to ex-pats.  It would help of course if the "on-line" 90 day reporting, introduced nearly three years ago, actually worked.

 

I changed over to the 800,000 in a Thai bank account a couple of years ago and I am now so glad that I did so, but I feel for those expats who are going through all the recent turmoil, without their Embassy or Thai Immigration offering much help.

9 minutes ago, onera1961 said:

I am asking for people's preference. Not my individual case. I get O-A visa from the US and I have no problem. In thousands of posts in multiple threads, I did not find a consensus emerge that will satisfy all.

Long live the agents. ????

 

16 hours ago, BertM said:

Don't get too excited... Nothing new. OP is very misleading. IO head only said the letters were not required and 800k bank account method was accepted. He DID NOT say monthly income method without income letter was accepted. See his quote below...

 

Of course this letter is no longer needed if the embassy no longer issues it,” Col Archeep explained to The Phuket News today (Nov 22).

“However, the foreigner applying for the visa (or permit-to-stay) will still have to prove that they have the funds to stay in the country, such as by showing bank statements that prove the foreigner has B800,000 in a Thai bank account,” he said.

The rabble Thai way continues

12 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Which they won't accept now!

this is incorrect, if your pension is going directly in your bank account in Thailand the immigration can see that the money are coming from abroad, you don't need any letter from any embassy... Is actually more simple than asking for the affidavit... Real problem is that many pensioners are in Thailand without the requirements and were abusing the affidavit, from this the request of the immigration to have the emabssy check on the claims of the pensioners. Is quiet simple.