What's the point to 'seasoning' retirement funds for a retirement extension?  We're led to believe that Immigration expects us to use the funds for living expenses during the year.  But if you can only 'use' them 9 months out of the year with the other 3 months during which your funds are 'frozen' (seasoned) and unusable - really! What's the point?
Also, if you're expected to draw those funds down for living expense, then you're also expected to replace them three months before your extension is renewed.  If you can replace them, and then sit on them without touching the funds for 3 months, then you obviously have the necessary income to live here.  Why?  Because you have enough money to top off the 800,000 THB while still having an income stream for the next three months to cover living expenses. ???? 

It really is all a game.  None of it make much logical sense.  But TIT - logic goes out the window.

At one time it the 800k baht only had to be in the bank on the date you applied.

The 3 months was started because people were getting short term loans or a group of friends were pooling their money to meet the 800k baht requirement.

800K is the minimum. There is nothing stopping you having extra to cover living expenses for the 3 months.

4 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

At one time it the 800k baht only had to be in the bank on the date you applied.

The 3 months was started because people were getting short term loans or a group of friends were pooling their money to meet the 800k baht requirement.

Spot on.

I doubt I'm the only one but my experience is this policy encourages me to be much more frugal during the four or five months before each annual application. Meaning on an annual basis I am definitely spending LESS than if there was no long seasoning period. I top up early and add my expected spending for the four or five months spending down. Once I get the new extension, I loosen up. So that means doing some deferred necessary spending but still lost to the economy here is the discretionary spending that never happened.  In my view, the main reason we're allowed here is to spend money (the more the better) so another case of unintended consequences? Of course banked money also has an economic benefit to Thailand. They can lend it out. 

Edited December 13, 20187 yr by Jingthing

How many expats in Pattaya alone?

Let's say all of them season 800,000 baht + ( Yes I know agents get around it. )

All that money sitting there, guess what the banks can make on it.

24 minutes ago, overherebc said:

How many expats in Pattaya alone?

Let's say all of them season 800,000 baht + ( Yes I know agents get around it. )

All that money sitting there, guess what the banks can make on it.

There is the real reason behind it IMO. 

The 65K baht/mo. is easily proved. With SS income especially.  And many other countries do it daily. 

Thailand? This move is predictable. 

I remember it as 2 months after the initial 3 months. Has it changed or is senility overcoming me?

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

At one time it the 800k baht only had to be in the bank on the date you applied.

The 3 months was started because people were getting short term loans or a group of friends were pooling their money to meet the 800k baht requirement.

So it seems the IMM folks are already aware the extent that some clever farang will go to manipulate their deposits required for extension of stay.

 

Maybe those same IMM folks will have some card to play of their own should the extension via 65K+ baht monthly FTT-type deposit scheme ever come into play to short-circuit the revolving door type antics some on here have been suggesting is the way they would intend to manipulate that option.

2 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

I remember it as 2 months after the initial 3 months. Has it changed or is senility overcoming me?

You have it reversed. It is 60 days for the first extension and then 3 months after that.

1 minute ago, ubonjoe said:

You have it reversed. It is 60 days for the first extension and then 3 months after that.

Senility then ????

37 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

Senility then ????

Of course.

Didn't she have number 1 hit in the 60's?

One could argue that this also has the potential to 'force' many retirees to always have some extra money in the bank for an emergency.

 

For 3 months of the year you'll have at least 800,000 in your account.

 

Spend down for 9 months at the rate of 65,000/month you would never have less than 215,000 in the bank.

 

Many of us can live on less than the 65,000/month. The two of us can live comfortably in a rural area on 45,000/month including eating out, beer and the occasional trip. That should leave a minimum balance for the year of 395,000.

 

1 hour ago, overherebc said:

How many expats in Pattaya alone?

Let's say all of them season 800,000 baht + ( Yes I know agents get around it. )

All that money sitting there, guess what the banks can make on it.

Interesting point and I do wonder how much they make. Most Thai banks have a quite poor track record (compared to other countries) in terms of overdue / never paid commercial loans, mortgages, car loans, and credit cards debt is enormous, one of the worst, by country, in the world, so yes an interesting question in terms of what returns they make when they use your / my deposits to try to make money.  

 

Edited December 13, 20187 yr by scorecard

6 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

At one time it the 800k baht only had to be in the bank on the date you applied.

And agents are still using this method today. 

 

Of course it's just another BS game, like why all of a sudden did the amount jump from 400,000 to 800,000 baht in the bank? Raising it maybe to 500,000 baht would maybe make sense, so why twice the amount? So it's a scam hatched between the politicians and the banks.

3 minutes ago, amse said:

Of course it's just another BS game, like why all of a sudden did the amount jump from 400,000 to 800,000 baht in the bank? Raising it maybe to 500,000 baht would maybe make sense, so why twice the amount? So it's a scam hatched between the politicians and the banks.

I don't recall it ever being 400k baht for an extension based upon retirement. There has been no change since 2003 when it was raised to 800k baht from 600k baht when adjustments for the exchange rate changes in 1997 was done.

"Seasoning" is something that you do to food. When you are talking about bureaucracies, it is an extra hoop for you to jump through to convince the higher-ups that those pesky aliens are being made to WORK for their visa. Chestbeating and grandstanding are hallmarks of bureaucracies all over the world. Max Weber did some fascinating research detailing the behavior of bureaucracies and it is easily recognizable to anyone who has ever stepped inside ANY government office, not just in Thailand.

6 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

At one time it the 800k baht only had to be in the bank on the date you applied.

The 3 months was started because people were getting short term loans or a group of friends were pooling their money to meet the 800k baht requirement.

With the changes that are already in effect, imho T.I. will either go two ways; allow agents to continue with the scam of the system and thus keeping a revenue stream for T.I. or prohibit these agents from representing expats in this manner. I believe corruption will win out which will allow some folks to remain here. Not a fan of corrupt practices but also not a fan of people being forcefully separated from their families.

Edited December 13, 20187 yr by from the home of CC
grammar

Just deposited mine for a March renewal, raking in a whopping 0.9%. Didn't bother looking around to go for the 1.5% less tax. Has anyone tried transferring B65,000 between to local Thai accounts to see if that will satisfy Immigration? This was my plan in my daily account and if it doesn't work show them the K800??

 

 

1 hour ago, balo said:

And agents are still using this method today. 

 

Some agents Supply the money ,but one pays dearly for that. Its cheaper to have the THB oneself in the long run  (few years)

Yet, foreigners with a family related (Thai wife or child) non O visa can get a one year extension while showing only 400 K without seasoning.

 

It seems to me that someone over 50 year old, with a Thai relative, is better off chosing the family option instead of the retirement option...or am I missing something?

 

I think the objective was to try and stop the Agent back door fixes, for those that didn't have a proven certified income. Now a number of the embassies have stopped certifying income it will be interesting to see if immigration change their requirements. I think the plot is still unfolding...

7 hours ago, connda said:

What's the point to 'seasoning' retirement funds for a retirement extension? 

To prevent anyone but agents from issuing short-term (often 1-day) loans for the required "in the bank" funds.  When an agent-submitted application is processed, the seasoning is waived.  By contrast anyone filing an honest application in-person is unlikely to get even 1-day of the seasoning-period waived.

 

1 hour ago, balo said:

And agents are still using this method today. 

Exactly.  Some bit about people sharing funds, etc was just their cover-story - like every other "stopping abuse" / "crackdown" story that ups the tea new-car money.

 

8 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Yet, foreigners with a family related (Thai wife or child) non O visa can get a one year extension while showing only 400 K without seasoning.

It's 60-days seasoning every year, in that case - except if using an agent, of course, in which case, you don't need any money at all besides the agent's fee.

 

9 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

It seems to me that someone over 50 year old, with a Thai relative, is better off chosing the family option instead of the retirement option...or am I missing something?

Until you go to get one, and some offices make it a nightmare, to try to force you to an agent.  Retirement is generally easier to do (less paperwork, etc) - though reports indicate they are starting to add more of the family-based extension hassles to the retirement folks (landlord-docs, pictures, home-visits, etc) - unless they use an agent, as preferred, of course, in which case none of that applies.

I reckon they are amazingly lenient. To make sense it should be permanent guarantee held in some interest bearing government fund. In case of emergency, withdrawal could be allowed for medical treatment, repatriation, etc. Designation of beneficiaries, foreign or local, in case of death should be part of the package. Look at M2H if you want to get the drift. That's for retirees, I am still struggling to see the justification of the 400k for marriage extension, since these people have families here, hence local support in case of problems. They are not long term tourists, they are (should be) integral parts of Thai society.

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

Interesting point and I do wonder how much they make. Most Thai banks have a quite poor track record (compared to other countries) in terms of overdue / never paid commercial loans, mortgages, car loans, and credit cards debt is enormous, one of the worst, by country, in the world, so yes an interesting question in terms of what returns they make when they use your / my deposits to try to make money.  

 

Not true!

 

Thailand's Non Performing Loans Ratio stood at 3.0 % in Sep 2018, compared with the ratio of 2.9 % in the previous quarter.

 

Italy's Non Performing Loans Ratio stood at 11.4 % in Jun 2018, compared with the ratio of 13.2 % in the previous quarter.

 

 

My money could be earning 6%+ back home so it is a little disappointing, but that is the joys of living here.

Edited December 13, 20187 yr by Rawairat
updated post

1 hour ago, Rawairat said:

My money could be earning 6%+ back home so it is a little disappointing, but that is the joys of living here.

Where is that as most of the posters home rates here would be substantially lower than that? 

9 hours ago, connda said:

What's the point to 'seasoning' retirement funds for a retirement extension?

Whether there is a valid logical reason or not, we are in their country, their rules so, unfortunately. we have to follow them if we want to stay.

2 hours ago, KiChakayan said:

To make sense it should be permanent guarantee held in some interest bearing government fund. In case of emergency, withdrawal could be allowed for medical treatment, repatriation, etc.

Makes sense - an inexpensive form of insurance could cover this for every foreigner in the country - stabilize-only for sickness and accident followed by immediate repatriation, but could also cover criminal penalties and subsequent repatriation.  The cost would be directly-relative to the permit-of-stay being issued. 

At that point, the other requirements would be unnecessary, saving a huge amount of time and effort on all sides.