US Embassy reminder: Income affidavits for visas to cease Jan 1

[Old Croc]

It will be interesting to see what Immigration does accept in the new year when these changes take effect.

I'm someone who has always had more than 800k in the bank AND has solid records of transferring more than 65K into Thailand each month.

If they are going to accept just the latter it would allow me to remove from the bank, and make better use of, the lump sum. I wonder if that is an intention of this tightening up of the rules.

[Pattaya46]

20 minutes ago, sumrit said:

Apart from the Danes, the problem will only arise for people needing to renew their extension after August next year, plus people arriving in Thailand from January onwards who then need to apply for their 'first' extension.

You are way too optimistic IMHO. 

I would bet we will hear of people finding this problem as soon as January. Many people do not read such forums and may still not know about the decision of their Embassy. (Mainly British people, as their Embassy didn't even sent them an email )

[johnny49r]

16 hours ago, Jonathan Fairfield said:

US Embassy reminder: Income affidavits for visas to cease Jan 1

Many embassy's are rushing to stop providing fraudulent affidavits because the stated income and residence address was never verified. 

Thai immigration has said that they won't accept bank or pension statements as proof of income and the only thing they will accept going into 2019 is 800K baht in a bank for 3 months prior to visa renewal. 

It is now up to Thai immigration to state proof of income requirements and that will happen when pigs learn to fly.

[sumrit]

34 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

It will be interesting to see what Immigration does accept in the new year when these changes take effect.

I'm someone who has always had more than 800k in the bank AND has solid records of transferring more than 65K into Thailand each month.

If they are going to accept just the latter it would allow me to remove from the bank, and make better use of, the lump sum. I wonder if that is an intention of this tightening up of the rules.

 

I've said this before. The 800k method only shows there's that money in the bank for three months (and sometimes even then with the help of dodgy agents), it does not show that person has an adequate income to live on. How many use this method and then work illegally?

 

Coming up with a more secure method of 'verifying income' and making proof of income an 'extension requirement' would solve a lot of the illegal working and dodgy financial issues around extensions that have been happening. 

 

19 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

You are way too optimistic IMHO. 

I would bet we will hear of people finding this problem as soon as January. Many people do not read such forums and may still not know about the decision of their Embassy. (Mainly British people, as their Embassy didn't even sent them an email )

There has been almost blanket coverage of this issue on Embassy websites, many forums like this one, various expat clubs such as Pattaya expats club and countless news articles around the country. Ignorance cannot be a defence.

[Leatherneck]

16 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Very big deal indeed if Thai immigration won't accept that without an embassy letter. Why would you assume they would?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

16 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

Oh, really?  Well, <removed>, my next door neighbor just happens to work at Chiang Mai Immigration, and according to him, I'm more than covered.  <removed>

Extended my visa in late October in Chiang Mai and provided similar documents described by Just1Voice, along with my income affidavit from the consulate. I had been informed prior to going in that immigration here required those documents because they were already not accepting the income affidavit as proof of income. I had no problems at all and clearly they were not interested in the income affidavit...it was the other documents that did the trick.

[Old Croc]

2 minutes ago, sumrit said:

I've said this before. The 800k method only shows there's that money in the bank for three months (and sometimes even then with the help of dodgy agents), it does not show that person has an adequate income to live on. How many use this method and then work illegally?

 

I don't like your inference that I use dodgy agents to prove income.

For your edification, Immigration has always required me to produce my bank book, which shows a full history of my funds, not just for the current year, but my complete time living here. It includes all transfers into Thailand from overseas.  They now also require a bank certified statement showing transactions (I supply one for the previous 6 months).

Presumably the dodgy agent path would not have such evidence and only works if the IO is also dodgy and sufficiently recompensed.

My initial question remains.

[DPKANKAN]

13 hours ago, garyk said:

The world i live in is where money is king. Giving away 800K for no reason, even if for only 3 months has got to be the dumbest thing I have ever heard of... haha

Hopefully, the 65K in a Thai bank will satisfy immigration. If not, I say vacate!

 

But as I have pointed out before. The bank only shows what you have had in the bank not what you are going to get for the next year. That is why the method is not a safe bet yet!!

[quandow]

1 hour ago, sumrit said:

The Embassy letter is valid for six months so everybody who needs to renew their extension before the end of July 2019 has had the opportunity and adequate time to obtain one before the end of this month.

 

I wouldn't bet the farm that immigration will be OK as late as July 2019. Their inability to get common agreement throughout the kingdom on the rules would have me losing sleep, as well as hair if I had any left, over this issue. I suspect some offices will say "screw it, your letter no good now" any time between now and July.

[wgdanson]

26 minutes ago, Leatherneck said:

 

Extended my visa in late October in Chiang Mai and provided similar documents described by Just1Voice, along with my income affidavit from the consulate. I had been informed prior to going in that immigration here required those documents because they were already not accepting the income affidavit as proof of income. I had no problems at all and clearly they were not interested in the income affidavit...it was the other documents that did the trick.

How do you know it was 'the other documents' and not the affidavit, when the Immgration law requires the affidavit and not bank statements?

[Burma Bill]

I have just received my "Proof of income" letter from the British Embassy prior to the cut-off date. I thank the Embassy staff for the quick and efficient way my application was handled. No problem paying with my Bangkok Bank VISA debit card. My local Immigration Office in Isaan has assured me the letter has a "shelf life" of six months. My one year retirement visa is due for renewal in March 2019 so everything looks good for at least another year.

[Derek B]

18 hours ago, Jonathan Fairfield said:

REMINDER: British Embassy has now stopped issuing income letters

 

 

Should now be a reassignment of personnel or a head count reduction at the UK Embassy in Thailand.

[sumrit]

1 hour ago, Old Croc said:

I don't like your inference that I use dodgy agents to prove income.

For your edification, Immigration has always required me to produce my bank book, which shows a full history of my funds, not just for the current year, but my complete time living here. It includes all transfers into Thailand from overseas.  They now also require a bank certified statement showing transactions (I supply one for the previous 6 months).

Presumably the dodgy agent path would not have such evidence and only works if the IO is also dodgy and sufficiently recompensed.

My initial question remains.

I was not for one minute suggesting you use a dodgy agent method, apologies if you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I was only highlighting your comment "I wonder if that is an intention of this tightening up of the rules." contained in your post. I accept your comment that you have to produce your bank book and, in your case, you point out that it also shows regular transfers into Thailand. Although as I understand it, showing transfers is not currently a requirement if you are showing 'money in the bank with a bank letter.

 

Having never used an agent, dodgy or otherwise, I'm not familiar with the finer points of their process but, reading this forum regularly, I do realize there are many people posting here do use agents and, from some comments made and advice given here, it's obvious that some use the (illegal) agent method because they don't qualify financially to do things legally. 

 

As I said before, personally I would prefer to see a system where people have to prove that they have enough income to live in Thailand rather simply show they have a certain amount of money it a bank account for a short period of time each year without having to show you can afford to live here permanently

 

 

Quote

 

 

Edited December 14, 2018 by sumrit

[HHTel]

16 hours ago, pookiki said:

embassies who still issue income verification letters.

I don't think there are any embassies who issue income verification letters which is why there is a problem now.

[HHTel]

13 minutes ago, Derek B said:

Should now be a reassignment of personnel or a head count reduction at the UK Embassy in Thailand.

Around 10 a day isn't even enough work for one person so there's no reason to reduce personnel.

[Old Croc]

6 minutes ago, sumrit said:

I was not for one minute suggesting you use a dodgy agent method, apologies if you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I was only highlighting your comment "I wonder if that is an intention of this tightening up of the rules." contained in your post. I accept your comment that you have to produce your bank book and, in your case, you point out that it also shows regular transfers into Thailand. Although as I understand it, showing transfers is not currently a requirement if you are showing 'money in the bank with a bank letter.

 

Having never used an agent, dodgy or otherwise, I'm not familiar with the finer points of their process but, reading this forum regularly, I do realize there are many people posting here do use agents and, from some comments made and advice given here, it's obvious that some use the (illegal) agent method because they don't qualify financially to do things legally. 

 

As I said before, personally I would prefer to see a system where people have to prove that they have enough income to live in Thailand rather simply show they have a certain amount of money it a bank account for a short period of time each year without having to show you can afford to live here permanently

If you read my initial post again you will see that I was asking a question very similar to your last para. 

My question was/and is, would the lump sum be redundant, i.e. no longer required, if you have adequate proof of transfers of 65k+?

The question was based on comments by others who wish to use this method in the absence of the embassy letters. I realise the answer may not become clear until the changes hit home. 

 

[pookiki]

19 minutes ago, HHTel said:

I don't think there are any embassies who issue income verification letters which is why there is a problem now.

Yes, I used the wrong 'terminology' again.  I am sure there are other embassies that still use income affidavit letters or a more formal letter than used by the US. The US Embassy caused this problem - not the Thai government.

[spiroinusa1]

The American and British representatives of a signed petition of retirement visa holders should asked for a meeting with the head of immigration and explain to him that the embassy letter never meant anything except you swore your stated income on the letter was true. What would be better are letters of documentation from VA, SS,or Pension Bureaus  from companies, city,state, towns sent to the Pensioner as proof he receives a pension, or some other valid letter regarding income you receive validly. That should be good enough for Thai Authorities. Where is the organization. Why can't this be done. I live in Chiang Dao with family and med. needs or I would volunteer. There are a lot of you who just sit around with little to do. It would be a service to you and a lot of the ex-pat community.

[pookiki]

6 minutes ago, spiroinusa1 said:

The American and British representatives of a signed petition of retirement visa holders should asked for a meeting with the head of immigration and explain to him that the embassy letter never meant anything except you swore your stated income on the letter was true. What would be better are letters of documentation from VA, SS,or Pension Bureaus  from companies, city,state, towns sent to the Pensioner as proof he receives a pension, or some other valid letter regarding income you receive validly. That should be good enough for Thai Authorities. Where is the organization. Why can't this be done. I live in Chiang Dao with family and med. needs or I would volunteer. There are a lot of you who just sit around with little to do. It would be a service to you and a lot of the ex-pat community.

I tried to get US expats organized in requesting a meeting with embassy officials and got absolutely nowhere.  To me, the preferred action of the embassy to explain that a 'sworn' affidavit does have serious consequences if an affiant makes false declarations.  Another obvious solution - this time for the Thai authorities - is to make the original application for a retirement visa include documentation for monthly income that would be available for the life of the applicant.  If this were the case, then there would be no need to letters or documents again for the life of the retiree.

[Pattaya46]

17 minutes ago, spiroinusa1 said:

The American and British representatives of a signed petition of retirement visa holders should asked for a meeting with the head of immigration and explain to him that the embassy letter never meant anything except you swore your stated income on the letter was true. //

And Thai Immigration would just reply that affidavits and stat-decs these embassies provided in recent years did not - and do not - qualify for the TI request that was for years a "Letter from the applicant’s Embassy or consulate in Thailand verifying their pension or other income of the applicant which must not be less than 65,000 Baht per month."  (from Immigration FAQ)

[AAArdvark]

Embassies not giving verification letters is caused by the embassies and not the Thai Immigration, so why do so many automatically assume that TI will no longer accept income verification letters from Thai banks?  Of course they potentially could change whatever they want but what indication of a change is there?  There is no legal reason for TI to not accept a verification letter from a Thai bank were direct deposits of at least 65K have been made every month. 

For US citizens it is an easy process to open a Bangkok Bank account in Thailand and have direct deposits done using Bangkok Bank New York's routing number and Bangkok Bank Thailand's account number.

[JackThompson]

5 minutes ago, pookiki said:

Yes, I used the wrong 'terminology' again.  I am sure there are other embassies that still use income affidavit letters or a more formal letter than used by the US. The US Embassy caused this problem - not the Thai government.

Apparently, the Thai govt did/requested something to make 4 embassies cancel their letters.  The embassies tell us that the Thai govt changed their long-standing policy of accepting the letters as-is, and wanted them to verify the income sources.  I do not think that they invented this.  Unfortunately, none of them will reveal the details of their conversations - and without a transcript, we don't know the whole story.

[berrec]

Look I will firstly apologize for my comments, but it only highlights my observations after working in this country on and off for some 30 years and now living here as one of those pesky (ATM thank you) Farnags.... "Thais could not organize a piss up at a drunk's party"...... forget about Thailand 4.0 .....they will never get out of Thailand 1.0 mode............unless they invoke serious reform....which is doubtful....

 

Common sense and logic are woefully missing especially in Thai Government institutions...........Thailand has an Immigration act with policies and procedures to be followed and applied consistently by all their employees.......you all know there is no dam way this ever happens..................

 

Whatever your financial income is you would think a certified letter on bank stationary signed and stamped by your bank manager (in Thai) with your required financial bank statements attached, countersigned by yourself and the bank manager would suffice any institutional requirements for proof of income..........(including Thai Immigration) would be logical and acceptable...........<deleted>...............not here buddy.............

 

Our only hope is Maj-Gen Surachate Hakparn) or “Big Joke” now head of Immigration who is a common sense no nonsense guy leads by resolving this ongoing deliminar that is wasting everyone's time and energies... we live in hope................

[pookiki]

5 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Apparently, the Thai govt did/requested something to make 4 embassies cancel their letters.  The embassies tell us that the Thai govt changed their long-standing policy of accepting the letters as-is, and wanted them to verify the income sources.  I do not think that they invented this.  Unfortunately, none of them will reveal the details of their conversations - and without a transcript, we don't know the whole story.

Jack - Please review the post I made some time ago:

 

 

[AAArdvark]

I thought the embassies said that they could no longer be responsible for something they could not really verify.  The tell would be for someone who has an embassy which still issues letters to try using one of those letters.

[Thailand]

3 hours ago, johnny49r said:

Many embassy's are rushing to stop providing fraudulent affidavits because the stated income and residence address was never verified. 

Thai immigration has said that they won't accept bank or pension statements as proof of income and the only thing they will accept going into 2019 is 800K baht in a bank for 3 months prior to visa renewal. 

It is now up to Thai immigration to state proof of income requirements and that will happen when pigs learn to fly.

Where have immigration said that? I thought there has yet to be any clarification or comment from Thai immigration regarding the current situation?

[garyk]

4 hours ago, wgdanson said:

Come on, the 800k is not 'given away'. It is deposited in a bank which you can get back anytime you want. Yes, HOPEFULLY Immigration will accept the 65k monthly but I am not holding my breath.

Just have to wait and see? As far as the 800K, I'll pass.

 

[jesimps]

18 hours ago, garyk said:

As long as you have it deposited in a Thai bank monthly no problems what so ever I would think.

As far as I know, no one so far has managed to get a one year visa extension without the embassy letter. If you know different, please tell us the details because myself and many more on here are anxious to know.

[DJ54]

1 hour ago, Old Croc said:

if you have adequate proof of transfers of 65k+?

Hopefully the IO will soon clarify the monthly deposit over 65k.

 

My concern 65+ Deposit monthly (OK) in Thai bank and use

the money for daily expenses But the real meaning was to put

in bank and not use.

 

Someone early on when the hammer first came down did the math. Monthly deposits at 65k = 780,000 a year. 

 

Hopefully this is clarified soon because now we are all guessing 

what they’ll do. 

[jesimps]

43 minutes ago, Glenn Roe said:

Embassies not giving verification letters is caused by the embassies and not the Thai Immigration, so why do so many automatically assume that TI will no longer accept income verification letters from Thai banks?  Of course they potentially could change whatever they want but what indication of a change is there?  There is no legal reason for TI to not accept a verification letter from a Thai bank were direct deposits of at least 65K have been made every month. 

For US citizens it is an easy process to open a Bangkok Bank account in Thailand and have direct deposits done using Bangkok Bank New York's routing number and Bangkok Bank Thailand's account number.

Thai immigration never did accept verification letters from Thai banks, it's stated in immigration regs that the verification letter from the embassy is needed (backed up by documentary proof if asked for).

 

[Jip99]

16 hours ago, garyk said:

The world i live in is where money is king. Giving away 800K for no reason, even if for only 3 months has got to be the dumbest thing I have ever heard of... haha

Hopefully, the 65K in a Thai bank will satisfy immigration. If not, I say vacate!

 

 

I can't help thinking that you and a few others are going to be disappointed when immigration come up with...................... nothing!

 

If you think that they are going to accept sight of bank statements showing 65,000 Baht passing through every month, then I think you are in for a shock. Do you really think they can fathom what goes in and out of a bank account ? Do you really think they can be arsed?  Do you really think that they will accept a lesser reassurance when they were seeking certifications from embassies?

 

The line from immigration at the moment is that money is the bank is the only acceptable method once they no longer have embassy letters.