CONFIRMED: Here is exactly what’s needed for retirement & marriage extensions (income method) from 2019

[Nyezhov]

2 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Agree totally. But another way for short-timers would be to borrow 800k, put it in bank for 3 months and then re-patriate the money and pay off the loan. Cheers.

Im wouldnt risk borrowing $28 large to save $190. I wouldnt put 800K into a Thai bank to save $190. 

 

I leave in and about April. Since my Extension expires Jan 20, 2020, I arrive in October, 2019 and just leave to get an SETV in January. Perfect for me. No need to toss 65K in a Thai bank. No need to put 800K in a bank for a few months. Simplify life.

[spambot]

20 minutes ago, logres212 said:

There is no mention of averaging as in previous announcement. So what I can see from this it has to be a PCM deposit of 40/65000 bhat into a Thai bank account. It cannot be an average of that amount over a 12 month period if making quarterly deposits or if you miss or a bit short one month for example. 

Yup - Good point.

The picture is not clear from Jan 20120 - which of the following is acceptable for a year - Since all equate to the same total value of 12 x 65K :

Amount of Deposits       Value of each Deposit        Comment

12                                  65K                               If 1 month missed 2 trsfs/m is OK next mnt? 

24                                  32.5K                            Any problem with more than 12 trasfs?

10                                  78K                               Not 12 transfs, but value is equivalent

5                                   156K                              If 10 trasfs are OK, why not 5

4                                   194K                              But I only get my pension quarterly

 

I guess we  know the answer already - There is is no answer - Work in progress - Open to interpretation by individual IM or simply; lets see what happens in the real world of rejections to get the answer.

 

 

 

[wgdanson]

Just now, Nyezhov said:

Im wouldnt risk borrowing $28 large to save $190. I wouldnt put 800K into a Thai bank to save $190. 

 

I leave in and about April. Since my Extension expires Jan 20, 2020, I arrive in October, 2019 and just leave to get an SETV in January. Perfect for me. No need to toss 65K in a Thai bank. No need to put 800K in a bank for a few months. Simplify life.

That's OK, but not for us 'lifers' !!!

[mogandave]

Why? It is unfair if I have to prove an additional 800000 THB in addition to the proven foreign banks, while other applicants only have to prove the monthly income. All my Euro deposits come from a foreign bank. But not every month but throughout the year. So it could happen that in the 3 month period before the extension of stay application my total balance at the Thai Bank is under 800000 but still every month 65000 goes into my Thai account.

And your mother told you life would be fair?

[onera1961]

17 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Thais target the Anglosphere? 

Are New Zealand and Canada not in Anglosphere? Is Denmark in Anglospehere?

[ZABA]

Regarding monthly income, the only problem I see is that Bangkok Bank told me they would give a letter and only 6 months foreign deposits on a statement. Hopefully they will get in sync with this.

[JLCrab]

11 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

38 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Well OK but you are then just trying to help others with something that most likely ain't gonna work.

Well I bow to your expertise. My offer stands. Especially if someone has backup documentation like a SS award lette

Call it as you want -- I was advised years back by a US Embassy vice-consul that (based on their experience) no changes to the Income Affidavit form would be accepted by Thai IMM. The rest up to you and whoever wants to give the blank -affidavit form a try.

[JLCrab]

6 minutes ago, ZABA said:

Regarding monthly income, the only problem I see is that Bangkok Bank told me they would give a letter and only 6 months foreign deposits on a statement. Hopefully they will get in sync with this.

If the monthly FTT deposits are in your savings account passbook why should that make a difference as they would only verify that the passbook was genuine.

Edited January 8, 2019 by JLCrab

[onera1961]

15 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

I leave in and about April. Since my Extension expires Jan 20, 2020, I arrive in October, 2019 and just leave to get an SETV in January. Perfect for me. No need to toss 65K in a Thai bank. No need to put 800K in a bank for a few months. Simplify life.

Same as me but I have an O-A visa good for to stay till march 2020 (after I make an in/out in March 2019). Ha ha. I will cross the bridge when time comes in March, 2020. There are multiple options. I want to be able to keep my option open to come in/out anytime be able to stay more than 90-day if I wish. But I am not complaining. I think this is the best TI could have come up with in the circumstances when only four embassies wanted to screw their citizens. Kudos to TI. 

Edited January 8, 2019 by onera1961

[Mango Bob]

I see there are going to be a lot of people being rejected when they request their extension of stay.   Amazing how people can not read and understand.

[Pattaya46]

19 minutes ago, mlmcleod said:

The ignored portion of these rules is that now every expat utilizing the monthly income method must transfer at least 65K baht to a Thai bank every month.  //

That's what the OP says, but it's false.

You don't have to transfer 65k monthly if you use an Embassy Letter as proof of income.

[onera1961]

11 minutes ago, ZABA said:

Regarding monthly income, the only problem I see is that Bangkok Bank told me they would give a letter and only 6 months foreign deposits on a statement. Hopefully they will get in sync with this.

@007 RED has already posted that he was in touch with Bangkok Bank and they are getting a template ready and approved by immigration before they circulate it to their branches. 

[zydeco]

1 minute ago, Pattaya46 said:

That's what the OP says, but it's false.

You don't have to transfer 65k monthly if you use an Embassy Letter as proof of income.

The ENTIRE POINT of these topics is the change in income method because the letter will be gone in six months for US, UK, Australia, Denmark. For Denmark it is already gone!

[MartinL]

1 hour ago, onera1961 said:

For umpteenth time, money in the bank (400K/800K) and seasoning rule has not changed. It remained the same. Please people don't ask the same question thousand times to clutter up the forum. 

I've always done my visa extensions using the 'money in the bank' method, although there has also always been a monthly transfer from abroad > 40k฿, clearly shown in the bank book. 

 

When my latest - 10th. - marriage extension was approved at Khon Kaen last Christmas Day, the IO asked how much my pension was each month, something that they'd never been interested in before.

 

In the light of this new information, maybe the IO - who's done my extension for the past 5+ years and with whom my wife is very friendly - was preparing the ground for a change to 'monthly income only', and would have given a warning about what might be happening in the future, if I'd told her my pension was below 40k฿ since she thought that was the way things were heading. 

[Nyezhov]

6 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

That's OK, but not for us 'lifers' !!!

I agree. And that why all the screaming and worry confuses me. Im not going to get into the motivations of TI. But here is my take for folks who dont have an Income affidavit option.

 

1. If you are truly retired here, and have cut off all but banking ties to your home country, just put 800K in the bank two months before your extension expires and live off of it, replenish as needed. Basically, if you live on 30,000 baht a month, at the time you need to replenish, its only 300K. Hell, use a Foreign Currency Account

 

2. If you just want to work with the 65K, which today is $2030 USD a month, then just transfer it. Find a Bank or means that will show it as a International Transfer. If you only spend 30K a month, then at the end of the year you will have almost half of what you need to met the 800K goal. Toss in the other half and you are done with monthly transfers.

 

3. If you are a snowbird like me, just use the SETV method. Its the most hassle free way.

 

4. If you cant come up with $2000 a month, or dont have enough liquidity to come up with $25 large, then you need to figure out a way to skirt the rules. I guess this is what this thread is about.

[DPKANKAN]

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Starling Bank don't appear to operate like traditional banks, their international payments are more like Transferwise or Revolut.

 

Apparently Kasikorn don't mark any as Intl Payments?

 

My Kasikorn account does! Shows it as "INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND FACTORING CENTER TFN00000 under the 'Service Channel' heading! That is in Account Management, Statement Inquiry.

[BigStar]

37 minutes ago, mlmcleod said:

The ignored portion of these rules is that now every expat utilizing the monthly income method must transfer at least 65K baht to a Thai bank every month. 

Who's ignored that? Why do think we have 29 pages filled with squawks?

 

Quote

This appears to be a huge win for the Thai banking industry.  As an American, I have always used my American credit union for banking.  I use any ATM I want at no charge.  The only difference now is that I have to use a Thai bank and put up with all the miscellaneous charges that they deem necessary. 

*Nitnoi. Get used to using Thai debit/credit cards. ???? You can get a secured credit card, BTW. 

 

Quote

Every American with Social Security has the ability to provide a certification letter from SSA showing the pension amount and the payments made every month. 

The certification letter from SSA doesn't show transfer to a Thai bank. And the average monthly SSA benefit falls about $700 short of the amount needed.

 

Quote

The bank book method is just cumbersome and subject to the whims of Thai immigration.  Of course the documentation requirements will be high so they can fill another warehouse with unread and useless paper.

Not as cumbersome as going down to the Embassy every year. Besides, you always had to provide the same documentation if requested. I think they will read the paper, as they always do with the deposit method. If you really believe they won't, then just give them the same copies yearly. Nor is the warehousing any concern of yours. The non-sequitur "so" is just the usual silly bash; get over it.

 

1 hour ago, Jim7777 said:

Finally some extremely good news!  No more trips to the embassy every year I get my extensions, from now on I just make a short trip down the street to my local Bangkok Bank branch.  Just have to make sure I make the transfers into Bangkok Bank every payday once a month which is fine because it's actually saving me money in ATM fees by using Bangkok Bank instead of my stateside bank.  I just simply transfer half of my monthly pension payments into Bangkok Bank once a month every payday which is equivalent to about 75,000 baht a month and that's just half of my monthly income.  The rest of it I just leave in my bank in the states.  That's not so bad this is actually good news for a lot of us.  

 

 

Edited January 8, 2019 by BigStar

[scubascuba3]

My Kasikorn account does! Shows it as "INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND FACTORING CENTER TFN00000 under the 'Service Channel' heading! That is in Account Management, Statement Inquiry.

Will that count as an international payment though? Mine has a branch / channel code 0911, i was kinda hoping that meant Intl payment

[Suradit69]

18 hours ago, sometimewoodworker said:

But I think that he assumed more than a child's ability of reading and comprehension and that people would actually read the translation before jumping to unfounded assumptions.

"But I think that he assumed more than a child's ability ..."

 

A dangerous, unwarranted assumption on his part. Most of these threads relating to immigrations demonstrate the existence of significant number among the Thai Visa brethren who are still struggling to understand the difference between a visa and a permission/extension of stay or even between doing a 90 day report and renewing an extension. And of course each year on 1st April, the TV intelligentsia are pulled in by the most ridiculous April Fools Day post ... year after year after year.

 

I find it amazing that most immigrations officers remain polite and friendly. Can you imagine having to deal with some of these characters every day.

 

 

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Huckenfell said:

Why keep producing these orders, is it the result and consequence  of undiplomatially trained military officials.

This process - removing Western visitors piecemeal - began before the current govt took power.  It is an "institutional" problem.

 

2 hours ago, ocddave said:

You do know how most Thai males act when shamed in public, right? Be very careful!

Not so different than those in other nations/cultures who are doing something they know is wrong, and try to cover by acting ignorant and indignant at the same time.

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

"er no. No income method and no lump sum. Agency route all the way for some guys. Unaffected by current changes.

"Unaffected by current changes"

 

Actually, this thread and the changes by TI have made me see a little sense in one respect!

 

Last year I used the letters from the UK and NZ embassies, along with some money deposited in my account here, so the income and lump sum regimen, which I thought would be okay.

 

However the IO gave me a little bit of a hard time what with getting his assistant to calculate the actual Thai amount from the embassy income letters, as per the exchange rate on the day, then adding my lump sum to it, and then looking at me and saying something along the lines that the lump sum method would be a lot easier next time.

 

And in all honesty, I think that is the way I will go this year, not only that, it takes away the worry of uncertainty as to what the IO deems to be the exchange rate etc. and whether or not he will give you the extension.

 

A further consideration is that if I transfer the 800,000 baht from my NZ bank account and let it "season" here, I have calculated that I will lose about the equivalent of 6600 baht in New Zealand dollars, whereas using the old method and paying for the embassy letters, postage and so on (not to mention that I would earn a little interest on the account in Thailand) the difference will be about 1000 baht, so not really worth worrying about.

 

So the 800,000k is my go-to option this year, and this should alleviate any worries I have with regards to getting the retirement extension.

Edited January 8, 2019 by xylophone

[JackThompson]

 

 

6 hours ago, Elkski said:

What is to prevent a person from transferring some of these 65k funds back to home country bank account?  Maybe use this money in later years as an income stream? 

In theory - nothing.

 

Quote

I guess what I am saying what if a person lives on less than 65k and wants to invest this extra somewhere outside of Thailand. 

Many people live here because of the relatively low-overhead - do not spend 65K/mo, even though their total monthly income is 65K/mo+.  Many have passport-country bills to pay - so, given the new system, they will have to send money back to pay those bills.

 

The downside of the new scheme, is it would be nigh-impossible to tell the difference between those with the required-income, remitting to pay passport-country bills, and those who don't have the required-income, and "rotate money" to make it look like they do.

 

5 hours ago, JLCrab said:

Did it really take 13 pages on this topic before you got in your agent-centric view of the universe?

I am trying to focus on how to prevent thousands of expats who qualified under the old rules, to survive the moved-goalposts.  But it's hard to avoid the "Agent in the Room," with his stack of passports being processed in a back-room with top-priority and under a different set of rules.
 

5 hours ago, JLCrab said:

They might also ask for a pension statement with a legitimate monthly income to make sure there is not a merry-go-round deposit-transfer-redeposit in the works.

Exactly, in which case those with valid qualifying-incomes - but not from a "pension" -  can be arbitrarily shunted to an agent. 

 

I have the income, but I don't have a pension - though I can get a Non-O-ME based on marriage.  But, retired folks would have to go all the way to their passport-country to work-around the corruption with a Non-OA Visa (assuming they don't want to pay 15K to an agent, instead).
 

1 hour ago, Henryford said:

Yes it did occur to me what's to stop you sending 65k each month from abroad then sending the 65k straight back. The 65k sent back could be from a different bank, or using Dee Money, so the first bank account would look like you were just spending your income normally.Repeat every month. Would cost a bit in fees but would it comply?The incoming fees you would have to pay anyway so it's just the outgoing fees @ 6-10k per year.

Many who legitimately have the 65K mo-income will need to send some back to cover passport-country expenses.  But, this system is wide-open to abuse, as you describe. 

 

The only way to reduce the abuse, would be to ask for 2ndary documentation - but those without "pension" income (or not enough - so they combine it with other income), may not have the documents the IO wants, so could be re-directed to use an agent (unless they can sit 800K in an account for 3 m

onths).

 

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

1 hour ago, Henryford said:

Say you had an income of 30,000 baht a month, not enough to comply but enough to live on, plus 35,000 in savings. Month 1 send the 35k savings to your UK bank. Then send the 65k to Thailand as your "income". Month 2 send the 35k savings to your UK bank...... etc, etc. You have additional fees to pay but using Dee Money not much. Better than an "illegal" agent's fee.

Good luck with the money laundering method.

It's his money - sent it here - so legal to send it back.  But, the problem is, that scenario "looks" the same as if he had a legit 65K in income (maybe pension +/or dividends +/or interest +/or annuity), and 35K in passport-country expenses to cover.  How would an IO tell the difference between the honest and dishonest applicant, assuming it was/is possible to discover the remittances at all?

Edited January 8, 2019 by JackThompson

[Pattaya46]

18 minutes ago, zydeco said:

The ENTIRE POINT of these topics is the change in income method because the letter will be gone in six months for US, UK, Australia, Denmark. For Denmark it is already gone!

Right. But the OP document concerns everyone on marriage or retirement extension.

Many people of "other embassies" were worry that because of "the 4 embassies" Thai Immigration would change the extensions' rules in a way that could impact them too 

Fortunately this is not the case 

[JackThompson]

4 hours ago, Elkski said:

What if its better timing to do 1-4 investment withdrawals rather than 12? 

Withdraw into in your foreign-account as desired, but then xfer at least the minimum required by international-transfer to your Thai bank, monthly. 

 

1 hour ago, glamont002 said:

But now the pension (or at 65k a month) will need to go direct to your Thai bank account.

No, you can still put your pensions into a foreign-account first, then transfer the minimum in.  Many, whose pensions are less than the minimum-required, will need to combine funds from multiple income streams, to transfer the minimum-required.

[wildpikey]

Well. After discovering this topic and trawling through all I can say is. Why didn't the directive state, (even just in brackets) that the 'money in the bank' method remains the same. Would have saved alot of people here stressing and saved a shit load of unnecessary reading. 

So many times new Visa rules have been launched that just need an extra sentence to clarify things. 

But this is Thailand and that's the way it always seems to happen.

 

Oh well.

Edited January 8, 2019 by wildpikey
Spelling

[JackThompson]

44 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Thats the silliness (or the rationale) of this whole change the rules business at least as it affects me and other part timers.

 

I have more than sufficient income. I dont need 65K a month and if I do, I can go to an ATM or do transferwise. I can make my life easier by just bringing in 9K, converting it, or even put it in a US funds account and live off of it.

 

For part timers, it makes no sense to deposit 65K in a bank account when you arent here.

 

I have been thinking about this whole thing as it applies to me, or anyone else who wants to stay here in the winter. It may actually make more sense to do an SETV in the USA and extend. Then a hop to Cambo or Lao or wherever for another SETV and extend. ...

Just be aware that we have reports at immigration at Bangkok Airports hassling those using 2x Tourist Visas to stay in Thailand 1/2 year.  Their claims of imaginary laws have ranged from "180 days / yr max" to "180 days in well-over a year", to "Tourists only stay a couple weeks" (never mind that a "Tourist Visa" grants 60 days, extendable to 90). 

 

The goal is to get "snowbirds" to get annual extensions - preferably via an agent, as will be increasingly common due to US/UK/AU being told their letters were no-good any more (or so they claim).  Those not staying here year-round will be unlikely to xfer money in monthly - year-round.

 

For now, you could still do this safely - always entering using the law-abiding land-borders (all but Poipet).  But, that could end at some point, if/when the bosses of the good entry-points are bought-out by whoever paid-off the existing bad entry-points.

[Spidey]

3 hours ago, Huckenfell said:

Once again, the Thai government has succeeded in frightening and confusing many peaceful, law abiding, money producing retirees who just want to be left in peace and contentment in their country. Why keep producing these orders, is it the result and consequence  of undiplomatially trained military officials.

No, it's a result of your embassy shafting you.

[Sheryl]

The receiving bank, ie your bank in Thailand, must give you the Credit Advice, by some banks called Credit Receipt. However, if TransferWise receives your funds from abroad into their own account with a Thai bank and from there remits it to your Thai bank account, the Credit Advice your bank gives you will obviously show an incoming remittance from a Thai bank.
 
Below is an example of a Credit Advice issued by Siam Commercial Bank:

It seems from what others have said that Transferwise sends the funds to Bangkok Bank and from there a domestic transfer is made if the recipient uses other than Bangkok Bank.

That means 2 options for those using TW:

1. Have your account be at Bangkok Bank. The transfers will show in your bank book as international transfers.

2. Get a letter from Bangkok Bank stating you received these transfers from abroad and that the funds were in turn transferred to your account at Bank X. In this case you may also need a letter from your own bank confirming receipt of the transfers. Showing 2 different bank letters to Imm will complicate matters a little and you'll have to explain, unless you are able to persuade your bank to, based on the letter from Bangkok Bank, include the details in their letter (e.g. x amount date transferred from abroad first to Bangkok Bank and then to this account). That would be preferable but entail some discussion/explanation with your bank. And, you will probably have to deal with Bangkok Bank Head branch to get letter from them which might mean a trip to Bangkok if you live upcountry.

Option1 will obviously be simpler but if you have a compelling reasonto want to keep your account elsewhere option 2 should work.



Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[JTXR]

Look, the government of Thailand has long believed the kind of expat retirees it wants living here are those who have the resources to take care of themselves decently and not be burdens on the system (or drunken disheveled eyesores).  It set the bar (for those not married to Thais) at 65K baht per month income and/or 800K baht in a Thai bank account, or a combination of the two.  It then later concluded that some significant number of folks were abusing the "income verification letter" thing and decided to try to close that loophole.  Maybe it will later decide to crack down on the gaping "cheating agent" loophole. 

In any event, no use bitching and moaning.  The Thai government can set pretty much whatever requirements it wants.  Hell, in future it could be 80K/month or 1.2 million in the bank.  For folks on the margin, who might find either requirement difficult or impossible to meet, a better use of their time and energy would be to try to find a personal solution depending on their individual circumstances (including preparing for a possible departure) rather than fuming and railing against TI, Thais, Thailand, or their embassy.

[JackThompson]

7 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

ask T.I. to issue the formal requirements and an official check list for visa applicants to all offices and insist its used?

We can only dream of this.  Oversight of offices and entry-points from the top varies from minimal to non-existent.

 

7 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Just seems the ideal time to highlight these matters to T.I.

Any time to set a "These are the Real Rules" mandate would be ideal.  But when the head of the immigration pretends (in a press-interview) that agents "fool" IOs, it is unlikely we have found a hero who wants to remove the primary source of "faked" applications - agents.  When agent-submissions drop, IOs can use their "flexibility" to invent non-existent rules, to drive them back up again.  

 

 

6 hours ago, farangx said:

Surely your friend and his wife both running a business can whipped up 400K to sit inside a Thai bank for a few months instead of using this income method.  Or get a loan of 400K for it.  Unless of course he misses this paperwork so much and he spends every cent he earns. ????

What if they cannot?  Is it better if they quit the business and break up the family?  I fail to find humor in that.

 

If the office in question would simply follow the rules, instead of trying to get an agent's brown-envelope by twisting the rules, this would not be an issue.