3 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

That is still shown in the other police order 327/2557.

"(5) Must have an annual earning and funds deposited with a bank totaling no less than Baht 800,0000 as of the filing date."

Not mentioned the police order that has been amended since you still have to prove the income for it.

This is the bit that confused me. Both 327/2557 and 138/2557 both have Clause 2.22, one relating to money deposited and the other to income. Do I need to go back to an earlier Order where they are differentiated.

36 minutes ago, JamesH said:

I emailed Kasikorn Bank earlier regarding obtaining a Credit Advice for my last TransferWise transaction and the reply I received was "If you would like to get a Credit Advice for this transaction, please kindly contact the transferring bank" Who supplies them, the transferring bank or the receiving bank?

Yes, I had the same problem.

32 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

The receiving bank, it is a Kasikorn document and I have always been able to get them with no problem, but I have not been using TW, I've been doing bank to bank tarnsfers.  Does TW use an intermediary bank within Thailand? If so that may be the reason, you may have to get it from the first Thai bank to see the money.

 

And you might also need something to show that this money was then transferred to Kasikorn so that the Kasikorn branch staff can know that the transfer shown in your statement/bank book is this same money. Or alternately get a letter from whatever the intermediary bank is. That might actually be simpler since just one document. Something to the effect "Mr X made X transfers from abroad of X amount and after receipt in Thailand these were forwarded to his Kasikorn account number X".

 

 

I use OFX and they transfer money here through Barclays in UK. What are the chances of getting the right document.

35 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

but "retire" seems a very loose term. I'm 49 and not retired in terms of taking a monthly pension so those dates don't make sense

It is a "loose" term. It does not mean you have to be "retired" and no longer working anywhere.

 

It means you are old enough to qualify for the "Retirement" Visa (which does not allow you to work - in Thailand). They set the age at 50 no doubt to attract the younger generation of people who are able to "retire" at a much younger age than their parents.
 

Some people (i.e. some military people) could retire as early as 40 with a 20(+) year military pension. I recall in my younger days that financial companies used to tout "Freedom 55" retirement plans that, if you contributed the suggested amounts for the suggested time period, were supposed to generate enough money that you could retire quite comfortable at age 55.
I "retired" from the military when I was 42 (but then I went to work elsewhere after that).

 

For my self, when I was <50 my only options in Thailand were 30 Day stamps or maybe a Thai Elite card. Before I hit 50 I already had the "money in the bank" ready to go (and that was long before they came out with the rule about it having to be there for 3 months.

When I hit 50 it was a breeze. Had the money in the bank, got the Visa and then the extension. I was still working - overseas - but that didn't matter. I just couldn't work in Thailand. Having the Extension did make life a bit easier as I didn't have to deal with the occasional 2 or 3 day overstay or worry about having too many "30 Day" stamps in my passport.

You know what the requirements are and have plenty of time to prepare for whichever method you want to use. If you are going to go for the "income" method there's no reason you can't start making the required monthly deposits now, even if you can't apply for the visa until much later in the year. Maybe by the time you are old enough, you'll have enough in the bank to use the "money in bank" method and not have to worry about making transfers at all !

Sure simplifies things.

21 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Thought it was obvious but i plan to when 50, not long

Well once you get your visa, you have a choice ....either the money in the bank method (800K for the 3 months before your first extension), or transfer 65K into Thailand every month.

It is a "loose" term. It does not mean you have to be "retired" and no longer working anywhere.
 
It means you are old enough to qualify for the "Retirement" Visa (which does not allow you to work - in Thailand). They set the age at 50 no doubt to attract the younger generation of people who are able to "retire" at a much younger age than their parents.
 
Some people (i.e. some military people) could retire as early as 40 with a 20(+) year military pension. I recall in my younger days that financial companies used to tout "Freedom 55" retirement plans that, if you contributed the suggested amounts for the suggested time period, were supposed to generate enough money that you could retire quite comfortable at age 55.
I "retired" from the military when I was 42 (but then I went to work elsewhere after that).
 
For my self, when I was When I hit 50 it was a breeze. Had the money in the bank, got the Visa and then the extension. I was still working - overseas - but that didn't matter. I just couldn't work in Thailand. Having the Extension did make life a bit easier as I didn't have to deal with the occasional 2 or 3 day overstay or worry about having too many "30 Day" stamps in my passport.

You know what the requirements are and have plenty of time to prepare for whichever method you want to use. If you are going to go for the "income" method there's no reason you can't start making the required monthly deposits now, even if you can't apply for the visa until much later in the year. Maybe by the time you are old enough, you'll have enough in the bank to use the "money in bank" method and not have to worry about making transfers at all !

Sure simplifies things.

the confusion based on new rules is how they will apply the monthly income thing for new applications. That's a grey area. If you read their example its not clear

8 minutes ago, GreasyFingers said:

This is the bit that confused me. Both 327/2557 and 138/2557 both have Clause 2.22, one relating to money deposited and the other to income. Do I need to go back to an earlier Order where they are differentiated.

No

The 138/2557 order only shows the requirements for money in the bank and proof of 65k baht income (now changed). For the combination option shown 327/2557 you have to meet both requirements shown in 138/2557.

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

1 hour ago, elviajero said:

They don’t provide a definition of ‘retired’. But they simply mean ‘not working’.
 
Anyone granted a family based or retirement extension to live in the country isn’t expected to be working — unless they are employed in Thailand. Therefore, any income is expected to be passive income from pension/investments act.

But for new extensions, it sounds like they will accept 1 month "income" ? which can also include a cash transfer i.e. taken from a UK bank account. When they refer to "income" i assume they mean money

It does read that way - and that’s what I was told to expect. How they treat first time applicants has been my concern, and I’ve been waiting to see the instructions to offices. However, it’s not clear (Thai original or translation) so I’m waiting for clarification.

 

The maximum transfers they could see for a new arrival is 2. My opinion is that someone arriving in January (“month of retirement”) is expeceted to show a transfer in February prior to applying.

 

Sorry, but this is total mind-boggling confusion.

 

If this was not confusing then there wouldn`t be so many posters asking questions.

 

I have always and still do use the 800000 baht in a Thai bank yearly retirement extension method from my savings in a Thai bank here in Thailand. As for my living expenses I bring over money from aboard paid into my Thai bank joint account with my wife, if and when I need it. I`ve never been asked by immigration to show anything other than the 800000 baht in my Thai savings account that I don`t touch.

So now do these amendments mean this is no longer possible and have to show 65000 baht going into my Thai account from abroad each month to total 800000 baht at time of application?

 

Sometime this week I will visit my agent and ask if they could give me some clarification.

 

It does read that way - and that’s what I was told to expect. How they treat first time applicants has been my concern, and I’ve been waiting to see the instructions to offices. However, it’s not clear (Thai original or translation) so I’m waiting for clarification.
 
The maximum transfers they could see for a new arrival is 2. My opinion is that someone arriving in January (“month of retirement”) is expeceted to show a transfer in February prior to applying.
 

I'll be on an METV and will be applying in December for the first time, i won't be arriving November it will be months earlier. So i assume maybe they'd want to see the income November and December?

Just now, cyberfarang said:

Sorry, but this is total mind-boggling confusion.

 

If this was not confusing then there wouldn`t be so many posters asking questions.

 

I have always and still do use the 800000 baht in a Thai bank yearly retirement extension method from my savings in a Thai bank here in Thailand. As for my living expenses I bring over money from aboard paid into my Thai bank joint account with my wife, if and when I need it. I`ve never been asked by immigration to show anything other than the 800000 baht in my Thai savings account that I don`t touch.

So now do these amendments mean this is no longer possible and have to show 65000 baht going into my Thai account from abroad each month to total 800000 baht at time of application?

 

Sometime this week I will visit my agent and ask if they could give me some clarification.

 

No change to the Bt800K method.  The new amendment only deals with the monthly income method.

 

You are still good to go.

Party-time....excellent!

2 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

8 minutes ago, elviajero said:

It does read that way - and that’s what I was told to expect. How they treat first time applicants has been my concern, and I’ve been waiting to see the instructions to offices. However, it’s not clear (Thai original or translation) so I’m waiting for clarification.
 
The maximum transfers they could see for a new arrival is 2. My opinion is that someone arriving in January (“month of retirement”) is expeceted to show a transfer in February prior to applying.
 

I'll be on an METV and will be applying in December for the first time, i won't be arriving November it will be months earlier. So i assume maybe they'd want to see the income November and December?

My opinion at this point is that your “month of retirement” will be the first months entry from a non ‘O’ visa. Any time spent in the country prior to that as a tourist should be irrelevant.

4 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

No. The OP is wrong.

The notice says that for those with letter you must show income no less than 65'000B,

but does not say that they have to Transfer it in Thailand !

Yes it does:

...........and bank statement showing money transfer from overseas every month for the past 12 months..............

3 hours ago, madmen said:

So the crackdown BY TI on affidavit scammers did nothing. It's clear the merry go round of 65 k out 65k back in is the new scam and impossible to trace 

 

So much drama and TI still left the back gate open 

Actually, I can seem them still asking for "extra information" - like at Chang Mai now for those with embassy-letters - only now they will ask for "pension" statements when they want more agent-money (knowing many of us have non-pension income)

 

3 hours ago, DrTuner said:

Is that as in 65k back to outside Thailand? Remitting in that direction needs extra arrangements with a bank, one of the multitude of reasons I never transfer any more $ here than I immediately need.

See "Dee Money" and could also buy bitcoin out of your Thai acct, then immediately redeem it into your foreign-account (before its value changes much). 

Those with passport-country expenses out of the "gross income" will have to do this sort of thing - 100% legitimately - and also could use their MC/Visa Thai-bank debit card to pay some passport-country expenses.

 

3 hours ago, ocddave said:

It would be nice if they handed you an official check list of items needed (along with "Official" form numbers and revision versions) when going in to see them (or on ONE website), then none of this nonsense of custom forms and different ways of handling things at each IO would be tolerated anymore.

I don't think that is the goal of all this.  Otherwise, they would do exactly that - and not allow money-seasoning to be skipped for agents, etc.  The point appears to be to keep it fuzzy, to allow the shenanigans to continue. 

we will find out soon enough, one of these days a TV member will drop the issue, then we will know.

 

I think 800 k en 400 k will not be abandoned. why?

29 minutes ago, Mickmick said:

Well once you get your visa, you have a choice ....either the money in the bank method (800K for the 3 months before your first extension), or transfer 65K into Thailand every month.

... or a combination - with 12 (months) times your mo-transfer amount plus seasoned-money in-the-bank totaling 800K. 

5 hours ago, khwaibah said:

For confirmation and assistance contact your local agent.????

 

  Agree ,  a lot easier, and cheaper   having  your local  agent , get you a type D. visa .. easy pips .

8 minutes ago, hgma said:

we will find out soon enough, one of these days a TV member will drop the issue, then we will know.

 

I think 800 k en 400 k will not be abandoned. why?

         Most  certainly will be not abandoned ,  with  the  drops in the value of our gbp , usd , etc ,

            i am expecting   the  required amounts , 800k /400k , to be raised . 

3 hours ago, pontious said:

Can the 65,000 Baht per month be in a joint account?

I know the 4/8k has to be single account.

I says no - anyone confirm.

1 hour ago, wgdanson said:

The new rules have only just been announced, and here are people advising others how to circumvent the law. Disgusting. It was partly because of these sort of practices that Immigration changed their requirements.

Many people have expenses in their passport-countries.  Immigration have moved the goalposts, and people are trying to figure out how to continue.  The "law" was/is "income" not "Net income after paying everything else in your life outside of Thailand, where you only are given a 1-year permitted-stay with no PR ever, if retired." 

 

Many cannot burn all bridges in their passport-country, given we can be shown the door at any time (no "right" to be here).  How to pay expenses there, if one has to move 2x more than it costs to live in Thailand to Thailand every month?  The only solution is to use some of that money to pay those expenses.

 

And, if history is any indication, immigration changes its policies to maximize under-the-table revenue streams.

1 hour ago, Pattaya46 said:

They would not take kickbacks if nobody was paying agents to give them... 

And many would not need to pay agents if IOs in offices did not make up "extra rules / documents" not on the official list, to force honest-folks to agents.

16 minutes ago, pontious said:

3 hours ago, pontious said:

Can the 65,000 Baht per month be in a joint account?

I know the 4/8k has to be single account.

I says no - anyone confirm.

The 400K / 800K can sometimes be in a joint account (depending on IO) if the amount seasoned is Double the minimum-required.  Not sure if the same could come up with mo-xfers.   Why risk it?  Better to have one acct only in your name only for immigration purposes.

3 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The 400K / 800K can sometimes be in a joint account (depending on IO) if the amount seasoned is Double the minimum-required.  Not sure if the same could come up with mo-xfers.   Why risk it?  Better to have one acct only in your name only for immigration purposes.

Thanks but I am just asking about the income method.

1 hour ago, Pib said:

If you have a Bangkok Bank account the Transferwise transfer to that account will appear as an International Transfer which will satisfy TI that the money came from outside Thailand.   If sending to other Thai banks the Transferwise transfer may not appear as an International Transfer.....it may just a appear as a domestic/intra-Thailand transfer....not as a foreign transfer.

But is this solely a TransferWise issue, though? In other words might not potential international transfer coding problems also arise in the case of SWIFT transfers where your originating home country bank's agency bank in Thailand is not the same as your receiving Thai bank?

 

(As you are no doubt well aware but others reading this may not be, TransferWise's agency bank in Thailand is Bangkok Bank, which is why international transfer coding issues don't arise in the case of TransferWise transfers which end up in a Bangkok Bank account).

An astonishing number of posts so rapidly!!

 

Are we talking about a requirement for NEW money annually or OLD (previous year's money that has been kept in an acceptable bank deposit.

 

What is required and when is it required?

 

A)  New money (800k) for one year (12 months) posted in the beginning month of the year preceding the extension;

 

B)  Bhat 65k shown monthly progressively throughout the year preceding the extension; that is, an ongoing 65k per month;

 

C)  Bhat 800k in the account deposited in a previous year (and no new money)  in the year preceding the extension date applied for.  (This is what the Chiang Mai office currently approves, and has for many years.)

 

 

3 hours ago, pontious said:

Can the 65,000 Baht per month be in a joint account?

I know the 4/8k has to be single account.

You would have to ask your local immigration office about it. It would best to have it going into an account in your name only IMO.

But is this solely a TransferWise issue, though? In other words might not potential international transfer coding problems also arise in the case of SWIFT transfers where your originating home country bank's agency bank in Thailand is not the same as your receiving Thai bank?
 
(As you are no doubt well aware but others reading this may not be, TransferWise's agency bank in Thailand is Bangkok Bank, which is why international transfer coding issues don't arise in the case of TransferWise transfers which end up in a Bangkok Bank account).

No. A SWIFT transfer will appear/be coded as an international transfer on your receiving Thai bank account even if your home country sending bank uses another Thai bank as an intermediary bank.

The 400K / 800K can sometimes be in a joint account (depending on IO) if the amount seasoned is Double the minimum-required.  Not sure if the same could come up with mo-xfers.   Why risk it?  Better to have one acct only in your name only for immigration purposes.

The bank told us it could not be joint.

2 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

The bank told us it could not be joint.

Why would the bank know anything about TI policy just announced .