BREAKING NEWS Foreigners now need to keep 800k in Thai bank for three months AFTER retirement extension is granted

[elviajero]

1 minute ago, Tanoshi said:

32 minutes ago, elviajero said:

If the 400K minimum is correct it rather defeats the purpose of the combo method, which was to allow people with a small shortfall in income to cover it with cash in the bank.

I'd have stated the opposite.

It allowed people with minimum funds to make up the shortfall with income.

 

Previously as an example, 200K in bank, Embassy letter with annual income of 600K.

Whichever way, everyone will now have to keep a minimum of 400K year round in the bank for the combo.

My understanding is that it was introduced to cover shortfalls in exchange rate fluctuations for people with borderline incomes and incomes slightly short of the 65K pm.

 

In which case - IMO - it's/was primarily an income option that can be topped up with cash in the bank.

[David Walden]

9 minutes ago, Roy Baht said:

Yeah the Royal Thai Embassy in Athens, Greece just call it "TEMPORARY RESIDENCE [ NON-IMMIGRANT "O-A" (LONG STAY)] " http://www.thaiembassy.org/athens/en/services/785/17707-Visa-Issuance-for-temporary-residence-[Non-Immigra.html

https://mm2h.co/mm2h-requirements/.  Information for a My Malaysia 2nd home visa  MM2h visa.  You should think yourself lucky with Thailands requirements compared to Malaysia 

[Pib]

2 hours ago, Toosetinmyways said:

There is one thing that all these topics and posts have confirmed to immigration is that a lot of retirees here dont even have a pot to piss in. 

And the ones who do have a pot don't like it getting moved around with short notice like immigration has been doing lately with the out-of-the-blue new rules.

[elviajero]

9 hours ago, notamember said:

A legitimate agent is helping the client put together the documents required to submit to immigration. There is nothing illegal or corrupt about that.

I agree, but if the ‘’legitimate agent’’ you refer to takes it without the applicant, it is illegal

As I said there is no market for this service, the American chef with blog on here, could not find one in Bangkok and had to do what the agent said he should do and did it himself!

It's not "illegal". Can you quote the law being broken if an agent submits an application without the applicant being present?

 

Immigration rules are that the applicant should be present. Rules like this are easily, lawfully, bypassed. Immigration have started to tighten up on this rule which is the main reason our photos are now taken when applying.

 

I've no interest in replying to the rest of your post as you have no credibility.

 

[grobec]

So if changing from 800k extension, how many months of minimum monthly 65k are required? And do we still need to maintain 400k with that option?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Roy Baht]

10 minutes ago, David Walden said:

https://mm2h.co/mm2h-requirements/.  Information for a My Malaysia 2nd home visa  MM2h visa.  You should think yourself lucky with Thailands requirements compared to Malaysia 

Yeah, that's why I live in Thailand

[elviajero]

9 hours ago, notamember said:

It was reported last year that the British government issued YS with a 10 year visitor visa!

Reported, yes but not confirmed

BPost reported on 29 May 2018 that the UK foreign ministry nor the Thai foreign ministry knew anything about it

They said BBC Thai, whose editor is based in London, attributed the information to "a source close to Yingluck", whose name was withheld. 

Yes very reliable…………

And your 'source' is more reliable! LMFAO.

 

Maybe you can name the source that told you that her 'visa was withdrawn' and that the British government refused to give her one.

[Tanoshi]

33 minutes ago, elviajero said:

The only conditions that must be the same as (4) are cash in the bank for 2 months before and 3 months after, and a minimum balance of 400K must be maintained if any cash is withdrawn. The last condition suggests - what we both understand - that 400K is the minimum allowed to be used for the combo method.

After a re-read of your post, I'm now interpreting the order differently.

 

Cash in a Thai bank, plus income (Embassy or Thai bank) totalling 800K on the filing date.

Said funds (200, 400, 600K) must have been maintained in a Thai bank for 2 months as of the filing date and for 3 months after filing date, after which you can withdraw said funds as in (4), but their is no mention of leaving a remaining balance as in condition 4.

 

I believe it means you must keep the funds being used in for 3 months after, but then withdraw the funds (as in 4) but with no minimum balance required to be left in the account, as per purely the funds method.

Following year funds in bank 2 month prior to filing + proof of income totalling 800K.

 

Therefore whatever amount of funds you use, be it 300 or 500K, it only has to be maintained in the account for 5 months.

 

[Canuck50]

34 minutes ago, bert bloggs said:

Or perhaps they are like me ,they do have the funds but object to being made to keep 400,000 baht in a bank and never be able to use it , i like to have the choice ,to do as i please with my own money (Q those saying well then go home,dont bother)

Agree 100%. It only benefits the Thai banks that will get a lorge influx of low-interest funds to use for operations. I refuse to be a part of this scam and prefer to leave my money in my home country where I can invest it as I choose. So I will reduce or eliminate my time spent in Thailand and spend it in more agreeable (and less paranoid) countries instead.

[Spidey]

4 hours ago, madmen said:

What about Eastern Europe. I'm serbian and the cost of living is actually cheaper than thailand. I would imagine all of them would be cheaper or the same as Thailand

So much beautiful architecture and the best food.

To many visa variations to list though.

Next year its Europe and Thailand for the winter

I preferred Croatia. It has great beaches and some of the best dive sites anywhere.

[Jingthing]

There is one thing that all these topics and posts have confirmed to immigration is that a lot of retirees here dont even have a pot to piss in. 

I call B. S.

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

[elviajero]

9 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Won't affect "legitimate" retirees?  Do you refer to those who have a time-machine, and can re-plan to retire here under rules that were not then written?  They just need a DeLorean, Mr. Fusion and a few banana peels to go back and re-arrange history to become perfectly "legitimate."  Forget buying that condo, because that's Immigration's money to ... well, what a dog does to a fire-hydrant to mark its territory.  Good to know that one in advance.  And "income"? - it's not defined as before ("loophole theory" - right?), so they need to go back and plan for that change of terms.

 

Immigration just effectively raised the bank-level to 1.2M Baht through the back-door, with 28-days notice - similar to when they began adding "extra seasoning" to marriage extensions, but even more severe.  No "grandfather clause," almost no warning was given to retirees, and none to married folks.  Sure, you only need 800K, but 1/2 isn't yours to spend any more, and the other 1/2 very limited ...  Unless, you leave and spend it somewhere else (the goal of the policy).  This result hurts Thais most of all, but that's not "immigration's problem," I suppose.

Overreaction much! You always look at things from a negative point of view, and again have formed a wrong opinion. 

 

We already need more than 800K to retire in Thailand, because you already have to keep 800K in the bank for up to 3 months and need other income or cash to live on during that 3 months. How much more would depend on lifestyle.

 

As it stands you cannot 'retire' in Thailand with only 800K to your name. Again, IT'S A MINIMUM requirement. The changes now mean that other income or cash - that you already need - must cover you for 5 months instead of 3. And for anyone that spends more than 400K plus the other money they already use to cover the seasoning period just needs to top up earlier than they currently do.

 

A legitimate retiree will have an income and cash in the bank and will not be affected by these changes. Other than possibly having to rejig their finances.

 

The rest of your post is just more tin hat nonsense.

 

[Jingthing]

Because by the look of things, most don't have the required funds... not even close!!

Expat Stockholm syndrome strikes again.

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

[Roy Baht]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I call B. S.

I hope so. What's your estimate of the "Pot to Piss In" / "No Pot to Piss In" ratio?

[JTXR]

Does anyone know how to interpret the last line of part 5 (which appears to address the combo method)?

 

For example, if you have income of 500K and put 300K in the bank 2 months before extending in order to meet the requirement of "annual earning and fund deposited with a commercial bank in Thailand totaling of no less than 800K until the filing date", then what do you do after extending, to meet the last bit "under the same conditions as stated in (4)"?  Do you just need to keep the entire 300K in the account all year?  Only the 300K?  It doesn't have to be 400K?

 

[elviajero]

8 hours ago, notamember said:

An O-A visa is not a retirement visa

in fact there is no such thing as a retirement visa

Any visa issued on the basis of retirement can justifiably be referred to as a 'Retirement Visa'. 

 

Embassies, agents, lawyers, immigration, and most expats, refer to visas or permits to stay issued on the basis of retirement as a 'Retirement Visas'. Pedants like you will not change those facts.

 

Visa issued on the basis of tourism = Tourist Visa

Visa issued on the basis of education = Education Visa

Etc.

Visa issued on the basis of retirement = Retirement Visa

[elviajero]

8 hours ago, notamember said:

not kidding  check it yourself

they will not issue an O visa so the applicant can do the retirement extension after arrival in Thailand

They push applicants into an O-A visa and call it a retirement visa

Thats why Americans  think an O-A Visa is a retirement visa 

if you see someone on TV referring to an O-A visa as a retirement visa, i would bet they are an American

Or Australian!

 

A long stay 'O-A' visa is being marketed and sold as a 'Retirement Visa', or the path to an extension (permit) of stay based on retirement. Therefore; for all intents and purposes it is a 'Retirement Visa'. 

[elviajero]

8 hours ago, Soupdragon said:

I am wondering if this is even legal. Two people applying for the same visa extension. One is required to maintain a bank balance of 400K (ignoring the 800K rules) and the other is not. Is that discrimination ?

Not when you have the choice of which option you want!

[elviajero]

7 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

17 hours ago, Canuck50 said:

I will NOT use the bank deposit method for several reasons:

1. I will not tie up that amount of money in Thailand at a low interest bank rate and risk currency fluctuations when I can invest the money for a much better return in my home country.

5 years best Canada bank rate 2.5% Thai bank 2.0% Currency 30 to 24?  So how much have you lost keeping money in Canada?

Translated they mean they can't really afford to retire.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, David Walden said:

http://canberra.thaiembassy.org/Home/visa

David, a question here. Do you have to attend the Thai embassy in Canberra in person, or can it be done by mail or on the internet?

[elviajero]

7 hours ago, markpbfree said:

Does anyone know what this means exactly?  Will the monthly pension amount of 65,000 bt not be sufficient to qualify for a Visa or what?  Their changing their policies every day, this is getting to be almost not worth living here.  Another hoop to jump through.

"Every day". They hardly ever change their policies! You still have the choice of using income or cash in the bank, or a combination if the extension is based on retirement.

[Lacessit]

46 minutes ago, Roy Baht said:

Yeah, that's why I live in Thailand

I wouldn't live in Malaysia for quids. Getting woken up at 4 am while they practise their BS religion?

[notamember]

44 minutes ago, elviajero said:

It's not "illegal". Can you quote the law being broken if an agent submits an application without the applicant being present?

TM7 back page

picture

 

Immigration rules are that the applicant should be present.

Rules like this are easily, lawfully, bypassed.

so lawfully bypassed?

how did that happen?

how is it lawful to bypass a rule except to make you seem right instead of being wrong?

 

Immigration have started to tighten up on this rule which is the main reason our photos are now taken when applying.

so  it was ok to lawfully bypass the rule before in your book?,

why are the tightening up now?

shouldn't it still be ok now, if its lawfully bypassable ?

why would they bother?

 

44 minutes ago, elviajero said:

 

I've no interest in replying to the rest of your post as you have no credibility.

you choose not to answer any other questions because you dare not as your are scared of losing face 

Credibility? haha thats rich coming from you!

 

 

[elviajero]

6 hours ago, notamember said:

you have an O-A visa with an extension for the purposes of retirement

the extension has been renewed many times

not once has the extension thats been granted from the O-A visa ever been stamped RETIREMENT VISA

You're right, but the PERMIT (which can be described as a form of visa) has been stamped with "Retirement".

 

Visa

"an endorsement on a passport indicating that the holder is allowed to enter, leave, or stay for a specified period of time in a country."

 

6 hours ago, notamember said:

i am not acting smart,

That we can all agree on!

 

 

[notamember]

16 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Any visa issued on the basis of retirement can justifiably be referred to as a 'Retirement Visa'. 

 

Embassies, agents, lawyers, immigration, and most expats, refer to visas or permits to stay issued on the basis of retirement as a 'Retirement Visas'. Pedants like you will not change those facts.

 

Visa issued on the basis of tourism = Tourist Visa

Visa issued on the basis of education = Education Visa

Etc.

Visa issued on the basis of retirement = Retirement Visa

call a Samsung vacuum a Hoover but its not

a spa bath a jacuzzi but its not

need i go on?

i thought you knew what you were talking about

you are looking less and less credible all the time

 

[elviajero]

2 minutes ago, notamember said:

 

 

I am well aware of the rules. You said it was "illegal". It's not. It's against the rules not to apply in person.

[notamember]

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You're right, but the PERMIT (which can be described as a form of visa) has been stamped with "Retirement".

 

Visa

"an endorsement on a passport indicating that the holder is allowed to enter, leave, or stay for a specified period of time in a country."

 

That we can all agree on!

 

 

but not VISA and everyones stamp says that

thats a fact that we have to agree on despite your meanderings to the contrary

[elviajero]

1 minute ago, notamember said:

20 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Any visa issued on the basis of retirement can justifiably be referred to as a 'Retirement Visa'. 

 

Embassies, agents, lawyers, immigration, and most expats, refer to visas or permits to stay issued on the basis of retirement as a 'Retirement Visas'. Pedants like you will not change those facts.

 

Visa issued on the basis of tourism = Tourist Visa

Visa issued on the basis of education = Education Visa

Etc.

Visa issued on the basis of retirement = Retirement Visa

call a Samsung vacuum a Hoover but its not

a spa bath a jacuzzi but its not

need i go on?

i thought you knew what you were talking about

you are looking less and less credible all the time

Please do not go on. Those examples are not analogous! I have provided you with the relevant analogies.

 

Explain why it's ok to call a visa issued for tourism a Tourist Visa, BUT it's not ok to call a visa issued for retirement a Retirement Visa.

[notamember]

17 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Or Australian!

 

A long stay 'O-A' visa is being marketed and sold as a 'Retirement Visa', or the path to an extension (permit) of stay based on retirement. Therefore; for all intents and purposes it is a 'Retirement Visa'. 

but its not is it, it is not a retirement visa and calling it so over and over will not make it so

you are like a guy watching titanic movie and think the ship will not sink 

[notamember]

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Please do not go on. Those examples are not analogous! I have provided you with the relevant analogies.

 

Explain why it's ok to call a visa issued for tourism a Tourist Visa, BUT it's not ok to call a visa issued for retirement a Retirement Visa.

because an O-A visa is not issued specifically for retirement purposes