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

[Mark mark]

"The new requirements to keep 800k baht in the bank for three months after the retirement visa is granted is effective from 1st March  2019."

 

So do you think that this applies to existing Visas (Like mine from 27 Jan) ? or does it only apply to new Visas issued, ... after 1 March as implied ? ... like it could, be interpreted either way I think ? 

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, notamember said:

2 hours ago, elviajero 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.

so its not 1900 baht then?

or

in your playbook, thats not a law but a rule

is that something that can be legally bypassed?

For something to be illegal it must break a law. 

 

There is nothing written in Thai law that says you must apply in person. It is a rule/regulation. If an agent applies they are not breaking a law and arrested. Immigration could simply decline the application.

[ravip]

On 1/31/2019 at 7:32 PM, mlkik said:

800.000 baht is not very much if you genuinely have retired and have committed to living in Thailand.

Maybe the people getting worried do not really have enough to retire here? I know many people worry about the exchange rates,if that is the case again maybe they are not financially ready for retirement here?

I am far from being well off but I have put enough money in a Thai account to ensure a worry free retirement.

Interest rates here are no worse than my home country. I am not wealthy enough to speculate and possibly lose on the investment of stocks and shares . Therefore I see no reason not to have savings here.

 

Absolutely correct! 800k Bhat is the equalant of USD 25,600. Without that, why leave home? And all the posters bashing the rule, should really evaluate yourselves, including me

[CharlieH]

Off topic post (reported) and subsequent responses to it, removed.

[Tanoshi]

4 hours 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

I'll just state this, using your analogy;

 

If a Visa is issued on the basis of Retirement, why doesn't it state 'R' or 'RV' in the category of the Visa?

Tourist Visa = category TV

Education Visa = category ED

Business Visa = category B

 

Yes, a SE O. a ME O, or an O-A can all be obtained on the basis of being 50 or over and perhaps with the intention of retiring in Thailand, but the term Retirement Visa does not distinguish between the categories of an 'O type' Visa, which invariable causes problems.

 

3 hours ago, elviajero said:

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."

And the reason Immigration are so incorrect using the term 'Retirement Visa' is because an extension (which is a permit) does not allow entry into the Country, which of course a Visa would.

You have to obtain a separate a re-entry permit in order to keep any remaining permission to stay valid.

[stud858]

I think the extension terminology is used to enforce the understanding that you're a temporary visitor to thailand even if retired.

This  ties in with my understanding that you will still certainly be classified as a permanent resident of your native country even if claiming to be retired in Thailand.

I.e. how can you claim to be a permanent resident of Thailand when the government only allows you temporary stay.

[lkv]

1 hour ago, stud858 said:

I think the extension terminology is used to enforce the understanding that you're a temporary visitor to thailand even if retired.

This  ties in with my understanding that you will still certainly be classified as a permanent resident of your native country even if claiming to be retired in Thailand.

I.e. how can you claim to be a permanent resident of Thailand when the government only allows you temporary stay.

It's not used to enforce the understanding of temporary, it's just exactly that. Temporary. Holder must leave the Kingdom within specified date. Offenders will be prosecuted. Is that not what's written on these "retirement extensions"?

 

Permanent residence is also available in Thailand, if you worked for a few years and paid taxes.

[stud858]

33 minutes ago, lkv said:

It's not used to enforce the understanding of temporary, it's just exactly that. Temporary. Holder must leave the Kingdom within specified date. Offenders will be prosecuted. Is that not what's written on these "retirement extensions"?

 

Permanent residence is also available in Thailand, if you worked for a few years and paid taxes.

My point was , temporary non O visa with extensions is indicating less of a tie to the country than displaying temporary retirement visa.

I would say residence is available only to the very lucky few. So few and near impossible to get. I think only two known on this forum.

Thailand is an old proud country. Thailand is for Thai people only as compared to Australia or England that offer citizenships. Some say Australia could learn a lot from Thailand immigration policy. I am indifferent about the matter. Probably for the reason that Freddy Mercury suggested. I.e I'll be dead soon and nothing really matters.

 

[farangx]

1 hour ago, stud858 said:

My point was , temporary non O visa with extensions is indicating less of a tie to the country than displaying temporary retirement visa.

I would say residence is available only to the very lucky few. So few and near impossible to get. I think only two known on this forum.

On a short leash by design, 12 month extension serves that purpose.

 

[tropo]

For months many of the "Whoopty doo... I've got 800k in the bank" members have been laughing (with insults) at the plight of income letter applicants searching for solutions. It's poetic that they too will be inconvenienced now. LOL

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎2‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 12:58 PM, jacko45k said:

I often wondered why I always had my picture taken yet those who use an agent never even attend immigration. 

??????

I used an agent and had to go there to get my photo taken.

[wayned]

Just now, tropo said:

For months many of the "Whoopty doo... I've got 800k in the bank" members have been laughing (with insults) at the plight of income letter applicants searching for solutions. It's poetic that they too will be inconvenienced now. LOL

IMHO, for some the new immigration requirements regarding no Income Affidavit and keeping 400k in the bank account forever will not be a problem, for others it will be.  Also for some reason the people that have the $ to meet the requirements with no problems seem to be those that continually criticize those that don't.  Just remember retirement doesn't always mean that you have acquired a mass wealth over your lifetime, it is actually controlled by your age.  Many come here to retire  because they can live out their life in a relatively pleasant way rather than in a cardboard box under the freeway overpass.  All of the people that retire here are contributing to the economy of Thailand  whether they barely qualify for the monthly income requirement or not. Personally I don't see how somebody needs 65000 baht/month to survive.  I live on 1/2 of that amount and don't budget my expenditures and support a family of 11, all be it they are 7 dogs and 4 cats, my wife passed away 4 years ago.

[thaibeachlovers]

58 minutes ago, tropo said:

For months many of the "Whoopty doo... I've got 800k in the bank" members have been laughing (with insults) at the plight of income letter applicants searching for solutions. It's poetic that they too will be inconvenienced now. LOL

?????

I never took money out of the account with the extension money in it, so I don't understand how I would have been "inconvenienced". Sorry, but if one has to do something dodgy every year to have the money in the account, or if one can't afford to leave it there ( and it's a useful backup in case of catastrophe ) one should be seriously considering if they should be staying in LOS, or a cheaper alternative.

[garyk]

10 minutes ago, wayned said:

IMHO, for some the new immigration requirements regarding no Income Affidavit and keeping 400k in the bank account forever will not be a problem, for others it will be.  Also for some reason the people that have the $ to meet the requirements with no problems seem to be those that continually criticize those that don't.  Just remember retirement doesn't always mean that you have acquired a mass wealth over your lifetime, it is actually controlled by your age.  Many come here to retire  because they can live out their life in a relatively pleasant way rather than in a cardboard box under the freeway overpass.  All of the people that retire here are contributing to the economy of Thailand  whether they barely qualify for the monthly income requirement or not. Personally I don't see how somebody needs 65000 baht/month to survive.  I live on 1/2 of that amount and don't budget my expenditures.

This is the best post here by far IMO. Two thumbs up!

Once you retire here you can find a nice home to rent for peanuts, motorcycle, car.  I do it and never had a problem, and go go go. How ever I do spend 65K when on the road. When idol, 30-40K is HARD to spend. Most of these guys that brag are in BKK, Pattaya, Phuket, etc, or supporting the wife and all their relatives. haha

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

??????

I used an agent and had to go there to get my photo taken.

Yes, but that is you, I have talked to others who never go to immigration at all. I have read some supply pictures to agents, and I think I read of supplying one via email. When I pick up my passport with the Extension, the young lady uses a webcam. I just figured the same pic would pop up when I used the passport to leave Thailand for the IO to check. 

Different processes of obtaining the Extensions are at play, it is all well organised and thought out, and as your comment confirms, goes well into the office itself. 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, wayned said:

IMHO, for some the new immigration requirements regarding no Income Affidavit and keeping 400k in the bank account forever will not be a problem, for others it will be.  Also for some reason the people that have the $ to meet the requirements with no problems seem to be those that continually criticize those that don't.  Just remember retirement doesn't always mean that you have acquired a mass wealth over your lifetime, it is actually controlled by your age.  Many come here to retire  because they can live out their life in a relatively pleasant way rather than in a cardboard box under the freeway overpass.  All of the people that retire here are contributing to the economy of Thailand  whether they barely qualify for the monthly income requirement or not. Personally I don't see how somebody needs 65000 baht/month to survive.  I live on 1/2 of that amount and don't budget my expenditures and support a family of 11, all be it they are 7 dogs and 4 cats, my wife passed away 4 years ago.

Being that it's LOS, logic isn't a consideration. However, one should always remember that it's their country, and they can do whatever they like, whether or not it inconveniences us.

Also, I doubt if the contributions that farangs make are even considered in the rooms of power when the big guys sit down to make decisions. They don't even look after their own poor, so why would they look after poor farangs?

[garyk]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Being that it's LOS, logic isn't a consideration. However, one should always remember that it's their country, and they can do whatever they like, whether or not it inconveniences us.

Also, I doubt if the contributions that farangs make are even considered in the rooms of power when the big guys sit down to make decisions. They don't even look after their own poor, so why would they look after poor farangs?

Fortunately, there are other countries that want the business of the 30-65K / month expats. Thailand is not one of them now. And not because 30-65K is not a very good living here it is because of politics and greed IMO.

And to say 30-65K expats are poor, is no more than an ignorant remark IMO. In the west yea, in many many countries it is a good living.. These type of posts make me sick to my stomach. 

[jacko45k]

17 minutes ago, garyk said:

This is the best post here by far IMO.

What, the first sentience is redundant!

[notamember]

8 hours ago, elviajero said:

 

Except when it’s marketed, bought and used as a retirement visa. Then it indisputably is.

but it isn't marketing does not change its core

its just marketing

indisputably

 

[notamember]

9 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

No, they refer to Retirement Visa because it is the visa for which we get this extension.

The stamp in my passport shows clearly: Visa class: NON-RE  (for Retirement )

thats  non RE Entry supported stamp for 3 months

[notamember]

8 hours ago, elviajero said:

I agree; nowhere on an extension stamp is it called a visa, but neither is it stamped with what it is, which is a ‘Permit’.

 

If you want to be pedantic and stop people referring to it as a “Retirement Visa”; the correct short hand description should be ‘Retirement Permit’.

 

As the overwhelming majority of travelers refer to anything stuck or stamped in a passport as a visa (in line with the general definition); and a permit can be described, by definition (google it) as a visa; I don’t see the problem with referring to a Retirement Permit as as Retirement Visa. And agents, lawyers, immigration, embassies etc. seem to agree.

its not a permit its an extension for RETIREMENT as stamped in everyones passport

you cannot rename just because its suits your purpose now and you cannot bring yourself to admit you are wrong and call it by its correct name

 

[notamember]

8 hours ago, elviajero said:

 

Except when it’s marketed, bought and used as a retirement visa. Then it indisputably is.

you asked the question

i answered correctly, even though its the truth

you do not like the answer as it does not suit you and makes you wrong and you do not like it

thats all this is about

your ego

to think i actually used to read your posts to get information and thought you were solid like UJ, wow, was i wrong...

[rott]

8 hours ago, elviajero said:

For something to be illegal it must break a law. 

 

There is nothing written in Thai law that says you must apply in person. It is a rule/regulation. If an agent applies they are not breaking a law and arrested. Immigration could simply decline the application.

I find myself agreeing with elvajero, strange. Perhaps I need to drink more. ????

[elviajero]

5 minutes ago, notamember said:

8 hours ago, elviajero said:

I agree; nowhere on an extension stamp is it called a visa, but neither is it stamped with what it is, which is a ‘Permit’.

 

If you want to be pedantic and stop people referring to it as a “Retirement Visa”; the correct short hand description should be ‘Retirement Permit’.

 

As the overwhelming majority of travelers refer to anything stuck or stamped in a passport as a visa (in line with the general definition); and a permit can be described, by definition (google it) as a visa; I don’t see the problem with referring to a Retirement Permit as as Retirement Visa. And agents, lawyers, immigration, embassies etc. seem to agree.

its not a permit its an extension for RETIREMENT as stamped in everyones passport

you cannot rename just because its suits your purpose now and you cannot bring yourself to admit you are wrong and call it by its correct name

It is a PERMIT. It is a “stay permit” granting an extension of stay!

 

 

[rott]

9 hours ago, madmen said:

All bashers have an excuse. I would leave except.. Blah blah blah

Why not be an amazing dad and give your child a first world education?

To many dead beat dads here more interested in a cruzy lifestyle and their happy hour circle of mates

Does a first world education explain the difference between to and too?

[notamember]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

Yes, but that is you, I have talked to others who never go to immigration at all. I have read some supply pictures to agents, and I think I read of supplying one via email. When I pick up my passport with the Extension, the young lady uses a webcam. I just figured the same pic would pop up when I used the passport to leave Thailand for the IO to check. 

Different processes of obtaining the Extensions are at play, it is all well organised and thought out, and as your comment confirms, goes well into the office itself. 

not any more, you have to show your face, with immigration as a backdrop albeit only for a few minutes

[rott]

16 hours ago, JackThompson said:

We need a new forum - "Relocation Options" to help those being forced-out.  Threads on each country would be needed (several on some) to address the many possibilities. 

Years ago there used to be one, not exactly that heading but same thing. Don't know what happened to it.

[notamember]

10 minutes ago, rott said:

I find myself agreeing with elvajero, strange. Perhaps I need to drink more. ????

if its OK to break the rule that application must be made in person, surely it must follow that to its OK to break the rule and not pay 1900 baht too?

elvajiero is wrong, and so are you

[notamember]

19 minutes ago, elviajero said:

It is a PERMIT. It is a “stay permit” granting an extension of stay!

 

 

first you said it was a visa and you were proved wrong,

now its not a visa anymore, its now a permit

which it is not either

are there any more names you want to rename it to try to wriggle off the being wrong hook?

[elviajero]

20 hours ago, Oxx said:

 

If one lives on 800k/year, previously one could simply bring that amount in each year three months before your annual extension, and then spend it to live during the following year.  The only extra one would need is money for the three months when the money is being seasoned - 200,000,  Total required, 1,000,000 baht.

 

Now, one has, on top of the 800,000 to extend, to have money to live for five months (333,000), and since the 800,000 baht can only go down to 400,000 baht, one needs an extra 400,000 baht.  Total required, 1,533,000 baht.

 

In other words, in the first year one needs to bring into Thailand an extra half a million baht.

Your numbers are way out. Someone that drawsdown 65K every month only needs 1,125,000 under the new rules compared to 930,000 under the old. That’s only an extra 195,000.

 

There’s an example in this topic