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

[jacko45k]

14 minutes ago, Soupdragon said:

I don't think I have a choice. I am 56 years old and don't draw a pension. I transferred money into Thailand regularly and on my first application for a retirement extension provided UK and Thai bank statements going back 2 years. The application was rejected as it was not a government or private pension but my own personal funds. I was forced to transfer in 800K to get the extension.  Has the rule changed ?

Why did you not support your 'income' with an Embassy letter as was previously required? Now your choices match mine. Keep the 800k on deposit and use that, or transfer 65k / month and have suitable verification from a Thai bank. 

Edited February 4, 2019 by jacko45k

[Soupdragon]

16 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Why did you not support your 'income' with an Embassy letter as was previously required? Now your choices match mine. Keep the 800k on deposit and use that, or transfer 65k / month and have suitable verification from a Thai bank. 

I was told this wasn't an option for me as I transfer money from my own personal fund they argued that it could stop tomorrow as opposed to a government or private pension that is guaranteed for life.

[luckyluke]

1 hour ago, notamember said:

like i said not any more

Was at Jomtien Immigration last week to pick up my passport with 1 year extension + photo taken.

 

There was a guy with a ticket to pick up his  passport as myself, the guy was completely lost, didn't know what to do with his ticket, neither where to go.

 

Seems to me like a guy who never entered the Jomtien Immigration before.

 

Now if one go for the first time to Immigration one can be completely lost.

 

But as he was holding a ticket he was supposed to be there the day or a couple days before.

 

Or...

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, Soupdragon said:

I was told this wasn't an option for me as I transfer money from my own personal fund they argued that it could stop tomorrow as opposed to a government or private pension that is guaranteed for life.

Obviously I don't know where you are getting this information, but as far as I have read they only need to see regular 65k + deposits (monthly) from overseas  into a Thai bank. I did not realize that somehow you had show it was a pension! (Nor am convinced it will be required generally). I too do not receive any pension and if I transfer from a savings pot in my home country hoped that would qualify!

[wayned]

Just now, jacko45k said:

I have read they only need to see regular 65k + deposits (monthly) from overseas  into a Thai bank.

That is the change.  In the past with the income affidavit you did not have to show that the 65k was deposited in a Thai bank.  The Affidavit only stated that you received 65k+ in monthly income and it could remain anywhere that you wanted it.

[newatthis]

1 hour ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

Instead of calling it a retirement visa why don’t we just call it :
An extension of your permission to stay permit based on an O-A Multiple Entry ( Long Stay ) Visa.

Much easier

It'd be much easier, Andrew, if they just started another topic instead of hijacking this one!

[bert bloggs]

10 minutes ago, newatthis said:

It'd be much easier, Andrew, if they just started another topic instead of hijacking this one!

Who cares a flying f--rt what its called ,lets move on ????

[rott]

1 hour ago, notamember said:

so by elvajeiro playbook its ok not to pay 1900 baht either

its just a rule to be legally bypassed

Not your decision. Imm decision.

[balo]

23 hours ago, jvs said:

What if the agents money is in the account year round and they just change the names?Sounds a lot easier.

How can they do that when the updated passbook from Bangkok bank shows 800k ? 

[Soupdragon]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

Obviously I don't know where you are getting this information, but as far as I have read they only need to see regular 65k + deposits (monthly) from overseas  into a Thai bank. I did not realize that somehow you had show it was a pension! (Nor am convinced it will be required generally). I too do not receive any pension and if I transfer from a savings pot in my home country hoped that would qualify!

I was told this at the immigration office when I submitted the application. It was five years ago so the rules may have changed.

[Roy Baht]

17 minutes ago, rott said:

Not your decision. Imm decision.

This is probably the most difficult thing for westerners to wrap their heads around. While there are laws in Thailand, the gov't official in charge of administering those laws has great discretionary power to interpret and impose the law as he sees fit, particularly in "special cases".  Of course, this leads to corruption as the official can make a "special case" of whatever case he chooses.  The case of a friend or family member can be considered a special case. Or the case of someone who gives him money. This is of course corruption but it is *legal* corruption in as much as that official has the right to judge which cases are special. 

[LongTimeLurker]

On 1/31/2019 at 5:13 PM, Jonathan Fairfield said:

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 does this mean it only applies to people applying for the retirement extension AFTER 1 March?

 

So as I've already got my extension from 16 January I don't have to jump through these hoops until next year?

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

So does this mean it only applies to people applying for the retirement extension AFTER 1 March?

 

So as I've already got my extension from 16 January I don't have to jump through these hoops until next year?

It's reasonable to read it that way, but there is nobody here, nobody at all, that can give anyone assurance that some or many officers won't enforce this retroactively.

I'm very concerned about this myself because the last extension I got I certainly went under 800K within the three months. Are we supposed to be freakin' PSYCHICS?!?

It's too late for me, I can't possibly undo the going under 800K within that three months after window. But I would tell people doing extensions now before the effective date, protect yourself, be paranoid, follow the rules anyway. Now you know about them. I didn't.

Edited February 4, 2019 by Jingthing

[LongTimeLurker]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

but there is nobody here, nobody at all, that can give anyone assurance that some or many officers might enforce this retroactively.

Too true.

[JackThompson]

16 hours ago, elviajero said:

On 2/3/2019 at 9:28 AM, 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.

What, specifically, is "tin-hat"?  That they want to drive more of us out? 

You have made this case previously, citing every "tightening" to date for years.  You have claimed that this agenda comes from the top, as I argued (at the time) it was only a clique within.  If anything, these rule-changes indicate your theory was correct - that higher-level personnel (or those recently reaching that level) in-fact do want to push more and more of us out.  If these new rules stand - no higher-authority puts a stop to this - it indicates you were correct, and things are much worse for foreigners here than I believed, prior.  All foreigners should be dusting-off contingency plans ASAP.

 

You continually re-define "legitimate" to be whatever immigration said this morning - and never mind what was deemed "legitimate" the day, week, or year before.  Each re-definition - whether done only in certain offices and entry-points, or "from the top" rule changes like these - drives out more foreigners. 

 

The issue we must face, is whether what is being done to foreigners here is "legitimate" from our perspective, in any meaningful way.  People made plans to come here to retire, based on the premise that immigration would act in good faith.  They could meet the goalposts when they arrived, and can still meet those goalposts.  In the past, grandfathering was used to avoid wrecking the lives/plans of those already here.  But, this time, with this move, immigration have now completely erased any credibility they might have had.

 

"Their country, their rules"?  Sure - but also their reputation to put in the trash can - joining the other nations whom no visitor in their right might would trust, given a track-record of unpredictable and irrational behavior towards foreigners. 

[JackThompson]

16 hours 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 

They don't like many Western foreigners staying there either - so no surprise.  Fortunately for those without strong ties to Thailand, there are many countries in the region who do appreciate and welcome us.

[rott]

According to joe a few days ago the requirements only kick in when you do a renewal after 1st March. Unless he has since rescinded this. Possibly there will be further statements from immigration in the near future to clarify things.

 

What individual IOs do is of course difficult to predict.

Edited February 4, 2019 by rott

[JackThompson]

16 hours ago, elviajero said:

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

Translated: "I don't agree with your retirement scheme, even though you live well here and are happy."

 

Thailand may no longer allow them to be here while retired, but that does not change whether they "can afford to retire," or not.  If prevented from staying here, they will simply retire and spend their money in another country, while the Thais whose incomes they previously supported, lose their jobs.

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, rott said:

According to joe a few days ago the requirements only kick in when you do a renewal after 1st March. Unless he has since rescinded this. Possibly there will be further statements from immigration in the near future to clarify things.

 

What individual IOs do is of course difficult to forecast.

He obviously said that because the text does not say it is retroactive, so it's reasonable and indeed "correct" to read it that it is indeed not retroactive. 

However, and here's the rub.

He won't be sitting next to us when we go in for our applications, will he?

So he just gives an OPINION of what the rule means. A respected one and I agree that is how the rule SHOULD be read, but it doesn't really address the enforcement realities that we may face.

In other words, interpretation of these new (and indeed old) rules is one thing. Some of them are clearer than others. But ENFORCEMENT is a totally different thing, especially with new rules, and even more so with unclearly written newer rules.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2019 by Jingthing

[mokwit]

13 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

They could meet the goalposts when they arrived, and can still meet those goalposts.  In the past, grandfathering was used to avoid wrecking the lives/plans of those already here.  But, this time, with this move, immigration have now completely erased any credibility they might have had.

 

"Their country, their rules"?  Sure - but also their reputation to put in the trash can - joining the other nations whom no visitor in their right might would trust, given a track-record of unpredictable and irrational behavior towards foreigners. 

By setting the precedent of not grandfathering Thai Immigration have given us clear indications as to how advisable it will be to stay here beyond the early stages of retirement. This (grandfathering or not) was the acid test. we now KNOW that the deal WILL be changed on us.

Edited February 4, 2019 by mokwit

[ubonjoe]

24 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

So does this mean it only applies to people applying for the retirement extension AFTER 1 March?

So as I've already got my extension from 16 January I don't have to jump through these hoops until next year?

Yes and Yes.

[wobalt]

Fact is your embassies don’t issue the income letter anymore. And you are paying now the price for it..ask your Embassy to revoke that decision


Gesendet von iPad mit Thaivisa Connect

[kannot]

53 minutes ago, Roy Baht said:

This is probably the most difficult thing for westerners to wrap their heads around. While there are laws in Thailand, the gov't official in charge of administering those laws has great discretionary power to interpret and impose the law as he sees fit, particularly in "special cases".  Of course, this leads to corruption as the official can make a "special case" of whatever case he chooses.  The case of a friend or family member can be considered a special case. Or the case of someone who gives him money. This is of course corruption but it is *legal* corruption in as much as that official has the right to judge which cases are special. 

Hmmmmmmmmm sound s like this person is "special needs".........

[JackThompson]

14 hours ago, madmen said:

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

Move the family to Japan, then? 

Doesn't Thailand have good private-schools?

 

14 hours ago, elliss said:

OK Genius , where is the first world education ,  your country of origin,? 

If USA - you want gated-community + expensive private school (with a long waiting list), and be careful of the curriculum, even with those.  Forget the "metal detector at the door" schools for "the rest of us."

 

14 hours ago, elliss said:

   Are you a real expat from  uk , usa , oz ,  countries  with historical pride

Depending on your ancestor's region of origin, if you put your kids through school in some of those, they may be taught to hate their culture and see their history as evil - though their ancestors were always at the forefront of discontinuing bad-practices (which existed since the dawn of time) than every other culture existing on Earth during the same time. 

 

The real message they learn is is, "Success is evil, because others fail - so it's your fault they failed, so you are guilty."

[wayned]

Just now, Jingthing said:

It's reasonable to read it that way, but there is nobody here, nobody at all, that can give anyone assurance that some or many officers won't enforce this retroactively.

I'm very concerned about this myself because the last extension I got I certainly went under 800K within the three months. Are we supposed to be freakin' PSYCHICS?!?

It's too late for me, I can't possibly undo the going under 800K within that three months after window. But I would tell people doing extensions now before the effective date, protect yourself, be paranoid, follow the rules anyway. Now you know about them. I didn't.

How do they intend to check?  Are they going to require a bank letter and copy of the passbook with each 90 day report?

[rott]

51 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

He obviously said that because the text does not say it is retroactive, so it's reasonable and indeed "correct" to read it that it is indeed not retroactive. 

However, and here's the rub.

He won't be sitting next to us when we go in for our applications, will he?

So he just gives an OPINION. A respected one, but it doesn't really address the enforcement realities that we may face.

 

He did not state it as an opinion he stated it as fact. Albeit possibly an interpretation of something that is uncomfortably imprecise.

As we all agree it will not help should an IO say differently.

[David Walden]

50 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Translated: "I don't agree with your retirement scheme, even though you live well here and are happy."

 

Thailand may no longer allow them to be here while retired, but that does not change whether they "can afford to retire," or not.  If prevented from staying here, they will simply retire and spend their money in another country, while the Thais whose incomes they previously supported, lose their jobs.

The 700,000 Thai elites with 2/3rds of the wealth in Thailand would not even blink in regard to the 69,300,000 poor people who have the other 1/3rd of the countries wealth shared between them, they probably have no idea how to even vote.  For most, politics is just over their heads and only for the rich?

[JackThompson]

5 hours ago, notamember said:

...

Notice how the guy standing at the overstay desk is dressed - in the sleeveless shirt.  Almost every time I was in that office, there was one of those at that desk.  Usually flip-flops, too. 

[rainwater]

On 1/31/2019 at 8:31 PM, moto77 said:

Nonetheless this constant changing of the rules is the hallmark of a banana republic that doesn't know what it's doing. Can you imagine the EU, UK or the US changing its visa rules every other month? It's ridiculous. They need to come up with a policy, put it in place all at once, and then just leave it alone for 5 years. I feel sorry for you guys that are still there full time and have to keep up with this incompetent nonsense happening all the time. 

I've been on a retirement visa since 2006, not sure what you're talking about "constant changing of the rules is the hallmark of a banana republic that doesn't know what it's doing"??? This is the first major change I've seen since I've lived here. And I wouldn't call Thailand a "Banana Republic"

 

Moreover I don't understand your statement at the beginning of your comment "I can't believe people can live off this amount of money in retirement." ???

I can easily live off of half the 800K annual amount. It's cheap to live in Thailand if you're not on holiday and a "2 week millionaire" going with prostitutes and drinking until dawn every night. If you're retired on a fixed income or your health prevents you from working Thailand is a good place to retire. Not everybody can afford a 2nd or 3rd home (like many of the 'snowbirds' that come here from London, Germany, Finland etc that come for 2-3 months a year who own condos) or the luxury to travel often and come and go at your pleasure when changes like this occur. Some of my friends that have lived here as long as I have without deep financial resources are serious about moving to Philippines. 

Yes this is a major change but we'll have to see how things shake out, I can't belive this is a done deal yet. But I too would consider a move to the Philippines if these new visa rules don't get revised and worked out to a better mutually satisfying situation for long term expats and the Thai's.  

Edited February 4, 2019 by rainwater

[kannot]

3 hours ago, jacko45k said:

I would expect you need to show transfers from the date the requirement was announced, ie January, so in March 2019, say, 3. Not certain on this as it hasn't been around long enough to be tested.

Transferwise does not always show up as a required international transfer. Again it is unclear whether substantiating documentation beyond the Thai bank statement will be accepted.

I would be tempted to use the 800k this April, although having to maintain 65k/month transfers to do different next year will have you Baht rich! (Pound poor)

as a  matter  of interest I asked transferwise about getting a  foreign  remittance  note and they said this. 

I transferred  to Kasikorn even though I have a Bangkok  Bank  accI couldhave used where some say its  shows  as  foreign remittance

 

Unfortunately, we are not able to provide with such documentation.

As this transfer is not a international transfer, it was a local payment from our Thai bank to your Thai account.

This is how TransferWise operates to keep the price lower for customers.

We operate on the two domestic transfer policy, you send GBP to our UK bank and we send you THB to your account from our Thai bank.

Let us know if you have any further questions.