New retiree visa rules bewilder Thai immigration: Source

[cmarshall]

17 hours ago, moonseeker said:

Still very reasonable requirements for retirement. Much more important would be a mandatory health insurance for anybody on long-term visa or retirement-extensions.

The misery I have witnessed with many foreigners  in my 24 years in TH, due to not having health coverage at all is unreal and not needed. Fully acceptable, that a government does not want low-end and irresponsible foreigners burdening their system. Or it would end up a welfare state like so many European places. There will still be plenty of retirees left, after sorting it all out.  MS>

Since foreigners have no free access to Thai health services, how could their treatment put a burden on the Thai govt?  Thailand is not to be confused with some first-world countries where it's possible to walk into a hospital emergency room and receive treatment even if unable to pay.

[zydeco]

14 hours ago, mercman24 said:

and now the <deleted> idiots demand me to keep 400,000 of my money.

Stop thinking of it as your money. It's their money, now.

[skatewash]

1 hour ago, nobodysfriend said:

I have an open end fund with SCB called +A , SCB pays about 1,5% and the money is always available . And it is accepted by Immigration . It just needs to be more than 8 cen baht ...

 

It's interesting that immigration accepts your retirement money in an open end fund.  My understanding is that immigration had two cardinal criteria for acceptance:  1) had to be accessible at any time with nothing more than a loss of interest and 2) had no exposure to market losses (e.g., savings account, fixed-deposit account, etc.).  Now, maybe +A is actually a savings account (the 1.5% payment would be possible for a savings account) but I was unable to find it on their site online.  Perhaps you could provide a link that explains the details of the +A fund from SCB?

[no deal]

24 minutes ago, Jonnapat said:

I'm interested in the fact that Bangkok Bank has always retained 400k in my account which I'm not allowed to touch.

Has nobody else encountered this situation? 

you have a credit card from bank of Bangkok that the only way they retain you 400.000tb on garanty

 

 

[Naamblar2014]

13 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

Fixed income account 2%.  Given the fall of your currency against the baht how much is the real interest rate at home?

Well I am a firm believer that my money should be working for ME.  2% per annum is not what I would call working. So let's take the 400k figure and invest it for a day in the stock market into real stocks.  I use this amount as that is the amount the Thai govt are restricting access to,  so thus is not really required for day to day living expenses after all, even though that was it's original intention. But any how we take 400k and buy five stocks 80,000 each.

ABC out 30% +24,0000

DEF out 6.67% +5,336

GHI out -1.19% -952

JKL out 13.3%  +10,640

MNO out 1.75% +1,400

Less some trading fees -7,200

profit 1 day in market +39,704

2% Int 1 day in Thailand +22baht

2% Int 1 year in Thailand +8,000

This is one day in the market and on some speculative stocks but even if you only achieve these results once a month,  you are on your way to doubling your 400k in a year. (obviously I would not exit stocks 3&5 at this point usually, but this was an example of a one day investment.)  I know what I would want to do with my money. The Thai govt has no right to tie up our money for these prolonged periods.

 

 

[Thailand]

Saw this on another thread.

 

"Key Visa Thailand

 

The News Downloadable ???????? .we the believe The New Rules Will Not Affect Applications For Retirement Information visa Applicants Who Have Had A Retirement Information visa Issued In The Last 10 Years, This Is New Rule Aimed At New Applicants, to be confirmed but looking good" 

 

Another twist?????????

 

[hottrader77]

18 hours ago, NCC1701A said:

Reactions on Thaivisa, a webforum frequented by expats in Thailand, was overwhelmingly negative, with many commentators saying the regulations undercut claims from Thai officials that the deposit is to ensure they have sufficient resources to get by.

 

“Then why keep up the charade that this money is to cover living expenses if it can only be used six months out of the year,” user Connda wrote. “So…what’s next? What’s the next hammer to drop?”

“And I thought the 800,000 baht was for living expenses, not as an interest earner for the Thai banks!” user Madmitch vented.

 

there is room in my attic if anyone wants to hide.

i actually agree with some of it as it will stop companies putting 800,000 in peoples accounts and charging them 12,500 baht then after the retirement visa is granted they take back their money but now they cannot 400,000 baht has to stay in there and 3 months after 800,000 has to stay in their accounts , i agree with this part as it will stop companies doing it and also ONLY people who genuinly have 800,000 baht to put in their own account will be able to get a retirement visa , therefore you will only get people with funds staying here after all that is what is suppossed to be happening ? otherwise you will get low life staying here in the country it will help in the long run getting better people staying here not scum 

[spidermike007]

It does appear that this administration, and especially the biggest joke, are trying to do everything in their power to discourage ex-pats from staying here. Does it not? These imbeciles should be making our lives easier, and making visa policy simpler. Rather they seem to be tightening the noose, every chance they get. To call them ignorant and misguided would be a vast understatement. 

 

One can only hope that come election time, all of this nonsense will be over, and both Prayuth and especially the biggest joke, will be sent out to pasture for the rest of their lives. They are not doing anything that benefits their nation, and they are picking on good men, who are bringing a lot to the table. Dumb and dumber. What can one say? 

[asiamaster]

15 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Good idea in theory but... unfortunately, if the requirement for the new 10 year O-A visa is any indication,  any requirement they would make for health insurance would  on the one hand not be adequate to enable people to pay their  hospital bills in case of major illness/accident while on the other hand including unnecessary OPD cover,  causing the premium to be  25 - 50% higher than it should be for the overall (very low) level of cover. An almost worthless and needlessly expensive policy that would still leave you needing additional  cover.

 

It is a genuine problem but believe me, you do not want this government making up a health insurance clause. They simply do not take the time to research and figure out what sort of cover is needed to avert the problems that frequently arise. Rather they appear to be unduly influenced by local insurance companies and to design requirements tailored to local products that are poorly designed.

 

And then there is the problem o that many people of retirement  have significant pre-existing conditions that would either make them uninsurable or result in significant exclusions (leaving them in essence still uninsured except for accidents).

 

there are things the government could set up and require that would actually make sense but that is nto likely to be what emerges fin any mandatory health insurance requirement.

It is no coincidence that the amount is 400.000 Bh. That is exactly the amount of coverage  needed in the compulsory insurance they were considering but then found out that there are no companies in Thailand that would cover retirees over 70 (and in some cases even over 60 if you have not been with that insurance company for a number of years previously. 400.000 Bh. coverage does not sound much but you can get quite a bit done for that money at government hospitals.

I would not be surprised if 50% of retirees do not have proper insurance coverage. The private hospitals will not accept them and the government hospitals are facing more and more who can not pay their hospital bills.  

[skatewash]

1 hour ago, rexall said:

This would not mean much to married as they are allowed to own a business and/or have a work permit. However, for retirees, if they are not living on the 800K, how are they supporting themselves? In other words, how would Imm know if they are illegally employed or doing business?  Well, the only way would be to require the retiree to demonstrate monthly income from offshore. So, if he can demonstrate income from offshore, why would he deposit 800K in a Thailand bank?   

I'm a retiree living on the 800k.  Since under the new rules there's effectively a new 400k surety bond that can never be touched (except upon exit) and one only has access to 400k to pay one's expenses during the 7 months of the year that it is unsequestered, I will as you suggest be switching to the monthly deposit method as it will thereby restore my ability to use my own money when I see fit (none of the monthly deposit money is ever sequestered). 

 

Dangle a carrot in front of my face and/or beat me with a stick and I'm likely to change my behavior.  Sure it won't be as convenient as the old 800,000 lump-sum method, but I've sort of given up the idea that Thailand is in any way set up to ensure my convenience ????

[zydeco]

9 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Don't you think the foreigners/farangs are getting worse as well with their disrespect of Thai people, Thai culture, Thai laws, etc?

Have any indication that people on retirement extensions are doing that? I see younger tourists bearing their butts in selfies before temples, having sex in public, going nude at historical sites. But I rarely, if ever, see someone on retirement extension in the news for any reason.

[asiamaster]

19 minutes ago, no deal said:

you have a credit card from bank of Bangkok that the only way they retain you 400.000tb on garanty

 

 

Yes but only if you your spending limit is as high as 400.000 Bh, I needed a 100.000 Bh fixed deposit for my card which has 100.000 Bh. limit.

[ross163103]

When will it all end?! Substitute the farang for a Thai immigration officer.....

 

 

[zydeco]

8 hours ago, farangx said:

What has 90 day reporting got anything to do with the changed rules? ????

 

Conceivably, immigration could combine the bank check with the 90 day. But who knows. That's the problem. There is absolutely no indication given of how this is going to be enforced. Hence the OP and the IOs being frustrated as well. Somebody just sat down at their desk one day, thought about things for a few minutes, then made a rule and said, "ah, that sounds good and tough." With no thought whatsoever of its implementation. And we are now 27 days from its its start on 1 March.

[balo]

Just relax, one of the reputable agents in Pattaya just posted on their facbook page it will be business as usual after March 1.   

So I would just go the agent route , 15k and no worries. 

 

[skatewash]

50 minutes ago, Pib said:

Nothing prevents you from withdrawing those funds if you want to

Could the restriction be due to the customer being issued a secured credit card?

[SupermarineS6B]

18 hours ago, Fex Bluse said:

Is that accurate? That the money needs to stay 3 months after the extension is granted? Because it used to be that the money needed to be in the account for 3 months before the extension is granted. This is going to catch many people off guard! 

Next it'll be, "It has to be in the bank all the time and must be available to be checked by immigration/Police when requested".......... You watch....... Then it'll be, "Somchai runs off with farangs 800,000 from Tin pot bank".... enough of this lot........

[asiamaster]

1 hour ago, rexall said:

As far as I know, BUPA/Aetna will not issue a new policy to anyone over age 61. If you enrolled before age 61, you are "grandfathered in" ... literally and figuratively. Not that the shitty coverage provides much for a serious illness or injury.

Yes I am turning 65 this year and I have been with them for 20 years. Premium does go up considerably though. Coverage only 500.00 Bh. which covers you for quite a lot in a government hospital. Indeed does not cover for more than a couple of days at Bangkok Hospital Pattaya...

But this is why I have 800.000 Bh fixed 12 month deposit. Not only for my visa but also for emergencies.

Anyone who thinks they should not have at least 400.000 Bh at all times is just an irresponsible idiot and should go back to their home country.

 

[SupermarineS6B]

14 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Conceivably, immigration could combine the bank check with the 90 day. But who knows. That's the problem. There is absolutely no indication given of how this is going to be enforced. Hence the OP and the IOs being frustrated as well. Somebody just sat down at their desk one day, thought about things for a few minutes, then made a rule and said, "ah, that sounds good and tough." With no thought whatsoever of its implementation. And we are now 27 days from its its start on 1 March.

Next it'll be every ninety day check bring your bank book....... then they'll ask, "Where's everybody gone" ??

[Pedrogaz]

I have no problem meeting either the 65000/month or the 800000 in the bank. I have always used the 800000 method in the past and my balance is always over 1 million so it's no issue financially. BUT they are basically saying that they are tying up 400000 permanently.

There is something about this that I dislike intensely. Most people think that the money in their bank accounts is 'their money' whereas in fact when you put money in a bank it becomes the bank's money and you become an unsecured, low priority creditor of the bank ie they owe you value of your deposit, and if they go bust, you get nothing excepting government backed insurance (which can be revoked by the government). 

I have said previously in these pages that insurance is the final straw for me. If that becomes a requirement I am off somewhere else....somewhere that wants retirees. 

 

[marcusarelus]

1 hour ago, rexall said:

This would not mean much to married as they are allowed to own a business and/or have a work permit. However, for retirees, if they are not living on the 800K, how are they supporting themselves? In other words, how would Imm know if they are illegally employed or doing business?  Well, the only way would be to require the retiree to demonstrate monthly income from offshore. So, if he can demonstrate income from offshore, why would he deposit 800K in a Thailand bank?   

I don't trust America.  Frequent government shutdowns.  Nutty politicians.  Many bank failures.  I'd rather put my money in a Thai bank and have money accessible for any emergencies. 

[skatewash]

47 minutes ago, Mamasun said:

 

Hi,

 

Can someone confirm that if my embassy confirm my income  : Nothing will change ???

 

Where is the list of Embassies who doesn't make letters anynore ???

 

If someone 10 years ago come here and obtain an extension on basis : 50 income and 50 percent money in bank....do they are under the new law ?  do they need to leave (sell) their Home (not rented) , family friends ,their pets ect and leave because they don't meet the new requirements ? (will be cruel and a non sense)

 

To my knowledge, Thai Immigration has not rejected an application solely for the reason of having an embassy income letter.  To the contrary, if you have such a letter you should be fine.

 

Four embassies decided to unilaterally stop providing their citizens income letters (despite there being no plan in place at the time to help those citizens continue to obtain their extensions):  UK, US, Australia, and Denmark.
 

Nothing I've seen officially revokes the combination method of getting your extension.  How it will work in practice remains to be seen.  In theory, 50% in income and 50% in the bank could be acceptable.  Your odds of being accepted depend on how closely you adhere to the new rules.  For example, bring into Thailand by international transfer at least a certain minimum amount each month.  Abide by all the new seasoning rules, basically, leave a certain amount in a Thai bank untouched for the year.  If the combination of your income deposited monthly and the properly seasoned money in the bank is greater than the minimum yearly threshold then you should get your extension.

[JackThompson]

10 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Don't you think the foreigners/farangs are getting worse as well with their disrespect of Thai people, Thai culture, Thai laws, etc?   

 

I don't think they are anti-foreigner but rather anti-trouble maker. Not all that are being affected are trouble-makers but they are paying the price for those who are.

No.  My own experience, and many reports here, indicate "non-troublemakers" are being targeted.   The "bad guys" just go to agents and similar - their avenues remain open. 

 

That said, I have no problem if the authorities boot those who break laws or try to tear-down Thai culture - missionaries, cultural-activists who promote indecency and/or undermining of the family-unit, etc.

 

The problem we are dealing with is a clique who have a "pay us off or leave" perspective.  This has nothing to do with farangs not respecting Thai culture, etc.  That, and the "foreigner who cannot pay his hospital bill," etc, is just a side-show to justify our extortion by the corrupt.

Edited February 2, 2019 by JackThompson

[Pib]

20 minutes ago, skatewash said:

Could the restriction be due to the customer being issued a secured credit card?

Definitely could be if he got a secured credit card and wanted a high credit limit and he went with a Bt400K deposit.  Yeap, that deposit is basically frozen as collateral for his secured credit card.  Maybe that is what he failed to mention.

 

But even if he did do that (but just didn't give those details), he could go the bank, cancel the credit card and once any outstanding balance is paid off with that possible Bt400K deposit he had to make to get the secured credit card, then the remaining funds are released to him...but that process might take up to 45 days as the bank wants to make sure no belated credit card charges possibly come in. 

[hotchilli]

18 hours ago, NCC1701A said:

Reactions on Thaivisa, a webforum frequented by expats in Thailand, was overwhelmingly negative, with many commentators saying the regulations undercut claims from Thai officials that the deposit is to ensure they have sufficient resources to get by.

 

“Then why keep up the charade that this money is to cover living expenses if it can only be used six months out of the year,” user Connda wrote. “So…what’s next? What’s the next hammer to drop?”

“And I thought the 800,000 baht was for living expenses, not as an interest earner for the Thai banks!” user Madmitch vented.

 

there is room in my attic if anyone wants to hide.

I'm packed & ready, do you have air-con & a pool?

[Acharn]

19 hours ago, seajae said:

rules changes that stop IO"S from getting extra payments so IO's had to come up with a new way to be able to make it difficult for those applying, what else can we expect from these people, what will the big boy do now

 

What extra payments were Immigration Officers getting by accepting the affidavit? That can't be the real reason for demanding that the embassies verify the amounts stated. Sounds to me like some office politicking in the Immigration Bureau. I've been renewing my visa (or "permission to stay" for the purists) for 36 years and never once been asked for extra payment

[JackThompson]

9 hours ago, farangx said:

16 hours ago, Mavideol said:

“My goal is to make visitors to our country, whether here for tourism or business, feel safe,” said Surachate,  ..here he said visitors thus tourist not retirees

Retirees on extensions are visitors.

Then he has a funny way of making us feel "safe" - changing the rules with a month's notice for long-staying retirees and allowing a back-door extension of seasoning for marriage-based extensions.

[Pattaya46]

34 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Conceivably, immigration could combine the bank check with the 90 day. //

Nowhere is written that you have to return to immigration for "the bank check"

And many people never or rarely go to immigration for 90-Days report

[george11]

.

19 hours ago, DrTuner said:

Gee I wonder why IOs would be pushing back. Nothing to do with kickbacks from agents .. nothing at all.

..some operatives who oversee visa affairs will file memos to their commanders declaring that they are no longer sure how to process requests under the new regulations published Monday."

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Nowhere is written that you have to return to immigration for "the bank check"

And many people never or rarely go to immigration for 90-Days report

You're right. Enforcement of this new onerous policy is not explained. That doesn't mean we as expats should engage in the folly of assuming what that enforcement policy will actually be. I've heard guesses here such as wait for the next extension. Pure meaningless speculation at this point.