Retirement extension using 800K - New v Old rule comparison.

[smotherb]

4 hours ago, spetersen said:

I don't understand, What about a letter from your bank proving foreign deposits , of 65000 THB every month or more, together with income affidavit from your Embassy or consulate. Does it also need 800K/400K sitting in a Thai bank for months ? The vast majority are still Issue them with the exception of four countries.

I think that is exactly the point. The Thais want you to keep the required money in Thailand. So, aside from the banking perspective; if you break a Thai law, cause monetary damage to a Thai, or have to use Thai resources, such as a hospital, they will have the ability to garnishee from each foreigner B800k for five months of the year and B400k for the remaining seven months of the year. 

 

Considering all the deadbeat foreigners in Thailand, having this ready stash of cash is quite logical from the Thai point of view--I am somewhat impressed.

 

However, the Thais probably see the monthly income of B65k being somewhat of a problem. There is no back-up stash of cash for those people; the Thais can only get a maximum of B65k at any one time. So, I am looking forward to the next Thai retirement funding evolution of how to get more out of the monthly income types.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2019 by smotherb

[spetersen]

4 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

If you have proof of income from an embassy there is no requirement to transfer the 65k baht into the country every month. You might be asked to produce backup proof of it is all you might need.

No need to have money in the bank if you can meet the 65k baht income requirement.

Thank you Ubonjoe , always helpful as usual 

[Lacessit]

6 hours ago, rak sa_ngop said:

KISS is great except that some immigration offices (so I am told) will not allow stagnant accounts, they want to see movement showing that the funds are being used to pay for the retirees living costs. So now that they have changed their minds will they say that they want to see you spending 400,000 baht over a period of 7 months to qualify for an extension.....jeeez what a mess.

In previous years ( Chiang Mai ) I've left the 800K baht untouched, no account activity. Never had a problem with extensions at Immigration. Can you identify branches where spending is required?

[rak sa_ngop]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

In previous years ( Chiang Mai ) I've left the 800K baht untouched, no account activity. Never had a problem with extensions at Immigration. Can you identify branches where spending is required?

I was told that in Jomtien fixed deposit accounts were not accepted because money cannot be accessed immediately. Whether they actually check to see that there is movement in the account I am not sure. Perhaps somebody else can confirm one way or another.

[kdrayong]

37 minutes ago, rak sa_ngop said:

I was told that in Jomtien fixed deposit accounts were not accepted because money cannot be accessed immediately.

Just used a fixed deposit account in Jomtien for my EoS recently. Well accepted.

Actually it can be accessed immediately, you will just lose the interest rate in that case.

[gamini]

You are confusing everyone. The old rule has always been that 800 K must be in the bank three months prior to applying for a visa extension for retirement. In your post . You say the old rules two months

[elviajero]

13 minutes ago, gamini said:

You are confusing everyone. The old rule has always been that 800 K must be in the bank three months prior to applying for a visa extension for retirement. In your post . You say the old rules two months

No it hasn’t. It’s 60 days for the first extension. And I made it clear the examples were for a new applicant (retiree).

 

“Here are a couple of examples comparing the initial transfer amount required for the old and new rules; for a new retiree.”

 

[baansgr]

The analysis is actually wrong, as the first year you replenish after only 11 months and on date of renewal you are actually 130,000 less than the previous year so will need to replenish after only 8 months. The initial figure needs to be higher 

[jacko45k]

8 hours ago, rak sa_ngop said:

I was told that in Jomtien fixed deposit accounts were not accepted because money cannot be accessed immediately. Whether they actually check to see that there is movement in the account I am not sure. Perhaps somebody else can confirm one way or another.

And I was told Jomtiem were one of the more flexible IOs as they accepted FD accounts and even Foreign Currency accounts.

[RocketDog]

22 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

On 2/4/2019 at 7:13 AM, onera1961 said:

Great analysis. Can we have a chart please for people who are better at visual information?. An interactive charge where you can plug in drawdown amount will be even better. Thanks.

would you like an android app? if so we'll get onto it right away

Well, yes please and also one for iPhone and laptop, tablet, desktop! 

 

Come on folks, this is 6th grade arithmetic. ???? A pocket calculator works too. 

[wgdanson]

16 hours ago, spetersen said:

together with income affidavit from your Embassy or consulate

Some of us do not get these now.

[wgdanson]

15 hours ago, offset said:

That is ok if you spend 65k a month but is you spend less that that the money will accumulate until you have 800k in your account

And then you would have money to spend on a spell-checker!   LOL

 

If you import 65k a month, but only spend say 40k, you would have 25k excess. 800k/25k = 32 months. By that time the rules, and the government will possibly have changes.

[RocketDog]

11 hours ago, smotherb said:

I think that is exactly the point. The Thais want you to keep the required money in Thailand. So, aside from the banking perspective; if you break a Thai law, cause monetary damage to a Thai, or have to use Thai resources, such as a hospital, they will have the ability to garnishee from each foreigner B800k for five months of the year and B400k for the remaining seven months of the year. 

 

Considering all the deadbeat foreigners in Thailand, having this ready stash of cash is quite logical from the Thai point of view--I am somewhat impressed.

 

However, the Thais probably see the monthly income of B65k being somewhat of a problem. There is no back-up stash of cash for those people; the Thais can only get a maximum of B65k at any one time. So, I am looking forward to the next Thai retirement funding evolution of how to get more out of the monthly income types.

 

 

Well, I would have hesitated to use the word 'deadbeat', but now that's it's out there......... 

I also agree with your logic and supposition on account seizures and where new regs are likely to go. 

In the end it will come down to a lump sum minimum amount in a Thai bank all year round. Seems inevitable given the arc of reg changes lately. 

Sigh........ 

 

BTW, in reply to another poster :

 

Vaseline is much cheaper than KY Jelly but the local IO will not be providing either I'll warrant. 

[Lacessit]

13 hours ago, smotherb said:

I think that is exactly the point. The Thais want you to keep the required money in Thailand. So, aside from the banking perspective; if you break a Thai law, cause monetary damage to a Thai, or have to use Thai resources, such as a hospital, they will have the ability to garnishee from each foreigner B800k for five months of the year and B400k for the remaining seven months of the year. 

 

Considering all the deadbeat foreigners in Thailand, having this ready stash of cash is quite logical from the Thai point of view--I am somewhat impressed.

 

However, the Thais probably see the monthly income of B65k being somewhat of a problem. There is no back-up stash of cash for those people; the Thais can only get a maximum of B65k at any one time. So, I am looking forward to the next Thai retirement funding evolution of how to get more out of the monthly income types.

 

 

I would agree with this analysis IF that is the intention of the Thai authorities. They are not given to transparency or explaining their motives. Having said that, there are probably quite a few retirees who would be happy to see the issue of medical insurance put to bed if that in fact is how the Thai government intends to deal with it. I for one would be unable to get medical insurance due to age and pre-existing conditions.

Having drawn those funds down to meet an emergency, the expat would either have to import more funds from overseas, or leave. Fair enough. Although the system could be a bit fairer if a grace period was given so as to not jeopardise the next extension.

As you say, the income method is more problematic as there are no cash reserves in Thailand to cope with an emergency. Perhaps the next step is a smaller deposit of funds for those using the 65K route; however, that's pure speculation.

Edited February 5, 2019 by Lacessit

[smotherb]

15 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I would agree with this analysis IF that is the intention of the Thai authorities. They are not given to transparency or explaining their motives. Having said that, there are probably quite a few retirees who would be happy to see the issue of medical insurance put to bed if that in fact is how the Thai government intends to deal with it. I for one would be unable to get medical insurance due to age and pre-existing conditions.

Having drawn those funds down to meet an emergency, the expat would either have to import more funds from overseas, or leave. Fair enough. Although the system could be a bit fairer if a grace period was given so as to not jeopardise the next extension.

As you say, the income method is more problematic as there are no cash reserves in Thailand to cope with an emergency. Perhaps the next step is a smaller deposit of funds for those using the 65K route; however, that's pure speculation.

I am not asking for any agreement, I have simply said what I think.  I do not know the impetus behind this new policy and I have not suggested this would solve any medical insurance problems.

 

Medical fees can exceed B800k and the retiree funds would not cover all such expenses. In my posit, medical debts were only part of the equation. I concluded the Thais could impound the retiree funds they mandate be kept in Thai banks if the foreigner legally owed money in Thailand for any reason.

 

I do not know the next step the Thais will make in the income extension for retirees, but I'd wager it will be one which involves more funds in Thai banks. The problem I see is many retirees do not have any substantive savings because they have a guaranteed monthly income; so requiring them to cough-up several hundred thousand baht may be difficult.  

 

I do not understand what you  mean by being a bit fairer by giving a grace period. 

 

 

 

 

[elviajero]

On 2/4/2019 at 5:09 PM, baansgr said:

The analysis is actually wrong, as the first year you replenish after only 11 months and on date of renewal you are actually 130,000 less than the previous year so will need to replenish after only 8 months. The initial figure needs to be higher 

No it's not.

 

Example 2.

At month 11 you only need to top up by 780K because you still have a balance of 410K in the account at the close of month 10.

[notrub]

Does the money on deposit need to be in a THB bank account?  I have a Euro account at BKK bank.  The amount, in Euros, far exceeds the 800,000 or 1,250,000, THB liquidity requirement.  Does the money have to be in my THB account in Thailand?  Also, are we expected, in Buriram, to actually spend 65,000 per month?  If yes, on what?  Do we have to prove spending beyond simply withdrawing this amount every month? 

[ubonjoe]

21 minutes ago, notrub said:

Does the money on deposit need to be in a THB bank account?  I have a Euro account at BKK bank.  The amount, in Euros, far exceeds the 800,000 or 1,250,000, THB liquidity requirement.  Does the money have to be in my THB account in Thailand?  Also, are we expected, in Buriram, to actually spend 65,000 per month?  If yes, on what?  Do we have to prove spending beyond simply withdrawing this amount every month? 

Many immigration offices will accept a foreign currency deposit account at a Thai bank. You would need to check with your local office to find out it they will accept them.

There is no requirement to prove what you do with the 65k baht after it it is credited to your account.

[SooKee]

You can do that if you want to, but other than making sure the 65k comes in every month as a foreign transfer, you don't otherwise need to lock up the money with the income method.

 

I'm not talking about people who are unable to raise the 800k, rather those who are unhappy about being forced to tie up their money in this way. The deposit is mostly locked in now and can't be used as an emergency fund or rest of the year income in anything like the same way it could previously. Hence, if you value financial liquidity without jeopardising the validity of your visa extension, the income route will give you a lot more of it. And when you deduct actual living expenses from the 65k, the surplus 20 or 30k that someone might not need is a far smaller de facto requirement for someone who is here year round.

 

Of course, this route is also far more trouble than it was prior to the scrapping of embassy letters, and may no longer be practical in many cases, especially for people who spend part of their year out of Thailand and need the income for that. 

 

Exactly the point for me. I've used monthly transfers to Thailand ever since being here. I did ponder switching to the FD route a couple of times, not now. You'd only need to earn 1% pa on 400,000 to cover the costs of sending money here on a monthly basis to be better off IMO and I'd just rather keep that money somewhere where I see it as less of a risk, either in the home country or, in my case, Malaysia where I have a currently more stable MM2H visa that they don't change, at least not yet. It's not keeping the money in a Thai bank that bothers me, it's what might come next Immigration wise. Indeed the 1% would likely need to be less given the 4-5 months you need to keep the whole 800k tied up for. Sure I might be able to get that 1% (bear in mind that's only to negate transfer costs) in Thailand. I'd rather have the money outside Thailand though.

 

The only issue for me is proving the offshore nature of the deposits which before you've never had to bother about. They are, but mostly haven't shown up as such. Hopefully I've now addressed that.

 

No big deal for me at the moment, troublesome but not a problem. If it changes for the worse again it'll be time to consider if the hassle is worth it. Anything for an easy life. I really like Thailand but it's not the only option.

 

 

Posted using Tapatalk

[JackThompson]

On 2/5/2019 at 9:00 AM, RocketDog said:

Well, I would have hesitated to use the word 'deadbeat', but now that's it's out there......... 

I also agree with your logic and supposition on account seizures and where new regs are likely to go. 

In the end it will come down to a lump sum minimum amount in a Thai bank all year round.

A 100K Bond-account (locked) combined with a 50K-deductible "stabilize and send home" insurance policy would take care of any risk to Thailand from so-called "deadbeats" - to the extent they actually exist in any appreciable number and/or create significant financial-harm for any Thai persons or entity. 

Some statements imply "many deadbeats" here - to bolster immigration's rationale for increasing under-the-table revenue streams - without any facts to back up their assertion.  I have to wonder what their reason is, for backing immigration's games.

We have history of immigration increasing revenue-streams from so-called "crackdowns" - so historical actions by the organization in question supports the belief this is yet more of the same.  Is it "different, this time?"  Let's review a few months after the changes go into effect, and see how the chairs have been rearranged.