Marriage/Retirement - Interpretations explained.

[Tanoshi]

7 minutes ago, seajae said:

I transfer money to my thai bank account every 4 weeks, thats 13 transfers a year and it averages out well over the amount required. Going by the new laws this is still ok as it totals more than the requirement a year or are you saying that it will not be accepted. Doesnt really matter as I will now deposit the required amount but interested if they are now saying it cant be done, I have used this method of transfers for years

4 weekly is fine, for one month you'll have 2 monthly deposits.

The UK pay the state pensions every 4 weeks.

[Kenny202]

8 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

If it is an indirect way to increase the deposit (to an effective 1200,000 ?) as Sheryl pointed out in another thread it would be a clever move. Someone else mentioned that 400000 is the mandatory health insurance coverage for the O-X visa. Maybe far fetched..

Would be interesting how much thought went into this or if there is an end game? 

I wonder if it is better for Thailand to have money sitting around doing nothing in their banks or us spending it? I imagine some people may have to do some belt tightening, maybe put off buying the new car or motorbike or renovations this year as they need the extra funds. 

[overherebc]

4 minutes ago, Kenny202 said:

Would be interesting how much thought went into this or if there is an end game? 

I wonder if it is better for Thailand to have money sitting around doing nothing in their banks or us spending it? I imagine some people may have to do some belt tightening, maybe put off buying the new car or motorbike or renovations this year as they need the extra funds. 

Or just fall back on selling any assets they have and moving.

Don't ask where. ????????????

[Kenny202]

A couple of clarifications if I may and sorry if I missed something, read through all previous posts...

 

1) If you use the 65k per month OS income method, do you also need to maintain the 400K in the bank year round?

 

2) If for eg: I decide to start the 65k method as of 1st March, and my current extension expires August this year...are they going to accept only 5 or 6 months deposits for this first year? Obviously it will be up to the IO but I am in your area and wondering if they showed any leanings towards leniency the first year?

 

3) Did the subject of recycling the 65k every month come up and what was there take on that?  

[dick turpin]

(4) At least 2 months prior to filing date, and at least 3 months after being granted permission, the alien must have fund deposited in a bank in Thailand of no less than THB 800,000. The alien can withdraw the fund 3 months after being granted permission and the remaining balance must be no less than THB 400,00 or;

 

This is how it is stated in the original police order, makes no reference to first time or subsequent extensions.....had already decided to stick with the three month pre-seasoning to be on the safe side. 

[Tanoshi]

39 minutes ago, Thailand said:

Great info.

So a renewal of extension of stay from say August of 2019 will be checked for compliance upon renewal in August of 2020?

✔️

 

40 minutes ago, Thailand said:

A thought, depositing 800K 3 months prior to the August 2019 renewal and the same month starting 65K+ for the following 12/13 months would meet income requirements in 2020 and allow immediate expenditure of the 800K?

✔️

[steve73]

3 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

Combo method.

Funds and income totalling a minimum of 800,000 per annum.

There is no minimum balance of funds required.

Same seasoning conditions apply as for funds in the bank method. (First application 2 months prior, then 3 months after. Subsequent applications 3 months prior, then 3 months after.)

The important factor for the combo method is that funds deposited and income must not fall below the 800,000 requirement for the year.

If I understand the combo method correctly, then you don't actually need a minimum monthly income....

 

IE. If pensions are paid quarterly, or as someone earlier suggested he sends 100k "as required", then from the above quote from the OP, provided the total income (from outside T/L) over then year, plus funds held during the 3 month seasoning period are over 800k then this method would be acceptable.

 

e.g.  If  receiving a pension of (say) 90k every quarter, then provided 440k is seasoned for 3 months, then the initial criteria is met... There may be jiggery-pokery required regarding minimum holding for the following year.

 

Or, if someone brings in, say 40k at each transfer, some months just one, others 2 or 3 lots, then providing the total brought in over the year PLUS all funds seasoned for 3 months, then this should also prove acceptable. 

 

I typically transfer around 400-500k (entirely from savings & investments) over the course of the year (some months much more than others, and some months zero if the FX rate looks low), then do I only need to keep 300-400k seasoned for 3 months?  To date I've needed to ensure that I've kept 800k for the requisite period.  The combo method, if acceptable, would definitely be of benefit to me.       

[Tanoshi]

11 minutes ago, Kenny202 said:

1) If you use the 65k per month OS income method, do you also need to maintain the 400K in the bank year round?

If you use the 65K income method, there is no requirement to prove any funds deposited in a Thai bank.

 

13 minutes ago, Kenny202 said:

2) If for eg: I decide to start the 65k method as of 1st March, and my current extension expires August this year...are they going to accept only 5 or 6 months deposits for this first year? Obviously it will be up to the IO but I am in your area and wondering if they showed any leanings towards leniency the first year?

6 x 65K income deposits = 390K.

Yes they expressed leniency this year, but how much would be up to the IO.

For extension based on Thai child only requiring 400k, as long as you explain your switch to income for 2020, I don't see a problem.

[Tanoshi]

20 minutes ago, Kenny202 said:

3) Did the subject of recycling the 65k every month come up and what was there take on that?

Never raised the issue, why give them cause to close a potential loophole for some.

[Sheryl]

3 hours ago, phuketrichard said:

so everyone before saying only 2 months before was wrong?

Thats 6 months 800,000, 6 months 400,000
 

Not just everyone saying...the police order saying! It did nto distinguish between first and subsequent renewals.

[Sheryl]

18 minutes ago, steve73 said:

If I understand the combo method correctly, then you don't actually need a minimum monthly income....

 

IE. If pensions are paid quarterly, or as someone earlier suggested he sends 100k "as required", then from the above quote from the OP, provided the total income (from outside T/L) over then year, plus funds held during the 3 month seasoning period are over 800k then this method would be acceptable.

 

e.g.  If  receiving a pension of (say) 90k every quarter, then provided 440k is seasoned for 3 months, then the initial criteria is met... There may be jiggery-pokery required regarding minimum holding for the following year.

 

Or, if someone brings in, say 40k at each transfer, some months just one, others 2 or 3 lots, then providing the total brought in over the year PLUS all funds seasoned for 3 months, then this should also prove acceptable. 

 

I typically transfer around 400-500k (entirely from savings & investments) over the course of the year (some months much more than others, and some months zero if the FX rate looks low), then do I only need to keep 300-400k seasoned for 3 months?  To date I've needed to ensure that I've kept 800k for the requisite period.  The combo method, if acceptable, would definitely be of benefit to me.       

However he seems to be saying that 800K has to be maintained in the account year round. That is very hard to understand. Not only is it much more restrictive than the 800K lump sum requirement but for most people it would mean never spending your income.

 

In addition, if you have 800K seasoned 3 months in advance, account never dropping below 800K then it is the 800k method already and not a combo method!

 

Something is wrong here....

[Sheryl]

29 minutes ago, dick turpin said:

(4) At least 2 months prior to filing date, and at least 3 months after being granted permission, the alien must have fund deposited in a bank in Thailand of no less than THB 800,000. The alien can withdraw the fund 3 months after being granted permission and the remaining balance must be no less than THB 400,00 or;

 

This is how it is stated in the original police order, makes no reference to first time or subsequent extensions.....had already decided to stick with the three month pre-seasoning to be on the safe side. 

Me too.

 

 

[skatewash]

16 minutes ago, steve73 said:

If I understand the combo method correctly, then you don't actually need a minimum monthly income....

 

IE. If pensions are paid quarterly, or as someone earlier suggested he sends 100k "as required", then from the above quote from the OP, provided the total income (from outside T/L) over then year, plus funds held during the 3 month seasoning period are over 800k then this method would be acceptable.

 

e.g.  If  receiving a pension of (say) 90k every quarter, then provided 440k is seasoned for 3 months, then the initial criteria is met... There may be jiggery-pokery required regarding minimum holding for the following year.

 

Or, if someone brings in, say 40k at each transfer, some months just one, others 2 or 3 lots, then providing the total brought in over the year PLUS all funds seasoned for 3 months, then this should also prove acceptable. 

 

I typically transfer around 400-500k (entirely from savings & investments) over the course of the year (some months much more than others, and some months zero if the FX rate looks low), then do I only need to keep 300-400k seasoned for 3 months?  To date I've needed to ensure that I've kept 800k for the requisite period.  The combo method, if acceptable, would definitely be of benefit to me.       

I believe you're right about there being no minimum monthly income (meaning there's no minimum amount of money you have to transfer into your Thai account) per month, I think you're mistaken if you don't see the requirement to have 12 monthly deposits.

 

Look at the examples given in the combo section.  All of them are showing 12 monthly deposits and I don't think that's just a coincidence.  The combo method is for someone who is doing 12 monthly deposits but because the amounts aren't enough to meet the threshold they need to have additional money in the Thai bank.  At least that is my current understanding from reading the OP.

[Tanoshi]

19 minutes ago, steve73 said:

If I understand the combo method correctly, then you don't actually need a minimum monthly income....

 

IE. If pensions are paid quarterly, or as someone earlier suggested he sends 100k "as required", then from the above quote from the OP, provided the total income (from outside T/L) over then year, plus funds held during the 3 month seasoning period are over 800k then this method would be acceptable.

 

e.g.  If  receiving a pension of (say) 90k every quarter, then provided 440k is seasoned for 3 months, then the initial criteria is met... There may be jiggery-pokery required regarding minimum holding for the following year.

 

Or, if someone brings in, say 40k at each transfer, some months just one, others 2 or 3 lots, then providing the total brought in over the year PLUS all funds seasoned for 3 months, then this should also prove acceptable. 

 

I typically transfer around 400-500k (entirely from savings & investments) over the course of the year (some months much more than others, and some months zero if the FX rate looks low), then do I only need to keep 300-400k seasoned for 3 months?  To date I've needed to ensure that I've kept 800k for the requisite period.  The combo method, if acceptable, would definitely be of benefit to me.       

Using the income or combo method it is monthly deposits of ……...

 

If you get quarterly payments, it's up to you to adjust the monthly deposits from overseas.

Averages of monthly are not acceptable.

[Sheryl]

54 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

If it is an indirect way to increase the deposit (to an effective 1200,000 ?) as Sheryl pointed out in another thread it would be a clever move. Someone else mentioned that 400000 is the mandatory health insurance coverage for the O-X visa. Maybe far fetched..

Another thought I've had was that they want people to move to the income alternative. They could could be thinking about income tax... But then I'd see all the people with higher income moving to Malaysia.

This possibility had occurred to me and is another reason why for now I will do the 800k method.

 

Though as I understand it, income from abroad is taxable in Thailand only if brought in the same year it was earned and a pension or equivalent is arguably earned over an extended period of time before that.

 

[Tanoshi]

4 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

However he seems to be saying that 800K has to be maintained in the account year round. That is very hard to understand. Not only is it much more restrictive than the 800K lump sum requirement but for most people it would mean never spending your income.

At next renewal, they'll review the funds deposited in the bank, and transfers of income totalling 800K throughout the year.

You can spend the income, you may also be able to spend some of the funds.

The transfers of income are only used as a calculating figure against funds held in the bank.

[marcusarelus]

2 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

At next renewal, they'll review the funds deposited in the bank, and transfers of income totalling 800K throughout the year.

You can spend the income, you may also be able to spend some of the funds.

The transfers of income are only used as a calculating figure against funds held in the bank.

You mean immigration is bright enough to calculate interest? 

[Sheryl]

1 minute ago, Tanoshi said:

At next renewal, they'll review the funds deposited in the bank, and transfers of income totalling 800K throughout the year.

You can spend the income, you may also be able to spend some of the funds.

The transfers of income are only used as a calculating figure against funds held in the bank.

OK so just to be clear: In combo method you do not need to maintain a cash balance of 800K at all times, in fact you never need a cash balance of 800k. But you need to maintain in the bank at all times a sum equal to 800k minus your monthly income over the past 12 months.

 

Yes?

[Sheryl]

2 hours ago, MikeN said:

I don't suppose you asked them to clarify the reason for leaving 400K in the bank ? I know many are assuming it is to cover any medical bills, but what happens if it is and then you do use it for a hospital bill, or whatever its supposed use is?

If it is just dead money they might as well just charge us 400,000baht for a visa and be done with it.

There is no provision allowing use of those funds for any purpose. You spend it and you may be denied your next year's extension.

 

I very much doubt the reasoning had anything to do with covering medical bills.  If this were the reason, they's also require a 400K bond from those on the income method, but they do not.

[steve73]

22 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

However he seems to be saying that 800K has to be maintained in the account year round. That is very hard to understand. Not only is it much more restrictive than the 800K lump sum requirement but for most people it would mean never spending your income.

 

In addition, if you have 800K seasoned 3 months in advance, account never dropping below 800K then it is the 800k method already and not a combo method!

 

Something is wrong here....

From the OP.. "The important factor for the combo method is that funds deposited and income must not fall below the 800,000 requirement for the year."

 

I understand this to mean if you have a regular income of 40k/mon (480kper year), you need only maintain 320k in deposited funds to remain above the 800k for the entire year, which is clearly less onerous than maintaining 800/400k all year (plus additional cash needed for living expenses for the first/last 3 months).

 

But obviously it will depend how each Imm. Officer chooses to interpret the rules.

Edited February 11, 2019 by steve73
bold text highighted.

[Tanoshi]

41 minutes ago, dick turpin said:

(4) At least 2 months prior to filing date, and at least 3 months after being granted permission, the alien must have fund deposited in a bank in Thailand of no less than THB 800,000. The alien can withdraw the fund 3 months after being granted permission and the remaining balance must be no less than THB 400,00 or;

 

This is how it is stated in the original police order, makes no reference to first time or subsequent extensions.....had already decided to stick with the three month pre-seasoning to be on the safe side. 

No, that's not the original order. Your quoting from new order 35/2562.

 

The original order 327/2557 stated;

(4) On the filing date, the applicant must have funds deposited in a bank in Thailand of no
less than Baht 800,000 for the past three months. For the first year only, the applicant must
have proof of a deposit account in which said amount of funds has been maintained for no
less than 60 days prior to the filing date: 

 

The new order 35/2562 isn't replacing order 327/2557 as I assumed, it's in addition to and amends changes to 327/2557.

Read the 2 orders together as one and it becomes clearer.

[keemapoot]

1 minute ago, Sheryl said:

There is no provision allowing use of those funds for any purpose. You spend it and you may be denied your next year's extension.

 

I very much doubt the reasoning had anything to do with covering medical bills.  If this were the reason, they's also require a 400K bond from those on the income method, but they do not.

Yes, in this respect it seems the clear intent here is to impose strict monetary standards and strict compliance of those standards presumably in an effort to weed out those without the financial standing to comply.

 

Truly seems to be a thinning of the herd with the have-nots being singled out,

[pontious]

5 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

OK so just to be clear: In combo method you do not need to maintain a cash balance of 800K at all times, in fact you never need a cash balance of 800k. But you need to maintain in the bank at all times a sum equal to 800k minus your monthly income over the past 12 months.

 

Yes?

Sheryl will say it is bad for me but I am  going to have another beer.

[Tanoshi]

2 minutes ago, steve73 said:

I understand this to mean if you have a regular income of 40k/mon (480kper year), you need only maintain 320k in deposited funds to remain above the 800k for the entire year, which is clearly less onerous than maintaining 800/400k all year (plus additional cash needed for living expenses for the first/last 3 months).

Yes, you can spend the income part, just as you can if using income only method.

Only the figures of income, not the income itself is used to maintain the 800K balance throughout the year.

[Sheryl]

2 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

Thanks OP, good report. I'm in the money in bank method retirement. 

I would suggest that I won't be the only one now electing to just put 800k in a bank account and leaving it. With all the dates of 800 for this period and 400 for that.....I realize it ain't rocket science but one could easily make a calendar error. I feel for those that were just able to meet previous requirements and now this does tie up more funds. Perhaps funds some don't have. Anyway it is what it is. BTW any suggestions for a bank offering OK fixed term. My light blue bank is rubbish bank.

I've been looking around and the best I have found is 2.15% for a 48 month  FD at Krung Sri.

 

Of interest to those worried about what would happen in an emergency with their funds tied up, they state that these deposits can be used as collateral to access a loan fro mtheir bank. (That part is probably true elsewhere as well).

[Kenny202]

Never raised the issue, why give them cause to close a potential loophole for some.

Of course. I thought they may have brought it up

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Sheryl]

2 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Yes, you can spend the income part, just as you can if using income only method.

Only the figures of income, not the income itself is used to maintain the 800K balance throughout the year.

Thanks, it is clear now. (And interestingly different from all of the various theories TV members have come up with as to what that part of the police order meant!).

 

Thank you very much for doing this, Tanoshi.

[steve73]

26 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Using the income or combo method it is monthly deposits of ……...

 

If you get quarterly payments, it's up to you to adjust the monthly deposits from overseas.

Averages of monthly are not acceptable.

Pity... you could cut down on transfer fees if depositing quarterly... or alternatively optimize Fx rates by sending more when rates are in your favour.  I'll be doing my extension in the next week or two, and may ask for clarification unless they are busy.

[Kenny202]

Using the income or combo method it is monthly deposits of ……...
 
If you get quarterly payments, it's up to you to adjust the monthly deposits from overseas.
Averages of monthly are not acceptable.

So say on the retirement combo method I bring in 40k every month, totalling 480k....just before I go for my 12 month extension I top up with and extra 320k in the bank. Is this acceptable or is there seasoning on the combo method and do I still need 400k year round?

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Tanoshi]

13 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

There is no provision allowing use of those funds for any purpose. You spend it and you may be denied your next year's extension.

That's dependant on your amount of income, as detailed in my examples in post 1.