8 minutes ago, nasa123 said:

Hmmm in Phuket to Ubonjoe.

I don't recall ready anywhere in the article that they would not accept a proof of income proof from an embassy.

I think the wording was it was not required if you showed the money going into the bank.

It certainly allowed in the amendment to police order 138/2557 issued on December 21st.

To me it looks more and more like the 400k change is destined to cover issues such as unpaid health bills or repatriation costs. Fair enough. Married guys are supposed to be taken care of by their loved ones.

Of course I'd be proven wrong if they proceeded with some (other) corny health insurance requirement.

21 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

There is considerable doubt as to whether the "2months before and 3 months after" phrasing in the directive actually meant  2 months before extension and 3 months after the extension, or 2 months before the 1st extension then 3 months before all extensions after that (i.e. exactly what it has been before).  @Tanoshi thinks the latter  and I tend to agree with him but due to vague wording it has been otherwise interpreted by many IOs

 

Supposedly a meeting scheduled at TI next week to clarify matters,

 

My interpretation is 2 months before whatever day you "apply" which could be 30 to 45 days before the expiration date.  If you apply 1 month before the extension expires, then that would mean 2 months before that application date which would be 3 months before the actual expiration date. 

 

And then if you applied say 1 month early and was approved then you must maintain the 800K for 3 months from that application/approved date which would the same as 2 months from the old extension expired date.  

 

Durn, I'm getting confused.  Who's on first....

 

 

 

"Who's on first".

 

 

 

 

Missed it by 3 years!

17 years continuously on "retirement" extension, spent around 20million baht here in that time, counts for nothing.

yeah sad, counts for nothing, they'd probably give you a kick up the arse on the way out

 

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

There is considerable doubt as to whether the "2months before and 3 months after" phrasing in the directive actually meant  2 months before extension and 3 months after the extension, or 2 months before the 1st extension then 3 months before all extensions after that (i.e. exactly what it has been before).  @Tanoshi thinks the latter  and I tend to agree with him but due to vague wording it has been otherwise interpreted by many IOs

 

Supposedly a meeting scheduled at TI next week to clarify matters,

The wording is clear. 2 months before application , and maintained for 3 months after extension granted. 

The interpretation that it only applies for first time application would make the clause requiring the need to keep 400k throughout the year irrational as it is written.

 

6 hours ago, farangx said:

I am working towards reducing my time in Thailand to less than 5 months in a year that will allow me to avoid extensions and 90 days reporting altogether.

 

This is my idea also, but for sure they will change the rules to stop the same people they make go away, coming back, because they lose money from them to push them to tourist visa.

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

I don't recall ready anywhere in the article that they would not accept a proof of income proof from an embassy.

I think the wording was it was not required if you showed the money going into the bank.

It certainly allowed in the amendment to police order 138/2557 issued on December 21st.

Phuket ????

18 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

Unsure if this article/interview really clarifies rules 

Reading it, it looks like those who still use an embassy's income letter

now need to show "bankbook records proving this income already being received [in a Thai bank]" ?? 

So what is the purpose of the Embassy letter if I still have to show transfer into my account?

13 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

If you can get income proof from you embassy it will be accepted instead of monthly transfers.

 

I dont quite read it that way

 

"As many embassies no longer issue affidavits confirming income, this is no longer required, he said, noting that letters from governments and pension fund providers will be accepted along with other forms of evidence to prove the income pending.

 

“Of course any financial statements from banks and copies of bankbook records proving this income already being received should be provided,” he said.

So it sounds to me they will accept the embassy letter but in addition they want proof the monies are actually transferred???

What is the purpose of the embassy letter then?

29 minutes ago, Such a Hairy Guy said:

So it sounds to me they will accept the embassy letter but in addition they want proof the monies are actually transferred???

I think they mean back up proof for the income letter from the source such a bank statements of it going into a bank anywhere.

They cannot flat say they are not accepted is my main point.

 

i hope someone will attest to the feasibility of combo method

of deposit + embassy letter of pension, only, very soon

9 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

I think they mean back up proof for the income letter from the source such a bank statements of it going into a bank anywhere.

They cannot flat say they are not accepted is my main point.

 

thanks, I hope you are right. But as usual it may depend on the individual officer's interpretation.

Can people not setup an automatic transfer from oversea. Then 65K will tick in every month in Thailand...
Then you take it out of the bank for expenses ( And sent it back. - transfer expenses, for next month... )
Recycling is so popular.....

I am not retired or in any problems, just curious...

19 hours ago, xylophone said:

“Under the income requirement, applicants must receive at least B65,000 per month,” Col Acheep explained.

As many embassies no longer issue affidavits confirming income, this is no longer required, he said, noting that letters from governments and pension fund providers will be accepted along with other forms of evidence to prove the income pending.

 

“Of course any financial statements from banks and copies of bankbook records proving this income already being received should be provided,” he said.

Read more at https://www.thephuketnews.com/holding-the-balance- phuket-immigration-clarifies-new-rules-on-retirement-visas-to-start-march-1-70401.php#qFDrdIdC5SewFzHi.99

 

So from my perspective in trying to qualify for the 65k per month method I can provide the required evidence, which was a worry because they have been ''fickle" in that area.

 

Not decided yet as to follow that route or the 800k route. For me it depends upon whether or not I can get an automatic transfer of funds from my NZ bank, so trying Transferwise under an automatic payment schedule if poss.

 

What happened to the combination method.

Friend came to Thailand 3 years ago, he has a pension and his Thai wife also had a pension, together more than enough for the 65,000 retirement extension.

His wife died, his income became borderline 65K.

Now, due to the low Euro and changes in the pension taxes his net income falls to 55,000.

And he has 200,000 on a Thai bank account, and growing.

The embassy still supplies the income letter.

Under the old rules this combo was ok for retirement extension.

But what will happen now to him?

 

20 hours ago, smedly said:

well that's cleared that up - not

 

I am under 60yo and have been using the 800k balance for the last 5 years so do the new rules apply to me or not

 

more confusion

No confusion it's simple:

Married visa: minimum 40,000 baht per month or 400,000 baht in a Thai bank for 2 months prior and 3 months after application.

Retired visa: minimum 65,000 baht per month or 800,000 baht in a Thai bank for 2 months prior and 3 months after application

 

What's confusing ???.

Perhaps some effort and lobbying on the part of the banking industry? After all, most politicians can be easily bought. It represents a fair amount of cash, that the banks can use, without paying much at all, in the way of interest.

The Phuket Imm. notice is very clear, so why is this thread going to grow to a thousand or more comments, or pages. Its all been said before and things clarified by UJ.

1 minute ago, indepth said:

The Phuket Imm. notice is very clear, so why is this thread going to grow to a thousand or more comments, or pages. Its all been said before and things clarified by UJ.

I guess because people. Like u n me have just read it!

10 minutes ago, hansnl said:

What happened to the combination method.

It is still possible. 

The only question is how much will be needed in the bank after the extension is done.

So if I have to renew in August this means I have to have 400k in bank starting March 1st ? and 800k in bank 3 months before renewal.

3 minutes ago, mmail2you said:

So if I have to renew in August this means I have to have 400k in bank starting March 1st ? and 800k in bank 3 months before renewal.

No changes until after you apply for your next extension in August. Just top up your account to 800k baht like you normally do.

Good money in no money going out fairly simple really after a few sleepless nights ???? 

19 hours ago, BertM said:

You need to check with Ubonjoe. Last he published said 2 before and 3 after for renewals. Not 3 before.

Yes . I have actually worked it out that  60 Days = 2 months  and 90 Days = 3 months but i could be wrong as i never was any good at maths.

23 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Perhaps some effort and lobbying on the part of the banking industry? After all, most politicians can be easily bought. It represents a fair amount of cash, that the banks can use, without paying much at all, in the way of interest.

Very much doubt the banking industry has anything at all to do with this.

The money is such a relatively small amount.

If there were a total of 10,000 people using the 800k method for retirement (I very much doubt that there are that many), then it adds a total of only 4 billion Baht (US$133,000,000) spread out over all banks. A drop in the ocean.

Too many people overestimate the economic benefit to Thailand of foreign retirees.

20 hours ago, worgeordie said:

You will have to tighten your belt ????

regards Worgeordie

Looks like the 800,000Bt. only has to be lodged for 5 months according to everything I have read, not 6 months. Under the old rules it had to be lodged for 3 months prior to the application being made (except for 1st. time applicants, which was 2 months). Now that appears to have been changed to two months (which surprised me) and for the next 3 months after receiving your extention. 

19 hours ago, BertM said:

You need to check with Ubonjoe. Last he published said 2 before and 3 after for renewals. Not 3 before.

Ubonjoe is never wrong, so pay attention to what he says.

20 hours ago, Hellsten said:

I probably need to move out from this madhouse soon  If the bath go more stronger I'm out, don't have the money to stay and I'm married and have lived her for soon 15 years, this IS my Home! I have no place to go! ????

The paper from the embassy show the income Before Tax

the Bank after Tax there is a big difference.

You live here very long time you married a Thai and take care the family

But you have NO RIGHT what so ever and they still make it even more difficult

for us to stay here I probably spend 8-900000 a year here the most time but now when I get older the money is not to great now, and the Bath is too damn strong

I lose about 30000thb/month compare from the first time I come her

Not to nice of you Thailand!

 

There is no entitlement to reside in country other than your home country. We live here by the grace of the Thai govt. and they have a sovereign right to make whatever rules they choose. Changes in global economics and currency are not Thailand’s responsibility...

Asked what happens to applicants who are discovered next year dipping into the account, bringing the balance below B400,000, Col Acheep said, “Just don’t do it. Keep it at B400,000.”

At least now everything is clear.

19 hours ago, sumrit said:

And, if too many people do that as a way of getting around the new rules, that option is likely to be closed, or at least severely curtailed, meaning it will cause problems for those who genuinely need to use Savannakhet as a one-off instead of having to go back to their home country.

I am quite happy to go back to my home country every couple of years, can get a free reliable medical check, i think that it is worth it.

12 minutes ago, Huckenfell said:

Yes . I have actually worked it out that  60 Days = 2 months  and 90 Days = 3 months but i could be wrong as i never was any good at maths.

It is months not days. For example 2 months from today is April 17th. Sixty days would be the 18th.