My Experience Extending my Retirement "Visa" last Friday.

[Tanoshi]

18 minutes ago, phutoie2 said:

It maybe a wire transfer, but no money moves across any borders, its moved from Banks within Thailand. I could write some more on how TMB the military Bank conducts this operation, but CC act/defamation etc.

Of course it doesn't.

Do you believe your banks post the money!

What about shopping online.

They are electronic transfers where your account is debited and another account is credited.

[Tanoshi]

7 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Unless the failure to maintain the 800k and the 400k violated the terms of my current extension.  Do we know that that is not the case?

The failure to maintain the 800/400K would only violate the terms of your extension if you applied using the same method the following year, where you would be expected to show 800K for 3 months following the extension being granted, then 6 @ 400K, before the 3 @ 800K again.

If at the point of receiving your extension you then transfer income to a Thai bank for 12 months, then that would form the basis of your next application based on income, not funds.

 

Ask at your IO if in doubt.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

18 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

I spent 2 hours in a KK branch with my friend and his Thai wife speaking to their HQ and their call centre.

He had a KK account, but Credit advice's are only now available to individuals through their HQ, in person only, for 100 baht a pop according to them. Our experience had no resemblance to yours.

 

 

In the episode you've posted on above, was the discussion about getting a credit advice for ONE recent transfer, or was any of the discussion about trying to get a multi-months recap of international xfers?  Was there any indication that Kasikorn would/could even product a 12-month retrospective document?

 

[steve73]

56 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Unless the failure to maintain the 800k and the 400k violated the terms of my current extension.  Do we know that that is not the case?

During my discussion with my I/O last week, when I suggested that I move to the 65k income method for my NEXT extension, then I was told that provided I could show a minimum monthly deposit of 65k for EVERY month, then I could immediately start drawing my savings below the 800k.

 

But you will need to confirm that your I/O understands things the same way before trying this yourself.

[steve73]

1 hour ago, sometimewoodworker said:

That is the information that many people have. Though there is no guarantee that every transfer will be coded as FTT as some people have posted, 10 out of 12 were FTT. 

 

It is certainly possible that TW has an agreement with Bangkok Bank (the only one that is somewhat consistent) that a TW transfer BB to BB is coded as FTT. 

 

As as I have said email TW. Unless there has been a very very recent change in the system you will get exactly the same answer.

 

here is a Telegraph article that you should believe.

UK TW system

I have used Transferwise 17 times to move funds from my UK account to my Kasikorn Thai account.

6 times it went via TMB and was coded as being from a "Dummy account"

5 times it went via BKB and was also "Dummy account"

6 times it went via Kasikorn and was correctly coded as International.

Clearly, the problem is only when the fund pass through a different bank from which the receiving account is held.

The Thai banks SHOULD be able to sort this miscommunication out if we keep pressing them enough.. (or maybe TiT..)   

[Tanoshi]

32 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

In the episode you've posted on above, was the discussion about getting a credit advice for ONE recent transfer, or was any of the discussion about trying to get a multi-months recap of international xfers?  Was there any indication that Kasikorn would/could even product a 12-month retrospective document?

 

It was about getting backdated receipts from April 2018 to present, then monthly thereafter.

 

[Tanoshi]

42 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Was there any indication that Kasikorn would/could even product a 12-month retrospective document?

It was TI who stressed the importance of obtaining bank statements from the HQ and not your local branch.

That's because your local statement may show deposits as 'local', i.e. they were transferred by HQ, whereas the statements from HQ would show the foreign source of income. In that scenario you wouldn't need credit advice notice's.

I haven't seen a comparison of HQ and local statements from KK to confirm.

 

I have seen a comparison of statements from BKK's HQ and local branch.

In this instance they were identical, both recording foreign transfers.

[jacko45k]

56 minutes ago, steve73 said:

The Thai banks SHOULD be able to sort this miscommunication out if we keep pressing them enough..

Why do you believe it is anything to do with the Thai banks rather than Transferwise themselves?

[steve73]

7 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Why do you believe it is anything to do with the Thai banks rather than Transferwise themselves?

Because when it passes through their own incoming branch it arrives correctly coded.

The ONLY was TW could address it would be for them to ensure it arrived in T/L in the same bank as the destination account...

 

But since there are only 3 thai banks that are used by TW, for all other banks, it will always arrive via another bank.  

[jacko45k]

11 minutes ago, steve73 said:

The ONLY was TW could address it would be for them to ensure it arrived in T/L in the same bank as the destination account...

 

I actually see this as the only way TW transfers could always get the FTT/ International tag, and then only when the final destination is one of the 3 they use, Bangkok Bank, Kasicorn or TMB. Apparently they say they cannot do this.

Edited February 26, 2019 by jacko45k

[steve73]

10 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I actually see this as the only way TW transfers could always get the FTT/ International tag, and then only when the final destination is one of the 3 they use, Bangkok Bank, Kasicorn or TMB. Apparently they say they cannot do this.

which is why the Thai banks themselves need to be able to "follow the trial through" so that it arrives coded correctly...

Since they DO code it correctly when it comes through themselves there is absolutely NO REASON why they cannot pass the correct code info through to other banks, and allow the final recipient bank to do likewise.

[Tanoshi]

12 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I actually see this as the only way TW transfers could always get the FTT/ International tag, and then only when the final destination is one of the 3 they use, Bangkok Bank, Kasicorn or TMB. Apparently they say they cannot do this.

It's not just a possible problem with TW though Jack.

All foreign transfers to a Thai bank either go through the Headquarters of the bank in question, or through the Bank of Thailand.

 

[Tanoshi]

7 minutes ago, steve73 said:

which is why the Thai banks themselves need to be able to "follow the trial through" so that it arrives coded correctly...

Since they DO code it correctly when it comes through themselves there is absolutely NO REASON why they cannot pass the correct code info through to other banks, and allow the final recipient bank to do likewise.

Bangkok bank appear to be the only bank doing just that.

 

Regardless of how the transfer was made, unless you get a statement from the HQ of your bank and/or advice receipts, you cannot rely on a local statement to identify the source.

 

It's really down to each individual, depending on their method of transfer to discuss the issue with their own banks. There is no one universal answer fits all.

Edited February 26, 2019 by Tanoshi

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, steve73 said:

Since they DO code it correctly when it comes through themselves there is absolutely NO REASON why they cannot pass the correct code info through to other banks, and allow the final recipient bank to do likewise.

But as far as the final recipient bank is concerned, is it not a domestic transfer, not requiring currency conversion? Initiated by a domestic account from another Thai bank? That account holder being Transferwise.

[Tanoshi]

4 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

But as far as the final recipient bank is concerned, is it not a domestic transfer, not requiring currency conversion? Initiated by a domestic account from another Thai bank? That account holder being Transferwise.

Why then is a transfer through a BKK account held by TW, and paid into my local BKK in baht, not coded as a 'domestic' or 'local' transfer.

[steve73]

8 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

But as far as the final recipient bank is concerned, is it not a domestic transfer, not requiring currency conversion? Initiated by a domestic account from another Thai bank? That account holder being Transferwise.

When the final bank is the same as the recipient bank then the final move would still be a domestic transfer from TW's (eg.) Kbank account to my Kbank account... but they can manage to code that correctly.

Why does using SWIFT allow the coding to be correctly transmitted?

(perhaps the additional 200-500 bt "recipient fee??)

Also, as other's have reported, occasional other types of transfer do not get accurately coded depending on the source and/or recipient bank.

Edited February 26, 2019 by steve73

[jacko45k]

12 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Why then is a transfer through a BKK account held by TW, and paid into my local BKK in baht, not coded as a 'domestic' or 'local' transfer.

Because it was the Bangkok Bank HQ that received baht internationally and deposited it directly into your account. There is no Branch information required. However, that is the way it appears to work and the aim is to see it coded as international for immigration's benefit no?

Edited February 26, 2019 by jacko45k

[Tanoshi]

19 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Why then is a transfer through a BKK account held by TW, and paid into my local BKK in baht, not coded as a 'domestic' or 'local' transfer.

 

8 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Because it was the Bangkok Bank HQ that received baht internationally and deposited it directly into your account. There is no Branch information required. However, that is the way it appears to work and the aim is to see it coded as international for immigration's benefit no?

Uh!

Bangkok bank HQ receive the baht locally, from the TW account.

It is coded as FTT because BKK record the source of the transfer. 

 

[jacko45k]

16 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Bangkok bank HQ receive the baht locally, from the TW account.

It is coded as FTT because BKK record the source of the transfer. 

 

Those two contradict each other.

Surely the T/W account is already at the Bangkok Bank? 

This is confusing.

Edited February 26, 2019 by jacko45k

[Tanoshi]

34 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Those two contradict each other.

Surely the T/W account is already at the Bangkok Bank? 

This is confusing.

Yes, but transfers never go direct to your local Thai bank account, they always go through the HQ first.

 

The only information I supply TW with is my BKK account number, the HQ locate and transfer it to my branch.

[skatewash]

21 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Yes, but transfers never go direct to your local Thai bank account, they always go through the HQ first.

 

The only information I supply TW with is my BKK account number, the HQ locate and transfer it to my branch.

The first three digits of your Bangkok Bank account number are your branch number. 

[cmarshall]

4 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

The failure to maintain the 800/400K would only violate the terms of your extension if you applied using the same method the following year, where you would be expected to show 800K for 3 months following the extension being granted, then 6 @ 400K, before the 3 @ 800K again.

If at the point of receiving your extension you then transfer income to a Thai bank for 12 months, then that would form the basis of your next application based on income, not funds.

 

Ask at your IO if in doubt.

 

While that's a reasonable reading, I don't see anything to make me believe that the IOs will interprete the rules that way.  What is the basis for your claim that this is TM's understanding, other than what seems obvious to you?

[Tanoshi]

6 minutes ago, skatewash said:

The first three digits of your Bangkok Bank account number are your branch number. 

Thanks, I'm aware of that.

Every branch also has an identifying branch name …… crazy.

https://www.bangkokbank.com/en/Personal/Other-Services/Currency-Exchange/-/media/A0C70AA9BEF14DA0B9A8DFDCA4CA3F6C.ashx

[Tanoshi]

15 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

While that's a reasonable reading, I don't see anything to make me believe that the IOs will interprete the rules that way.  What is the basis for your claim that this is TM's understanding, other than what seems obvious to you?

You'll only get a definitive answer from your IO.

The basis of my claim is from the understanding and confirmation from my IO.

[gentlemanjackdarby]

On 2/24/2019 at 4:27 AM, Pib said:

If you are using "ACH" transfer from Chase Bank  to Bangkok Bank you will no longer be able to use that method beginning 1 Apr 19 unless Chase uses ACH "IAT" format---and it highly, highly doubtful they use IAT format.  Now if you are using SWIFT then that will continue to work.  

There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding IAT (International ACH Transfers)

 

There is no question that Chase, as well as other banks, 'use' the IAT format for international payments - that standard has been required since 2009

 

What is being missed is that it's not 'the bank' that is responsible for correctly coding a particular transfer as an INTERNATIONAL ACH transfer - it is the originator (or payor, for example, U.S. Social Security or XYZ corporation)

 

There are a lot of U.S. businesses making payments to non-U.S. vendors for goods and services and not all of those are large enough or are of such urgency to require a wire (SWIFT) transfers - those payments are made through payment gateways in IAT format.

 

If the entity that originates (makes) a payment TO you is willing to code that payment in the IAT format, their bank, whoever that may be, will process the payment and you'll get your money. U.S. Social Security is coding their payments for those who have non-U.S. addresses in the IAT format, so all is good

 

In 2009, the U.S. Treasury required additional information on ACH payments whose final destination was outside the U.S. as well as additional information for payments originating outside the U.S. whose final destination was a U.S. account

 

If one has a BUSINESS account with a particular bank, one can make IAT payments all day long to one's heart's content since larger banks offer that as part of their treasury function

 

As of now, I haven't been able to find a bank that offers the service of making IAT payments for individual accounts

[Pib]

18 minutes ago, gentlemanjackdarby said:

There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding IAT (International ACH Transfers)

 

There is no question that Chase, as well as other banks, 'use' the IAT format for international payments - that standard has been required since 2009

 

What is being missed is that it's not 'the bank' that is responsible for correctly coding a particular transfer as an INTERNATIONAL ACH transfer - it is the originator (or payor, for example, U.S. Social Security or XYZ corporation)

 

There are a lot of U.S. businesses making payments to non-U.S. vendors for goods and services and not all of those are large enough or are of such urgency to require a wire (SWIFT) transfers - those payments are made through payment gateways in IAT format.

 

If the entity that originates (makes) a payment TO you is willing to code that payment in the IAT format, their bank, whoever that may be, will process the payment and you'll get your money. U.S. Social Security is coding their payments for those who have non-U.S. addresses in the IAT format, so all is good

 

In 2009, the U.S. Treasury required additional information on ACH payments whose final destination was outside the U.S. as well as additional information for payments originating outside the U.S. whose final destination was a U.S. account

 

If one has a BUSINESS account with a particular bank, one can make IAT payments all day long to one's heart's content since larger banks offer that as part of their treasury function

 

As of now, I haven't been able to find a bank that offers the service of making IAT payments for individual accounts

You are correct that all US banks have been able to "receive" ACH IAT format since around the 2009-2013 format....the banks can receive into a retail or business bank account.  Receiving is no problem.  However, when it comes to "sending" in IAT format that is reserved for certain "cooperate/business" accounts since many businesses need to pay for foreign services/products.  ACH IAT is not used in sending from "retail" accounts like the typical Joe has....SWIFT/International Wire is used instead....once again, like you said.

 

And regarding SSA coding all foreign beneficiary payments in IAT format, that is not correct.  I have a family member who has had a Thailand address on file since day one not receiving the SS pension in IAT format.  The family member is one of the approx 20% of SS beneficiaries receiving their payment to Bangkok Bank not in IAT format.  All telephone calls, emails, and letters to Manila and Baltimore SS Office since Oct 18 to correct the family members payment to IAT format have had negative results....latest early Feb payment still not in IAT format per Bangkok Bank.  Late  last week an IDD for Thailand form was emailed to Manila which means the payment would switch to the SWIFT system....Manila acknowledged receipt last week's and said they will update the member payment bank/payment method.  Probably too late to affect the upcoming early March payment...hopefully by the early April payment.  Time will tell.

 

P.S.  Per a call and email from two different Manila SS Office reps last week they say SSA is working closely with Bangkok Bank to ensure no payments are rejected come 1 Apr 19.  And more research from discussions to the POC at HQ Bangkok Bank on this issue last wee, Bangkok Bank "New York" has submitted letter to US Treasure OCC asking the US Treasury extend the deadline from 1 Apr 19 since SSA still sends many payments to foreign beneficiaries in "non-IAT" format.    This non-IAT format issue is also a prime reason SSA finally approved IDD for Thailand to help resolve the issue...create another method to pay foreign beneficiaries which does not use ACH.

Edited February 26, 2019 by Pib

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

12 minutes ago, gentlemanjackdarby said:

As of now, I haven't been able to find a bank that offers the service of making IAT payments for individual accounts

 

That's the bottom line. For now, and for the foreseeable future AFAWK, ordinary individual (non-business) U.S. bank, CU and brokerage customers are S.O.L. when it comes to having any ability to send IAT formatted transfers.

 

Pretty much across the board, it's either ACH for domestic transfers or SWIFT type international wires for foreign transfers with the banks, CUs, and brokerages.... Unless you start venturing into the private money transfer services like Transferwise, which have their own set of issues.

 

[gentlemanjackdarby]

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

That's the bottom line. For now, and for the foreseeable future AFAWK, ordinary individual (non-business) U.S. bank, CU and brokerage customers are S.O.L. when it comes to having any ability to send IAT formatted transfers.

 

Pretty much across the board, it's either ACH for domestic transfers or SWIFT type international wires for foreign transfers with the banks, CUs, and brokerages.... Unless you start venturing into the private money transfer services like Transferwise, which have their own set of issues.

 

Yes, absolutely correct and I agree completely

 

However, and not meaning to be too pedantic about, but when folks say that 'it's up to the bank' to code an ACH transfer in accordance with IAT standards, it creates misunderstanding by those reading that post and worse, it misleads them into believing that that the problem lies with their bank and not, for example, with the payor of their pension.

 

That's important because if someone wants an IAT and they can't get it, they need to focus their efforts with their payor and not with their bank; I think it's likely that for folks who get a pension or other payment from larger payors may find that their payor can do it or is willing to work on implementing it.

 

After all, the payors are using the same ACH system as they're currently using for everything else - IAT simply requires that additional fields be filled in the ACH record for an IAT ACH to comply with 'new' requirements.

 

I can see banks being very unwilling to make the ability to send IAT ACH transfers available for their individual accounts; after all, it costs pennies to make ACH transfers and payments where, in the U.S. at least, SWIFT transfers cost around USD 40 - 50 or more, so it's a profit center for them.

 

However, as the 'bugs' get squashed in making the U.S. ACH system 'talk' and be completely 'understood' by other payment systems throughout the world, it's likely that a non-bank player will step up and offer a system that will be less expensive than U.S. banks' SWIFT transfers. After all, Paypal will allow its users to make international USD transfers for very low fees from the U.S. to certain countries - unfortunately, it likely won't satisfy Thailand Immigration extension requirements. 

[gentlemanjackdarby]

1 hour ago, Pib said:

You are correct that all US banks have been able to "receive" ACH IAT format since around the 2009-2013 format....the banks can receive into a retail or business bank account.  Receiving is no problem.  However, when it comes to "sending" in IAT format that is reserved for certain "cooperate/business" accounts since many businesses need to pay for foreign services/products.  ACH IAT is not used in sending from "retail" accounts like the typical Joe has....SWIFT/International Wire is used instead....once again, like you said.

 

And regarding SSA coding all foreign beneficiary payments in IAT format, that is not correct.  I have a family member who has had a Thailand address on file since day one not receiving the SS pension in IAT format.  The family member is one of the approx 20% of SS beneficiaries receiving their payment to Bangkok Bank not in IAT format.  All telephone calls, emails, and letters to Manila and Baltimore SS Office since Oct 18 to correct the family members payment to IAT format have had negative results....latest early Feb payment still not in IAT format per Bangkok Bank.  Late  last week an IDD for Thailand form was emailed to Manila which means the payment would switch to the SWIFT system....Manila acknowledged receipt last week's and said they will update the member payment bank/payment method.  Probably too late to affect the upcoming early March payment...hopefully by the early April payment.  Time will tell.

 

P.S.  Per a call and email from two different Manila SS Office reps last week they say SSA is working closely with Bangkok Bank to ensure no payments are rejected come 1 Apr 19.  And more research from discussions to the POC at HQ Bangkok Bank on this issue last wee, Bangkok Bank "New York" has submitted letter to US Treasure OCC asking the US Treasury extend the deadline from 1 Apr 19 since SSA still sends many payments to foreign beneficiaries in "non-IAT" format.    This non-IAT format issue is also a prime reason SSA finally approved IDD for Thailand to help resolve the issue...create another method to pay foreign beneficiaries which does not use ACH.

Yes, you highlight one of the difficulties of implementing U.S. IAT ACH standards worldwide

 

The efficiency and low cost of ACH stops at the U.S. border -  there's still a lot of work to be done to get all of the different worldwide payment systems gateways 'speaking one language' and, although the IAT ACH working group doesn't say it, it's my opinion that a lot of the banking systems within a particular country don't speak the same language as well, making the system more difficult to implement.

 

Why else would there be such a problem getting all Transferwise payments, no matter which partner bank TW uses, to show as an 'international transfer' in the final recipient's account? 

[auntyedna]

Thanks for a useful post.  Two questions:

1.   What happens if one has repatriated all his worldly wealth in Thailand and is using the proceeds as pension income?

2.  The health insurance providers offer "private hospital care".  I don't want to use the private hospitals any more, having been ripped big time - now I use the public hospitals.  Is anyone aware of a "public hospital only" health insurance at an affordable price?