Retirement extension monthly income succesful (Jomtien)

[peterh123]

I just received my retirement extension stamp in Jomtien. I'm from one of the countries whose embassies are not doing income letters. I applied based on monthly income of more than 65000. Even though there were two cases where my pension arrived on the last day of the previous month and where I therefore technically had no income to show during the month in question, the lady (not an IO) doing the checking accepted it.

 

She also asked for a paper showing what amount of pension I received in my home country (which I luckily had), and a bankbook updated to the same day as well as a guarantee statement from the bank, which I went to a nearby Kasikorn and got without problems (I hadn't prepared this because I thought a bank guarantee and passbook update were only required if I had used the 800.000 in the bank method and had to prove that the money was still there).  

 

In the end, she gave me a paper to sign with a sort of summary of the new rules in unclear English and told me that I might be required to come in in June and show my bankbook to an officer. Why that would be the case, given that I used the monthly income method, remained unclear and maybe she just mixed up the two methods (or was told to tell all applicants this), but there were no clear instructions as to why and what documents I should bring. At this point, I plan to just ignore this, since I'm not in Thailand in June anyway.

 

I was also told that next time I should plan to use the money in the bank method, which was so much easier for both parties. I readily agreed and might actually want to switch (but this time I just did not have the funds in the bank).

 

Was there in the morning at 8 am on Tuesday, left by 9.30, and by 1 pm the next day the passport was ready to pick up. I did my 90-day report in person Wednesday after getting my passport back, as well as the re-entry permit, and it took less than an hour to do both.

[sfokevin]

13 minutes ago, peterh123 said:

I was also told that next time I should plan to use the money in the bank method

That does not sound good... Was this a directive or a friendly time saving suggestion?..

 

Also how many months of 65k foreign transfers to your Thai bank did you provide?... A full 12 months or just the last 3 (covering the time the new rule has been in effect)?...

 

 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2019 by sfokevin

[Swedenlars]

I just received my retirement extension stamp in Jomtien. I'm from one of the countries whose embassies are not doing income letters. I applied based on monthly income of more than 65000. Even though there were two cases where my pension arrived on the last day of the previous month and where I therefore technically had no income to show during the month in question, the lady (not an IO) doing the checking accepted it.
 
She also asked for a paper showing what amount of pension I received in my home country (which I luckily had), and a bankbook updated to the same day as well as a guarantee statement from the bank, which I went to a nearby Kasikorn and got without problems (I hadn't prepared this because I thought a bank guarantee and passbook update were only required if I had used the 800.000 in the bank method and had to prove that the money was still there).  
 
In the end, she gave me a paper to sign with a sort of summary of the new rules in unclear English and told me that I might be required to come in in June and show my bankbook to an officer. Why that would be the case, given that I used the monthly income method, remained unclear and maybe she just mixed up the two methods (or was told to tell all applicants this), but there were no clear instructions as to why and what documents I should bring. At this point, I plan to just ignore this, since I'm not in Thailand in June anyway.
 
I was also told that next time I should plan to use the money in the bank method, which was so much easier for both parties. I readily agreed and might actually want to switch (but this time I just did not have the funds in the bank).
 
Was there in the morning at 8 am on Tuesday, left by 9.30, and by 1 pm the next day the passport was ready to pick up. I did my 90-day report in person Wednesday after getting my passport back, as well as the re-entry permit, and it took less than an hour to do both.

One of the reasons I live in the Philiipines. I would also qualify for Thailand. But every time I visit my friends in Bangkok and Pattaya I only hear problems, hassles and kind of a new anti expat sentiment with the Thai immigration and government over the past few years. Otherwise I really like Thailand. But not with these requirements and conditions. Here in the Philippines I feel more welcomed.

Gesendet von meinem SM-N950F mit Tapatalk

[Peterw42]

OP, did you show a full 12 months of 65k each month ?

[JustAnotherHun]

"I did my 90-day report in person Wednesday after getting my passport back"

You did not have to do a 90-day-report. The countdown starts new from the day you got the extension.

[KarlS]

3 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

"I did my 90-day report in person Wednesday after getting my passport back"

You did not have to do a 90-day-report. The countdown starts new from the day you got the extension.

Not true. Every immigration office does not reset the 90day report date when issuing a new extension. 

[bkk6060]

6 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

"I did my 90-day report in person Wednesday after getting my passport back"

You did not have to do a 90-day-report. The countdown starts new from the day you got the extension.

No it does not.

They are completely separate issues.

Edited March 13, 2019 by bkk6060

[peterh123]

17 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

OP, did you show a full 12 months of 65k each month ?

Yes, I had a bank statement detailing all transactions for the last year (12 pages!) but as explained two of those months were without income.

 

As for the question of showing up with money in the bank next time, I think it wasn't meant as a directive,  more as a way of getting less hassle (especially for the IO).

[peterh123]

3 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

No it does not.

They are completely separate issues.

That was also my understanding. Anyways, the lady who took my 90-day report did not say that I did not need to do it or look surprised when she saw my passport with the new stamp.

[Goethe]

At Jomtien the retirement extension and the 90-day report are separate issues. I did both this week and received a 90-day notice from March 10, and a retirement extension from April 19. They are definitely NOT connected.

[scubascuba3]

 
She also asked for a paper showing what amount of pension I received in my home country

This is a strange requirement, not listed in the rules. Are they making stuff up again?

[Jingthing]

This is a strange requirement, not listed in the rules. Are they making stuff up again?

Is it strange?
If they don't see evidence of the source of the incoming income transfers then people could just play games and not really have that income. Yeah?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[JustAnotherHun]

1 hour ago, KarlS said:

Not true. Every immigration office does not reset the 90day report date when issuing a new extension. 

Is that so?

Let's have a look at my pp:

Entry Dec 15/2016 - extension done March 02/2017 - Exit May 10/2017.

Entry Dec 10/2017 - extension done March 07/2018 - Exit June 01/2018.

No 90-days-reports done in this periods.

 

The few other ins and outs don't count because there was no stay more then 90 days.

My pp was issued in 2016. The 3 years before it was about the same as 2016-2018.

How come?

 

[KarlS]

1 minute ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Is that so?

Let's have a look at my pp:

Entry Dec 15/2016 - extension done March 02/2017 - Exit May 10/2017.

Entry Dec 10/2017 - extension done March 07/2018 - Exit June 01/2018.

No 90-days-reports done in this periods.

 

The few other ins and outs don't count because there was no stay more then 90 days.

My pp was issued in 2016. The 3 years before it was about the same as 2016-2018.

How come?

 

Try reading and comprehending what I actually wrote. 

[scubascuba3]

Is it strange?If they don't see evidence of the source of the incoming income transfers then people could just play games and not really have that income. Yeah?  Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

It's not a requirement, not been mentioned before. Remember there are people who have plenty of money but are not receiving a pension. They can be transferring cash.

 

Also people transferring current year income should be paying tax on it in Thailand

 

 

 

 

[JustAnotherHun]

12 minutes ago, KarlS said:

Try reading and comprehending what I actually wrote. 

Your post was not so hard to understand.

I suggest you try to read and understand the entry and exit dates I reported from my pp. Then count the days.

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

It's not a requirement, not been mentioned before. Remember there are people who have plenty of money but are not receiving a pension. They can be transferring cash.

 

Also people transferring current year income should be paying tax on it in Thailand

 

 

 

 

I hate the new changes, but I think you're misguided.

The income based applications have always been based on the income being actually income.

The embassy letters (sadly I can't get them as a U.S. national) were/are meant to represent INCOME claims.

It has always been immigration policy to be able to request additional backup evidence for INCOME claims in the income letters.

Now lets say someone has lots of cash but no or little income.

For them the BANK METHOD is available. 

It's clearly not the intention of Thai immigration for people to fake income either by way of letters or by the new extremely onerous options for those without letter possibility of monthly imports.

So if they had the right to demand backup evidence for income applications with letters, they most certainly ALSO have the right to demand backup evidence for those with incoming transfer based income applications.
That doesn't mean they will demand this of everyone, but if they want to, they could and they can, and unlike you I don't see this really as a substantive change of policy. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Jingthing

[KarlS]

21 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Your post was not so hard to understand.

I suggest you try to read and understand the entry and exit dates I reported from my pp. Then count the days.

You clearly do have a problem.

What is so difficult to understand about " Every immigration office does not reset the 90day report date when issuing a new extension."? 

 

PS I have no intention of wading through an irrelevant list of entry/exit dates. 

[scubascuba3]

I hate the new changes, but I think you're misguided.
The income based applications have always been based on the income being actually income.
The embassy letters (sadly I can't get them as a U.S. national) were/are meant to represent INCOME claims.
It has always been immigration policy to be able to request additional backup evidence for INCOME claims in the income letters.
Now lets say someone has lots of cash but no or little income.
For them the BANK METHOD is available. 
It's clearly not the intention of Thai immigration for people to fake income either by way of letters or by the new extremely onerous options for those without letter possibility of monthly imports.
So if they had the right to demand backup evidence for income applications with letters, they most certainly ALSO have the right to demand backup evidence for those with incoming transfer based income applications.
That doesn't mean they will demand this of everyone, but if they want to, they could and they can, and unlike you I don't see this really as a substantive change of policy. 

This has been discussed before and it wasn't required, but we know Immigration make it up as they go along, so nothing new in that regard

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

22 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I hate the new changes, but I think you're misguided.
The income based applications have always been based on the income being actually income.
The embassy letters (sadly I can't get them as a U.S. national) were/are meant to represent INCOME claims.
It has always been immigration policy to be able to request additional backup evidence for INCOME claims in the income letters.
Now lets say someone has lots of cash but no or little income.
For them the BANK METHOD is available. 
It's clearly not the intention of Thai immigration for people to fake income either by way of letters or by the new extremely onerous options for those without letter possibility of monthly imports.
So if they had the right to demand backup evidence for income applications with letters, they most certainly ALSO have the right to demand backup evidence for those with incoming transfer based income applications.
That doesn't mean they will demand this of everyone, but if they want to, they could and they can, and unlike you I don't see this really as a substantive change of policy. 

This has been discussed before and it wasn't required, but we know Immigration make it up as they go along, so nothing new in that regard

It's never been required. It has ALWAYS been something that immigration has the full legal right to require, and sometimes they do, for INCOME based applications in general. Applicants in the know should always bring in backup evidence of  the income claimed in the letters and now shown in imports in non-letter applications to show if demanded. But do not present this until and unless demanded. If they demand it and you don't have it, obviously if you can bring it later, you should be OK. But if your application is based on fictional income, you're kind of screwed, huh?

Edited March 13, 2019 by Jingthing

[EricTh]

2 hours ago, peterh123 said:

Yes, I had a bank statement detailing all transactions for the last year (12 pages!) but as explained two of those months were without income.

 

As for the question of showing up with money in the bank next time, I think it wasn't meant as a directive,  more as a way of getting less hassle (especially for the IO).

By Bank statement, did you mean a Thai bank statement or a foreign (eg USA) bank statement?

 

Did you need to pay for the bank statement printout? Why can't they accept bank book?

[metisdead]

A troll post has been reported and removed as well as a reply. 

[JackThompson]

39 minutes ago, EricTh said:

Did you need to pay for the bank statement printout? Why can't they accept bank book?

There is a letter which certifies the owner of a bank-account and shows the current balance which is used for "money in the bank" based extensions (op called it "guarantee statement").  This letter is also being required for "show the monthly transfer" extensions.

 

Some offices may also want a bank-statement printout, but I don't see that in the OP's case - just that his passbook was updated same-day - also as needed for "money in the bank" based extensions.

[peterh123]

40 minutes ago, EricTh said:

By Bank statement, did you mean a Thai bank statement or a foreign (eg USA) bank statement?

 

Did you need to pay for the bank statement printout? Why can't they accept bank book?

A Thai bank statement. I need to prove the money enters Thailand, and that can only be done through a Thai bank (at least according to immigration rules). The statement cost me a few hundred baht, don't remember exactly. A statement is signed off by the bank, whereas a bank book is updated by a machine and can be falsified (I assume that's the reason Immigration requires a statement, as well as seeing the bank book). In my case, I hadn't updated the bankbook during the year so it wouldn't be of much use anyway.

[OJAS]

3 hours ago, peterh123 said:

Yes, I had a bank statement detailing all transactions for the last year (12 pages!) but as explained two of those months were without income.

Did this specifically identify each 65k transfer as having originated from abroad by being labelled "FOREIGN T/T" or similar?

 

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Is it strange?
If they don't see evidence of the source of the incoming income transfers then people could just play games and not really have that income. Yeah?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

So what you appear to be saying then is that, regardless of the 65k minimum requirement, I am actually now obliged to transfer across ALL of my UK income each month, solely so as then to enable Immigration to reconcile it with supporting evidence such as I used to provide the British Embassy for their letter. Correct?

 

So too bad, then, if I then need to go through the bureaucratic rigmarole of getting whatever I might need to pay my UK bills transferred back to my UK account, with consequential double whammy hits on the exchange rate and charging fronts to boot.

 

If what you have said is true, therefore, this is IMHO stark raving barking madness taken to a ridiculous level!

 

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

Also people transferring current year income should be paying tax on it in Thailand

Not necessarily - depends on the terms of the double taxation treaty between Thailand and your home country.

Edited March 13, 2019 by OJAS

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Is it strange?
If they don't see evidence of the source of the incoming income transfers then people could just play games and not really have that income. Yeah?

58 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

But if your application is based on fictional income, you're kind of screwed, huh?

Anyone faking things could come up with something that would look authentic.  "Go home and get it" would translate to"go home and fake one" for a dishonest applicant.

This is only a hurdle to molest the honest. 

 

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

It's not a requirement, not been mentioned before. Remember there are people who have plenty of money but are not receiving a pension. They can be transferring cash.

Or money from an overseas business, or from an investment portfolio (from which earned-income may be taken out quarterly or annually), etc.  A foreign bank-statement might show deposits - but not the "monthly" deposits they are now demanding.

 

Quote

Also people transferring current year income should be paying tax on it in Thailand

Only if their income does not originate in a country with dual-tax treaty that removes the need to pay in both countries. 

 

I'd be happy to split the tax-money with Thailand, remit current-year earnings as they come in, etc - but Thailand wants "same every month" deposits rather than "income as it is earned."  No sense filing 2 sets of forms in 2 countries, and increasing the risk of audit in my passport country, if there is nothing to be gained in Thailand by doing so. 

Thailand could make a lot more tax-income if they welcomed us bringing in foreign income - ideally if making it possible for foreigners to set up sole-proprietorships which only serve foreign-clients.   It seems having to endure our presence is not worth receiving the revenues, to the faction making the rules.

Edited March 13, 2019 by JackThompson

[peterh123]

35 minutes ago, OJAS said:

Did this specifically identify each 65k transfer as having originated from abroad by being labelled "FOREIGN T/T" or similar?

 

Yes, Kasikorn (happens to be my bank) uses specific codes which identifies foreign incoming transactions.  

[stud858]

1 hour ago, EricTh said:

two of those months were without income.

So, from what I've been reading you could have been declined. What would have been your Plan B option?

[Jingthing]

59 minutes ago, OJAS said:

...

 

So what you appear to be saying then is that, regardless of the 65k minimum requirement, I am actually now obliged to transfer across ALL of my UK income each month, solely so as then to enable Immigration to reconcile it with supporting evidence such as I used to provide the British Embassy for their letter. Correct?
...

 

No. I said no such thing.

I never said you needed to transfer in all your income. If you're meeting 65K monthly transfers and you have double that, if asked to show income, if you can show evidence of double that, I would assume that would be perfectly fine. 

[peterh123]

4 minutes ago, stud858 said:

So, from what I've been reading you could have been declined. What would have been your Plan B option?

Ha, didn't even dare to begin speculating. I guess either an agent or start a new retirement visa process in my home country, but there may be other options I'm not aware of. I'm not even interested in going/retiring anywhere else, as all things considered Thailand is (for me) the place I want to be.