Income change to 800k extension method.

[marcusarelus]

17 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

It's a good question.  A "sane" interpretation would be that you had the income the whole year, so it's fine.  But, they could also turn around and say you have been "on overstay" since the balance went below 400K. 

 

The question is, is the 400K year-round part of the current/last-extension's qualifications, or the qualifications for the next year's extension?  Given Jomtien are asking for "bank-book updates" after 90-days, the 800K for 3 mo after would seem to be part of the previous-extension there.  But perhaps they are just improvising, and it does not reflect nationwide policy - to the extent such a thing exists in this context.

 

I would say the most important factor, is whether the IO is angry you are applying in-person, vs using an agent.  The lack of clarity on these matters seems to be a way to maximize IOs ability to find a way to disqualify honest, in-person applications when/if they feel like it.  If they are looking for a way out of processing your application, and you didn't keep the 800K/400K for the previous year, they might use that to do so.

That is the question.  1.  How will they know after the first 90 days if you don't keep 400 in your bank account if you change to an income method for your next application?  2.  Does it make any difference?  3.  Could one just open a new bank account 91 days before the next extension and deposit 800k in that account?  4.  Is Immigration looking at last year when they approve another extension or only 90 days before the current application for extension. 

[Mike Teavee]

3 hours ago, Henryford said:

Is that in line with the new regulations. They only state MONTHLY transfers of 65k, nowhere does it say on the same day. I do monthly transfers but i wait until the exchange rate is at a high in the month so maybe not always on the same day. Am i wasting my time?

There have been Multiple (but not many) reports of people saying that their IO has suggested the 65K should be transferred on more or less the same date each month to demonstrate regular income so if I were you I would check with your local Immigration Office to get their views.

 

Last thing you want is to be following the published rules & finding that you've fallen foul of the local interpretation of these

[MikeN]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

It's a good question.  A "sane" interpretation would be that you had the income the whole year, so it's fine.  But, they could also turn around and say you have been "on overstay" since the balance went below 400K. 

 

The question is, is the 400K year-round part of the current/last-extension's qualifications, or the qualifications for the next year's extension?  Given Jomtien are asking for "bank-book updates" after 90-days, the 800K for 3 mo after would seem to be part of the previous-extension there.  But perhaps they are just improvising, and it does not reflect nationwide policy - to the extent such a thing exists in this context.

 

In BKK at least, when getting your extension you have to sign a number of forms. One I signed recently acknowledged that a breach of my visa conditions would mean it’s cancellation, another was acknowledging the money in the bank rules of 800k for 2 months before, 3 months after, then 400k.

 So in theory if you went below the 400k you could get kicked out but Immigration would not know about it unless you came to their attention otherwise, ie for working illegally.

 Therefore the 400k is a requirement of your current visa extension, not next years ..... BUT a breach of this year’s visa conditions would not look good when applying for an extension next year even if you change to the income method. The good old CATCH-22 !

 I would be keeping the 400k in the bank even if I was changing to the income method next year.....which of course means that you could be eligible for the combo method.

[marcusarelus]

41 minutes ago, MikeN said:

In BKK at least, when getting your extension you have to sign a number of forms. One I signed recently acknowledged that a breach of my visa conditions would mean it’s cancellation, another was acknowledging the money in the bank rules of 800k for 2 months before, 3 months after, then 400k.

 So in theory if you went below the 400k you could get kicked out but Immigration would not know about it unless you came to their attention otherwise, ie for working illegally.

 Therefore the 400k is a requirement of your current visa extension, not next years ..... BUT a breach of this year’s visa conditions would not look good when applying for an extension next year even if you change to the income method. The good old CATCH-22 !

 I would be keeping the 400k in the bank even if I was changing to the income method next year.....which of course means that you could be eligible for the combo method.

So, in theory, if you use the income method and SS messes up for a couple of months you would be in breach also.  Do you have to sign any forms for the income method? 

[Mike Teavee]

17 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

So, in theory, if you use the income method and SS messes up for a couple of months you would be in breach also.  Do you have to sign any forms for the income method? 

No, for income it’s the previous 12 months that count, if you fail to xfer 65k+ any month after you’ve got your extension, you won’t get one on that basis next time.

 

Having said that, it wouldn't come as a surprise if somebody reported being told to come back in 3 months with their Bank Book to prove that they were still recieving the 65K per month ???? 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Mike Teavee

[Tanoshi]

5 hours ago, Henryford said:

Is that in line with the new regulations. They only state MONTHLY transfers of 65k, nowhere does it say on the same day. I do monthly transfers but i wait until the exchange rate is at a high in the month so maybe not always on the same day. Am i wasting my time?

It is the definition of 'monthly' imposed by my IO.

i.e. Every 28 -31 days, not 6-7 weeks in-between.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Tanoshi

[Henryford]

18 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

It is the definition of 'monthly' imposed by my IO.

i.e. Every 28 -31 days, not 6-7 weeks in-between.

I would have thought that any definition of "monthly" was for May between 1-31st May, for June 1-30th June etc. So a transfer on the 5th May and the 20th June would not be seen as monthly?

[Pib]

[Sheryl]

Since this is Thai Visa the definitive source of all things visa ish.  I assume someone here has the actual answer. 

Actually no, no one does. The police order does not specify what happens (or even how/when the 3 month post seasoning and 400k minimum balance are to be verified) so individual Imm offices are on their own to figure it out. And the rules are too new for any one to have yet experienced this.

Personally I would maintain 3 month 800 k followed by 9 months 400k for the year before extending with the 65k income method to be safe. Once you've gotten an extension based on 65k/month income then you can spend tbe 400k.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[marcusarelus]

6 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Actually no, no one does. The police order does not specify what happens (or even how/when the 3 month post seasoning and 400k minimum balance are to be verified) so individual Imm offices are on their own to figure it out. And the rules are too new for any one to have yet experienced this.

Personally I would maintain 3 month 800 k followed by 9 months 400k for the year before extending with the 65k income method to be safe. Once you've gotten an extension based on 65k/month income then you can spend tbe 400k.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

As long as the 65k pension comes in every month.  But.  If your provider stops payment for a couple of months then I'd assume you would be in default of the 65k method and your extension invalid and be liable to deportation and fines.  Unless you renewed by the 800k method and then they would not look at last years income bank book assuming they are different books.

Edited May 9, 2019 by marcusarelus

[JackThompson]

5 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

As long as the 65k pension comes in every month.  But.  If your provider stops payment for a couple of months then I'd assume you would be in default of the 65k method and your extension invalid and be liable to deportation and fines.  Unless you renewed by the 800k method and then they would not look at last years income bank book assuming they are different books.

I don't see a problem with them being the same account.  If there was a problem with the income-stream, and you went for the 800K in the bank instead, it would not matter what income was going into the "income in the bank" account, as long as it was 400K min all the previous year, and 800K for 2 months (but some offices say 3) before applying for the new extension.

 

The best solution for the income-based folks, is to have a buffer of a couple months income in their foreign account.  Should there be a problem with an automated transfer, they could initiate a manual transfer to cover that month. 

[marcusarelus]

1 minute ago, JackThompson said:

I don't see a problem with them being the same account.  If there was a problem with the income-stream, and you went for the 800K in the bank instead, it would not matter what income was going into the "income in the bank" account, as long as it was 400K min all the previous year, and 800K for 2 months (but some offices say 3) before applying for the new extension.

 

The best solution for the income-based folks, is to have a buffer of a couple months income in their foreign account.  Should there be a problem with an automated transfer, they could initiate a manual transfer to cover that month. 

I would agree especially if all offices will still accept the combination method.  Do we know this for a fact? 

[Tanoshi]

2 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

I would agree especially if all offices will still accept the combination method.  Do we know this for a fact? 

They will but you should find out from your own IO their interpretation of the combination method.

There are currently two different interpretations being applied by IO's.

Whichever interpretation, you still require 12 x monthly transfers to meet the income requirement part, so if you missed a month, it could screw up your next application.

[Tanoshi]

2 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

As long as the 65k pension comes in every month.  But.  If your provider stops payment for a couple of months then I'd assume you would be in default of the 65k method and your extension invalid and be liable to deportation and fines. 

For extension applications applied for in 2020, Immigration will check the previous 12 months financial requirements in order to qualify for another extension.

In other words from the date of your extension this year, if using funds, you will be required to show proof of 800K for 3 months following your 2019 extension, then 7 months @400K, followed by 800K again, 2 months (3 at some IO's) prior to the date of application in 2020.

Similarly for income, they will require 12 x monthly transfers of 65K minimum from the extension date of 2019 - 2020 application.

For the combination funds and income must total 800K for the year.

 

You will not be fined or deported, but a further extension will be refused and you'll be expected to leave at the end of your current permission to stay, or given a 7 day extension to depart the Country.

[Sheryl]

But if planning to switch from 800k to 65k/month method you would not need to season 800 for 2 months at the end of the year, surely? I think just maintain 400k and simultaneously document 12 consecutive 65k transfers in?

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[marcusarelus]

9 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

They will but you should find out from your own IO their interpretation of the combination method.

There are currently two different interpretations being applied by IO's.

Whichever interpretation, you still require 12 x monthly transfers to meet the income requirement part, so if you missed a month, it could screw up your next application.

So, you are saying the combination method is figured each month and not by year.  So if SS does not deposit each month (they skipped me for 3 months a few years ago).  I'd be out of luck for the combination method as would any poor unsuspecting retiree who didn't know they figured it each month and would not listen to SS making up their mistake the following month.  They skipped me for 3 months and then gave me a deposit for all three months. 

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

But if planning to switch from 800k to 65k/month method you would not need to season 800 for 2 months at the end of the year, surely? I think just maintain 400k and simultaneously document 12 consecutive 65k transfers in?

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

If you could document 12 x monthly transfers, that qualifies for the income method. No need for any funds in the bank.

If you maintained 400k in the bank then you'd only require 12 x monthly transfers of 35,000 to qualify for the combination totalling over 800K.

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, marcusarelus said:

So, you are saying the combination method is figured each month and not by year.  So if SS does not deposit each month (they skipped me for 3 months a few years ago).  I'd be out of luck for the combination method as would any poor unsuspecting retiree who didn't know they figured it each month and would not listen to SS making up their mistake the following month.  They skipped me for 3 months and then gave me a deposit for all three months. 

There are rules for the funds method.

There are rules for the income method.

For the combination, the rules for the funds follow that of the funds only part, the income part follow that of the income only part.

The 2 combined must total 800K minimum annually.

 

The funds will be based annually in a Thai bank.

The income will be based on 12 x monthly transfers throughout the year.

[marcusarelus]

7 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

There are rules for the funds method.

There are rules for the income method.

For the combination, the rules for the funds follow that of the funds only part, the income part follow that of the income only part.

The 2 combined must total 800K minimum annually.

 

The funds will be based annually in a Thai bank.

The income will be based on 12 x monthly transfers throughout the year.

So I'll be clear.  If SS makes a mistake (happened to me) and drops my payment for 3 months and then pays me for 3 months in one month if I'm using the combination method, I'll be kicked out of the country even if I have a total (on deposit and monthly income) of 800k in the bank? 

[smedly]

On 5/7/2019 at 7:30 PM, marcusarelus said:

So when I get my extension next year and change from 800k to the income method I would not have to show proof I complied with the 400k rule all year only that I had 65k coming in every month? 

If you get a 12 month extension based on 800k/400k rules then you must comply with those rules for that extension up until your next extension application, if you then switch to income method then those rules will apply for that extension

 

How this works in practise will be interesting, IMO the whole thing is one massive Cluster XXXX

[smedly]

On 5/7/2019 at 8:51 PM, Tanoshi said:

Provided you have 12 x income transfers from the date of your previous extension, then no funds in the bank required.

That is wrong, if previous extension was based on bank balance then you must adhere to the rules for that extension and that means 400k balance for 9 months and 800k balance for 3 months after

 

If you have then completed the income rules for your next extension 65k x 12 then you are set provided you adhered to the rules set by your previous extension 

 

as I said in my previous post - these new rules are complete nonsense and unworkable

[smedly]

On 5/8/2019 at 11:20 AM, MikeN said:

Therefore the 400k is a requirement of your current visa extension, not next years ..... BUT a breach of this year’s visa conditions would not look good when applying for an extension next year even if you change to the income method. The good old CATCH-22 !

 I would be keeping the 400k in the bank even if I was changing to the income method next year.....which of course means that you could be eligible for the combo method.

correct

[smedly]

20 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

You will not be fined or deported, but a further extension will be refused and you'll be expected to leave at the end of your current permission to stay, or given a 7 day extension to depart the Country.

oh really and who told you this ?

 

How do you know a ban will not be a penalty ?

[Tanoshi]

3 hours ago, smedly said:

That is wrong, if previous extension was based on bank balance then you must adhere to the rules for that extension and that means 400k balance for 9 months and 800k balance for 3 months after

 

If you have then completed the income rules for your next extension 65k x 12 then you are set provided you adhered to the rules set by your previous extension 

If you read what I've previously stated, the time to change funds/income is when you are granted your extension based on funds from the previous year, then start the monthly transfers for the following years extension based on income. 12 x monthly transfers. No funds in the bank required.

That has been confirmed by my IO.

 

Changing part way through an extension is the tricky issue, because in effect you'd be using the combination method. You'd still need to comply with the monthly transfers, but the amounts will vary depending on how mush funds you keep in the bank, but they must total 800K min per annum.

 

The IO's are in disarray with the ambiguously written orders, leading to different interpretations.

Your only going to get a specific questioned answered by your own office in respect of changing the method of financial proof.

My replies are based on questions and answers already provided by my IO.

Edited May 10, 2019 by Tanoshi

[smedly]

8 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

If you read what I've previously stated, the time to change funds/income is when you are granted your extension based on funds from the previous year, then start the monthly transfers for the following years extension based on income. 12 x monthly transfers. No funds in the bank required.

That has been confirmed by my IO.

If you confirmed this with "your IO" then up to you - it is still not adhering to the rules which are very clear about seasoning after you have been granted an extension based on bank balance

 

Like I said above - these new rules are complete nonsense and need a rethink 

 

I have proposed a much simpler method that satisfies all senarios 

 

Seasoned 400k 12 months a year for everyone no matter what method they use

 

Making it up to 800k for 3 months prior to renewal

or 

12 month average income transfers of at least 40kbaht a month again equaling a total of 800k for the full year

 

Simple and workable for all and equals 800k

[Tanoshi]

3 hours ago, smedly said:

oh really and who told you this ?

 

How do you know a ban will not be a penalty ?

How many have already reported being refused an extension.

How many of those have reported being fined, deported or banned ….. none.

 

Extensions grant you permission to stay for 1 year in advance, but the financial requirements are based from the previous year in order to grant the extension.

If you can't meet the financial requirements for your next extension, it will be refused.

 

There is no provision in law or Police orders to fine, deport or ban any foreigner for meeting the financial requirements. You cannot be on overstay as permission has already been granted to stay for 1 year, up until the date of your next extension renewal.

[smedly]

17 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Extensions grant you permission to stay for 1 year in advance, but the financial requirements are based from the previous year in order to grant the extension.

If you can't meet the financial requirements for your next extension, it will be refused.

the new rules changed that

[Tanoshi]

1 minute ago, smedly said:

If you confirmed this with "your IO" then up to you - it is still not adhering to the rules which are very clear about seasoning after you have been granted an extension based on bank balance

The seasoning for 3 months after your extension is granted, then 400k for 6/7 months, before topping up to 800k again is in order to comply with the financial requirements based on the funds method for your next extension application. (The financial proof is in arrears).

 

If you want to change, then start transferring 65K a month before your extension application based on funds from the previous year, in order to have 12 x monthly transfers for your next application based on income.

My IO do not request any proof of 800K in the bank for 3 months following granting an extension, until the next years application. No requirement to return with proof after 3 months.

 

Again, I'll repeat, you'll only get a definitive answer from your own IO depending on their interpretation and instigation of their local requirements. No one answer will fit all.

[smedly]

5 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

The seasoning for 3 months after your extension is granted, then 400k for 6/7 months, before topping up to 800k again is in order to comply with the financial requirements based on the funds method for your next extension application. (The financial proof is in arrears).

ask at jomtien and see how that goes

 

exactly why these rules are nonsense - they are open to interpretation 

 

and it won't be clear how that is going to work for at least another 9 months

 

 

 

Edited May 10, 2019 by smedly

[Tanoshi]

1 minute ago, smedly said:

the new rules changed that

How, where, please provide your proof, or stop scaremongering.

For an extension in 2020, you'll have to provide proof of 800K for 3 months, then 400K for 6.7 months, then 800K for 2/3 months from the period 2019 - 2020 to meet the funds criteria.

Similarly for income, your extension application in 2020, will be based on 12 x monthly transfers from 2019 - 2020.

 

I do not agree with the new order in relation to the funds method for retirement extensions.

BJ made a complete hash of the requirements in my opinion.