Will the 400,000 Baht Marriage Option.....

[click2delete]

While at the Pattaya Immigration for my 90 day report I asked about the 400,000 baht bank requirement for the marriage non-o extension. My first "under consideration" stamp was issued in Pattaya mid-September 2006.

It was my understanding from reading what Sunbelt had written, that I am "grandfathered" into the system meaning I can use 400,000 baht in the bank instead of showing income this year, next year and the years after that.

NOT SO according to Captain Pattraporn. For those of you who don't know who that is, she is the lady who sits in the back and signs off on just about everything the officers do in that office.

I sat down with the man who processes the applications and he directed me to speak to her. She remembered my wife and I and even asked about our baby - now 1 month old.

There as no communication error between us, she understood my question and I understood her answer.

I showed her my "under consideration" stamp from Sept 06 and asked her to confirm that I can use 400,000 baht instead of having to show income of 40,000 baht per month.

She told me that I can do that "this time". I asked her to elaborate and she told me and I'll quote as best I can, "I think that you can use 400,000 baht this year and next year - every year, but no more - Bangkok just tell me that after Oct 07 you can no longer use this, you must show 40,000 baht income from you or your wife."

I did not use the word "grandfathered" but did get the point across that I should be able to use this in 08 but she told me that she believed that too, but Bangkok has come up with a new "ruling" given to her in writing saying that they will no longer honor this. She agreed with me that I should be able to do this but she must follow the instructions from Bangkok.

In short, I can this year use 400,000 baht in the bank in lieu of having an income. She told me for next that I should start a business with my Thai wife and pay tax on the income.

Throughout the 5 minute conversation, she was very pleasant, helpful and her English was clear. I thanked her and left.

Has something changed Sunbelt?

[lapamita]

thai grandfatherd

same me investvisa for 3 years,,have for ever.................

for ever was lasting until 2004,,, when they changed moneyrequirment at 0% policy

thats thaigrantfatherd'

i not belived one word of thai authoritys since 2004

[click2delete]

Thailand is government by people on the same level as children. I firmly believe that there is an office of Expatriate Annoyance staffed by Colonel General Major Captain Pritipoaphorn Sumchai who spends his days thinking up ways to annoy the expats.

His office must be very busy.

[bdenner]

As I pointed out in earlier topics on this subject the Nong Khai office will grandfather this year (my application was accepted in April with only one 30 day stamp) but our next applications will only be granted on the income basis.

Not to say things will probably change --- as they do!

Edited May 12, 2007 by bdenner

[Thanyaburi Mac]

Thailand is government by people on the same level as children. I firmly believe that there is an office of Expatriate Annoyance staffed by Colonel General Major Captain Pritipoaphorn Sumchai who spends his days thinking up ways to annoy the expats.

His office must be very busy.

Still, things are pretty well "workable" with Thai Immigration.  I've been retired here for 15 years now, initially on the Non-O 90-day shuffle, then got tired of having to travel on my passport's schedule so shifted to the retirement extention.  Just try living in the U.S. legally for such a period w/o a green card, ain't "workable."  

Thank you Thai Immigration for at least having rules that can be lived with (even if the goal posts do change sometimes.)

Mac

[Krub]

Thailand is government by people on the same level as children. I firmly believe that there is an office of Expatriate Annoyance staffed by Colonel General Major Captain Pritipoaphorn Sumchai who spends his days thinking up ways to annoy the expats.

His office must be very busy.

Still, things are pretty well "workable" with Thai Immigration. I've been retired here for 15 years now, initially on the Non-O 90-day shuffle, then got tired of having to travel on my passport's schedule so shifted to the retirement extention. Just try living in the U.S. legally for such a period w/o a green card, ain't "workable."

Thank you Thai Immigration for at least having rules that can be lived with (even if the goal posts do change sometimes.)

Mac

Seconded (originaly from Europe but living more than 30 years in Japan)

[jumnien]

I've been here 10 years under various visa situations, currently marriage. I'm grateful that the Thai authorities do continue, year after year, to make it workable to enjoy living in Thailand. I can only imagine what would happen to a Thai with an income of 1,000 dollars a month who wanted to live in the United States for 10 or 20 years. Fortunately, things go pretty smoothly here in the Land of Smiles!

[JR Texas]

I've been here 10 years under various visa situations, currently marriage. I'm grateful that the Thai authorities do continue, year after year, to make it workable to enjoy living in Thailand. I can only imagine what would happen to a Thai with an income of 1,000 dollars a month who wanted to live in the United States for 10 or 20 years. Fortunately, things go pretty smoothly here in the Land of Smiles!

JR Texas: I have suggested many times over the past year that the grandfathered laws will eventually be abolished/abrogated and a level playing field will be created. This has repeatedly fallen on deaf ears. Maybe this is the first grandfathered law to go.

[Felt 35]

I believe Thailand is on the right track asking for proof of a regularly income source instead of having to show a lump sum once a year. It’s more naturally for most people and more in line with what many Western countries demand as a proof of income. Besides I believe it’s a way to (in some cases) pick out criminals who enter the Country.

[bernie66]

Income requirements are totally unfair to the poor. What if a Thai farmer had married a woman from laos? He will not make 40,ooo a month. So according to them he has no right to get married! Its just wrong.

[pnustedt]

I believe Thailand is on the right track asking for proof of a regularly income source instead of having to show a lump sum once a year. It’s more naturally for most people and more in line with what many Western countries demand as a proof of income. Besides I believe it’s a way to (in some cases) pick out criminals who enter the Country.

I disagree. It is a normal requirement for immigrants of most countries to be able to demonstrate that they can support themselves, but not necessarily to show a regular income.

An acquaintance of mine has substantial wealth, has just built a Bt10mil. house but has no regular income and he is not "grandfathered". So now he is reluctantly getting a job teaching English just so that he can show income to qualify for a visa.

I am in a similar situation but, so far, my status is "grandfathered". I have more money than necessary to support myself and family (because I have managed it well, not because I am a criminal) but I would not buy an annuity because I consider it a foolish investment, and I could not show a regular income. However, over the past couple of years I also have spent about Bt10 mill. here.

I believe the need to show a regular income benefits no one and, in many circumstsances, is detrimental to Thailand.

[JR Texas]

JR Texas: Thanks........I truly believe it is critical that we--the members of the expat community--open our eyes wide and speak the truth. Yes, we will disagree......but it seems obvious that the govt. is intent on raising the bar until it reaches all of us.....how much more proof do we need?

Now.....maybe some numbers will put this problem in proper perspective. Those of us with experience in Thailand know that the vast majority of Thai families (with one bread earner) earn about 5000 baht per month (4000-6000 baht per month).

But a "mixed" farang-Thai family must earn 45,000 baht per month, 9 times more than a "pure" Thai family. There is no good reason for this. And, surely, it has nothing to do with crime.

Shift to the USA: The average "pure" American family (with one bread earner) earns about $2083 per month. What would a Thai male married to an American female think about USA immigration policy if he was required to earn 9 times that amount, or $18,747 per month?

It seems obvious to me that the Thai system is extremely unfair, cruel and, sadly, deliberately designed to break up mixed farang-Thai families.

A few years back one only needed 200K in the bank. BUT, too many farang-Thai families were able to meet that requirement. So the bar was raised to 400K. BUT, too many farang-Thai families still managed to meet that requirement. SO, the money in the bank requirement was dropped and replaced by a 45K monthly income requirement.......slightly more than the average pension of a retired US worker.

Fairness would dictate changing the law to something like 100K in the bank OR 5K per month income. Given that will likely never happen, perhaps they will change it to 200K in the bank OR 10K per month income.

The "OR" is critical........ask yourself why they are not providing mixed farang-Thai families that option. Can you say xenophobia? I am sorry but that is what it appears to be.

Having said that, I do not think that most Thais would support this new law if they truly understood its implications.

[sgunn65]

I believe Thailand is on the right track asking for proof of a regularly income source instead of having to show a lump sum once a year. It's more naturally for most people and more in line with what many Western countries demand as a proof of income. Besides I believe it's a way to (in some cases) pick out criminals who enter the Country.

I disagree. It is a normal requirement for immigrants of most countries to be able to demonstrate that they can support themselves, but not necessarily to show a regular income.

An acquaintance of mine has substantial wealth, has just built a Bt10mil. house but has no regular income and he is not "grandfathered". So now he is reluctantly getting a job teaching English just so that he can show income to qualify for a visa.

I am in a similar situation but, so far, my status is "grandfathered". I have more money than necessary to support myself and family (because I have managed it well, not because I am a criminal) but I would not buy an annuity because I consider it a foolish investment, and I could not show a regular income. However, over the past couple of years I also have spent about Bt10 mill. here.

I believe the need to show a regular income benefits no one and, in many circumstsances, is detrimental to Thailand.

Having checked this out if you have money enough to live on then just have the equivalent of 40,000 baht per month (just under £600 UK) transferred to your thai bank each month and voila you have the income required.

I have had my UK bank HSBC set up an account for me in Bkk and they will be transerring the money which will cost nothing, and I should get the Thai exchange rate rather than the Uk rate (10% difference).

I am fairly sure this will be ok as you do not have to show income from work so income from investment or savings is still income.

If anyone can offer me evidence that i am going to

come undone with this please let me know so I can work something else out before I move to Bkk permanently in October

Thanks

[Krub]

Income requirements are totally unfair to the poor. What if a Thai farmer had married a woman from laos? He will not make 40,ooo a month. So according to them he has no right to get married! Its just wrong.

I think that in that case there is no financial requirements for a long term visa for the foreign wife

[lopburi3]

The only acceptable proof for income outside Thailand is a letter from your Embassy; and supporting documents if requested.

[Krub]

I believe Thailand is on the right track asking for proof of a regularly income source instead of having to show a lump sum once a year. It's more naturally for most people and more in line with what many Western countries demand as a proof of income. Besides I believe it's a way to (in some cases) pick out criminals who enter the Country.

I disagree. It is a normal requirement for immigrants of most countries to be able to demonstrate that they can support themselves, but not necessarily to show a regular income.

An acquaintance of mine has substantial wealth, has just built a Bt10mil. house but has no regular income and he is not "grandfathered". So now he is reluctantly getting a job teaching English just so that he can show income to qualify for a visa.

I am in a similar situation but, so far, my status is "grandfathered". I have more money than necessary to support myself and family (because I have managed it well, not because I am a criminal) but I would not buy an annuity because I consider it a foolish investment, and I could not show a regular income. However, over the past couple of years I also have spent about Bt10 mill. here.

I believe the need to show a regular income benefits no one and, in many circumstsances, is detrimental to Thailand.

Having checked this out if you have money enough to live on then just have the equivalent of 40,000 baht per month (just under £600 UK) transferred to your thai bank each month and voila you have the income required.

I have had my UK bank HSBC set up an account for me in Bkk and they will be transerring the money which will cost nothing, and I should get the Thai exchange rate rather than the Uk rate (10% difference).

I am fairly sure this will be ok as you do not have to show income from work so income from investment or savings is still income.

If anyone can offer me evidence that i am going to

come undone with this please let me know so I can work something else out before I move to Bkk permanently in October

Thanks

If you want to go the income way from abroad, you need to present Immigration with a letter from your EMbassy stating the more tha 40k per month income. The suporting documents might be required by your Embassy to establish the letter and amy be required as supporting documents by immigration but the letter is mandatory.

[BigSnake]

Hmmmm!! Don't sound right to me, my understanding it was Bt400000 in a Thai Bank or the monthly income. Better truck over and check for myself AGAIN. WOW!!

[jumnien]

The US embassy doesn't require any supporting documents. So effectively, that eliminates all financial requirements for a marriage visa in Thailand.

[Krub]

The US embassy doesn't require any supporting documents. So effectively, that eliminates all financial requirements for a marriage visa in Thailand.

This works if you have a US passport. the UK Embassy requires supporting documents.

Also we have seen reports where immigration have asked to see supporting documents in adition of the letter.

It is not a good idea to go the income way with a letter from Embassy without grounds for the letter

[astral]

I showed her my "under consideration" stamp from Sept 06 and asked her to confirm that I can use 400,000 baht instead of having to show income of 40,000 baht per month.

She told me that I can do that "this time". I asked her to elaborate and she told me and I'll quote as best I can, "I think that you can use 400,000 baht this year and next year - every year, but no more - Bangkok just tell me that after Oct 07 you can no longer use this, you must show 40,000 baht income from you or your wife."

I think this lady has misunderstood the instructions from Bangkok.

I suggest you write a polite letter to the Head of Immigration at Suan Plu,

his name and address should be displayed in the Pattaya Imm office,

asking him what the situation is.

I am sure he will clarify the situation once and for all.

[whopper]

the border run is looking better and better! For guys married and under 50 without monthly income.

[click2delete]

I showed her my "under consideration" stamp from Sept 06 and asked her to confirm that I can use 400,000 baht instead of having to show income of 40,000 baht per month.

She told me that I can do that "this time". I asked her to elaborate and she told me and I'll quote as best I can, "I think that you can use 400,000 baht this year and next year - every year, but no more - Bangkok just tell me that after Oct 07 you can no longer use this, you must show 40,000 baht income from you or your wife."

I think this lady has misunderstood the instructions from Bangkok.

I suggest you write a polite letter to the Head of Immigration at Suan Plu,

his name and address should be displayed in the Pattaya Imm office,

asking him what the situation is.

I am sure he will clarify the situation once and for all.

Let's be clear: She agreed with me that I SHOULD be able to use the 400,000 baht option this year, next year and thereafter just as I used it in September of 06. What she said clearly was the Bangkok had just informed her that this is not going be the case after this year. Specifically, it will not be an option after October 1st 2007.

As I am renewing in June, I can use it one last time.

There was no miscommunication.

[click2delete]

A good friend of mine who has lived here since 2001 owns a home across from a Colonel of the Royal Thai Police Bangkok. My friend is having dinner with this police official as we speak. He figured he would ask about what I was just told at Pattaya Immigration and it has been confirmed.

The 400,000 baht in the bank option goes away after Oct 1 of this year.

Here is the new information - they now want the Thai spouse to prove income which would go along with what Colonel Prattaporn told me at Pattaya Immigration. She told me to start a business with my Thai Wife to show income. I wondered why she didn't say I should just show income but she did not. Now I know why, they want the Thai Spouse to show the income.

So much for living here and supporting a Thai Wife and Family.

This information is 10 minutes old and comes from a very reliable source.

Edited May 12, 2007 by click2delete

[geoffphuket]

What baffles me is how the Thai authorities expect us to show 40k tax paid income when, except for a handfull of jobs, we're not allowed to work here. I have adequate anuall income from an offshore investment, but no regular income. I'm under 50 (just) and married with 1.5 children. At the moment I stay here with the Thai wife support and 400k bank deposit, but it looks likely I'll have to change it to the retirement system after this year.....more 'dead' money in the bank

geoffphuket

[sabaijai]

The US embassy doesn't require any supporting documents. So effectively, that eliminates all financial requirements for a marriage visa in Thailand.

Immigration in Chiang Mai at least requires a bank statement in addition to US embassy guarantee for the retirement visa. For the marriage visa I don't believe you need US embassy documentation, only bank proof.

[PeaceBlondie]

Pardon me, but if I could run this past you fast.

My mate is UK citizen married to a Thai. He makes 25K per month, and she makes less than 10K. He's thinking of changing from a B work visa to an O married to a Thai visa, but I told him their combined salaries have to total 40K. He can't be grandfathered in and doesn't have income from abroad. I advised him to stay on his B visa. Correct?

[click2delete]

Pardon me, but if I could run this past you fast.

My mate is UK citizen married to a Thai. He makes 25K per month, and she makes less than 10K. He's thinking of changing from a B work visa to an O married to a Thai visa, but I told him their combined salaries have to total 40K. He can't be grandfathered in and doesn't have income from abroad. I advised him to stay on his B visa. Correct?

Stop using the word "grandfathered" because the ###### Thais have killed Grandpa and his clause.

It's over.

Fini.

El Fin

Kaput.

No more Grandfather Clause after Oct 1.

[PeaceBlondie]

That's a hard word to stop using when you're a man with ten grandchildren, but I'll try.

I just meant there was no prior O visa for marriage to a Thai which might temporarily allow him to use the qualification prior to October 1, 2006. Now, should my friend not even bother trying to get an O and keep his B? Thanks.

[Sunny Valentine]

When I extended my extension based on marriage this February (I got it in 2005 first) they first wanted to see 1 Year of paid taxes (I have a WP and income since September last Year). So I applied again with 400000 in Bank. Got approved (but so late on the 30th day that I could not renew my WP, was lucky that Chonburi believed the story the next working day, and extended it!), but was told that I cannot do it with money in the bank next Year.

Lets see what happens. Pattaya Immigration might have knowledge of a until now unpublished new rule. Or (I rather bet my life's savings on this horse!) they have no clue as well as no respect for the rules, and just do as they please.

Sunny

[Sunny Valentine]

Pardon me, but if I could run this past you fast.

My mate is UK citizen married to a Thai. He makes 25K per month, and she makes less than 10K. He's thinking of changing from a B work visa to an O married to a Thai visa, but I told him their combined salaries have to total 40K. He can't be grandfathered in and doesn't have income from abroad. I advised him to stay on his B visa. Correct?

Guess he should try to somehow get a statement showing a higher income for his wife ......

How can he get a Work Permit with only 25 k escapes me, though ... I thought all Labor departments refuse to issue WPs with less than 30 or 40 k income? Or is he from SEA?

Sunny