Jump to content

Norwegian Embassy in Bangkok: New income documentation requirements


Recommended Posts

image.jpeg


The Royal Norwegian Embassy in Bangkok and consulates in Pattaya and Phuket has been forced to change the document requirement for confirmation of annual income on a short notice.

 

“Norwegian citizens in Thailand may need confirmation of their income/pension from Norway in connection with the extension of a one-year visa. In this connection, they ask the embassy to confirm annual income/pension.

 

As it is the annual income that needs to be confirmed, we have required presentation of the latest annual statement from NAV or the latest tax return. The Embassy has changed its practice and will no longer calculate future income based on documentation of monthly payments,” they write in on their Facebook page.

 

by Sofie Rønnelund

Photo: Royal Norwegian Embassy in Bangkok

 

Full story: https://scandasia.com/norwegian-embassy-in-bangkok-new-income-documentation-requirements/

 

-- ScandAsia 2023-09-02

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scubascuba3 said:

Daft rule, some people are probably transferring money rather than "income"

Just arrived Thailand, taxi  to embassy, handed over my tax report, id, 1000 baht, and got my documentation, taxi to hotel, lunch at the rooftop. In less than two hours from leaving airport.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, OJAS said:

Well, at least the Norwegian Embassy are still providing an income confirmation service for their expats, in stark contrast to their American, Australian and British counterparts! Makes me seriously wonder why that particular trio of embassies were unable to come up with similar documentary requirements, instead of merely hoisting the white flag of surrender by throwing their arms up in the air and pulling the plug.

 

The Aussies were just signing a stat dec re income, no proof needed. Obviously that was being exploited by some and saved  the expense of using an agent to circumvent the requirements.

Edited by giddyup
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

Very nice but what has that got to do with my post?

What did your post have to do with the OP? 

 

Sometimes it is ok to nice and just answer and reply as you want someone to reply to you. 

 

Shine on

Edited by Hummin
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OJAS said:

Well, at least the Norwegian Embassy are still providing an income confirmation service for their expats, in stark contrast to their American, Australian and British counterparts! Makes me seriously wonder why that particular trio of embassies were unable to come up with similar documentary requirements, instead of merely hoisting the white flag of surrender by throwing their arms up in the air and pulling the plug.

 

The British Embassy used to ask the applicant for current documents to prove their income, then came the requirement for the Embassy to "guarantee the submitted documents", as the Embassy argued that they do not have the resources or data access to verify the submissions, this was what caused the withdrawal from issuing letters, and hence where we are today.

Looks like the Norwegians are prepared to go that extra step.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hummin said:

What did your post have to do with the OP? 

 

Sometimes it is ok to nice and just answer and reply as you want someone to reply to you. 

 

Shine on

You're another sensitive sole. My post is relevant because lots of people won't have proof of income, so it's a problem for them, they transfer money monthly instead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

You're another sensitive sole. My post is relevant because lots of people won't have proof of income, so it's a problem for them, they transfer money monthly instead

Norwegian Embassy have an update for Norwegian citizens or those who have income or pentions in Norway who use the Norwegian embassy for documentation. 

 

How can your post be relevant if Im going to be as picky as you are are. 

 

Have a splended day Sir ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, OJAS said:

Well, at least the Norwegian Embassy are still providing an income confirmation service for their expats, in stark contrast to their American, Australian and British counterparts! Makes me seriously wonder why that particular trio of embassies were unable to come up with similar documentary requirements, instead of merely hoisting the white flag of surrender by throwing their arms up in the air and pulling the plug.

 

More fool the Norwegian embassy or maybe the numbers are small so easy to verify the documents provided or they are not bothering. It was not the embassies that caused this but the Thai government by wanting each embassy to check and verify each financial claim this would cost in time money and slow to a crawl every application for verification. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, OJAS said:

Well, at least the Norwegian Embassy are still providing an income confirmation service for their expats, in stark contrast to their American, Australian and British counterparts! Makes me seriously wonder why that particular trio of embassies were unable to come up with similar documentary requirements, instead of merely hoisting the white flag of surrender by throwing their arms up in the air and pulling the plug.

 

They don't do decent public service any more for the oiks. Neither in Thailand nor back home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

Correct, can't use transfer 65k method like some other countries

We can do, but for me who travel for work, do not transfer consistent 65k a month. Some months 20k some months 300k.

 

We have the option which I find the easiest way for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hummin said:

We can do, but for me who travel for work, do not transfer consistent 65k a month. Some months 20k some months 300k.

 

We have the option which I find the easiest way for me. 

Isn't that the point of the original story, can no longer get a retirement extension using transfers of 65k+ a month? instead have to get income document 

Edited by scubascuba3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scubascuba3 said:

Isn't that the point of the original story, can no longer get a retirement extension using transfers of 65k+ a month? instead have to get in ome document 

I can transfer 800k tomorow if I want, transfer 65k or more a month, but I prefer to transfer what I need because I can! See the difference? 

 

I can also travel on tourist visa, extension, visa exemption and extension, fly out and back, but I choose retirement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Hummin  -- to get us back on track (and not your individual situation):

 

The reason that Immo is pressuring certain embassies to verify claims of pension income is that they are trying to weed out those ex-pats who are trying to get around the financial requirements of a retirement extension (i.e., 65K baht per month from overseas; in-country bank account with liquid 800K baht pre/post extension date).

 

You, Hummin, may have the financial means to satisfy the Immo regs, but your embassy will need to provide proof of that to Thai Immo going forward. 

 

And the only way they can do that is by a sworn statement that you have a verifiable pension income of at least 65K baht per month.

 

As others have pointed out, an ex-pat in Thailand may have a 65K baht monthly income from assets other than pensions which no embassy is willing or able to verify.

 

That is where the injustice lies.  But, we ex-pats have to live within the rules. 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Hummin said:

I can transfer 800k tomorow if I want, transfer 65k or more a month, but I prefer to transfer what I need because I can! See the difference? 

 

I can also travel on tourist visa, extension, visa exemption and extension, fly out and back, but I choose retirement.

You've missed the point again, it's not about what you prefer, the 65k+ transfers are no longer valid, that's it, so only relevant to those who make the 65k+ transfers to get the retirement extension 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, khunjeff said:

1) By regulation, the embassy can only provide notarial services that are equivalent to what a US notary public is authorized to provide. That does not include verifying or guaranteeing financial claims of private citizens. 

 

2) The embassy has no ability to implement a fee for any service. All fees are set by the Office of Management and Budget after being published in the Federal Register, and are the same worldwide.

 

3) Fees for notarial services are not retained by the consular section, the embassy, the Bureau of Consular Services, or even the State Department - they are turned over to the Treasury Department as part of general government funds. 

Regulation or Federal Law?  If it is Federal Law under what statue?  So Embassy Notarizations are equivalent to a US State Commissioned Notarizations?   Under what Regulation or Federal does this come under? I was at one time a California Commissioned Notary so I know a little something about Notarizing documents.  A state commissioned notaries are required to be bonded. What would be the equivalent Federal Notary Commission? 

 

A notarized document and a sworn affidavit are two different things.  The US Embassy in the past issued income Affidavits.  In many cases Affidavits are as valuable as the paper it is written on.  

 

 

Edited by sqwakvfr
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Isn't that the point of the original story, can no longer get a retirement extension using transfers of 65k+ a month? instead have to get income document 

Just so that I can understand, you're saying that Norwegians are being treated the exact opposite to UK, US and Aus citizens, who can't get an income document and thus 65k transfers are OK for them, the Norwegians are no longer allowed to use 65k transfers but must have income statements.

Confusing, no wonder my local office will only accept (or so I'm told, I've not asked them personally) money in the bank for both retirement and marriage.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, foreverlomsak said:

Just so that I can understand, you're saying that Norwegians are being treated the exact opposite to UK, US and Aus citizens, who can't get an income document and thus 65k transfers are OK for them, the Norwegians are no longer allowed to use 65k transfers but must have income statements.

Confusing, no wonder my local office will only accept (or so I'm told, I've not asked them personally) money in the bank for both retirement and marriage.

Yes that appears to be it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...