Warning! New Retirement Visa Rules - Hope This Is Of Interest.

[RichardEllis]

If an extension on retirement turns more difficult in time , and when people find it hard to comply with .

Why not just stay with the multiple and renew it every year , no bureaucratic questions and papers required anymore.

......................... Just a thought . If not willing to do , do it this way for a while untill you got your savings on a level

that you feel comfortable with and go the extension road again .

I believe this is a reasonable approach but assumes that Thais are welcoming to foreign retirees, are not scared shitless of farangs in general and have a trusting, non-xenophobic nature.

0 out of 3 not bad...

In my experience, projecting one's own reasoning ability and reasonableness onto Thai bureaucracy is a mistake. It is a mystery to me why so many Thais are so pleasant and lovely while others can be such a challenge. Still, probably the same back home which is why I came here.

Rich

Edited August 5, 2007 by RichardEllis

[RichardEllis]

If an extension on retirement turns more difficult in time , and when people find it hard to comply with .

Why not just stay with the multiple and renew it every year , no bureaucratic questions and papers required anymore.

......................... Just a thought . If not willing to do , do it this way for a while untill you got your savings on a level

that you feel comfortable with and go the extension road again .

Multiple? Can you explain a bit more?

Rich

[Jingthing]

On the form as posted it says it is for transactions of 20,000 or more at market rate.

Do they mean 20K baht or 20K US dollars?

If the form is only for over 20K dollars, I don't have any specific transfers above that amount, so it really would be impossible to get this form. Again, if it is for over 20K dollars as Mr. L says, maybe they only require it for transfers over 20K USD and the less official wire transfer form will suffice for smaller transfers? Egads! Did someone imply this was going to be simple.

I agree it is possible much more disturbing rule changes could be coming. I sure hope not. Again, I warn prospective future retirees considering Thailand that many of us are feeling we aren't welcome here.

Edited August 5, 2007 by Jingthing

[mellow1]

This thread is confusing.

Are you all now saying that the 400,000 balance must be kept for 3 months,and it cannot fall below this level.Or I will loose the TW Visa based on the 400,000 deposited rule.

1. In post 50 I quoted the regulation - I made no statement that 400k was required in bank 3 months - as far as I know that is not yet required - but the rule states that it is a requirement to use the 400k method so am sure at some point it will be required.

2. In post 51 I point out that the wording of regulation could give officer the option to say you must use 40k method if income meets that requirement. And I pointed out that the 3 month rule was not being required for 400k deposit method.

As far as I know it is still not required to have funds in bank 3 months for repeat extensions of stay for either marriage or retirement as most people in the system would not yet be aware of the new requirement.

Thank you for your reply and explanation lopburi 3.

These visa requirements are getting more troublesome all the time, and any security one may feel living in this country is truly an illusion.It is most certainly not a stable environment for the planning of a future for ones family.Anything can change at a whim, and there is certainly a big inconsistency in the interpretation of any law as well as its implementation.

[Lite Beer]

i am not a prophet and i hate to be a bearer of bad news. just trying to add 2+2 and use some common sense.

the result (from all indications) is that it is only a matter of time till immigration insists that we retirees prove that we not only possess BUT HAVE SPENT the 800k Baht per annum. through the grapevine i got this message from Pattaya immigration in february when i renewed our retiree visa.

I was wondering when you would dig this one up again.

I fail to understand how anyone can be expected to spend more money than they need to live on.

I for one would struggle to spend any where near that amount even if I wanted to.

I can understand having to have that amount in the bank for emergencies , but to spend it every year?

[R123]

Thanks much for the sensible postings by the likes of Lopburi3, Maestro and ProThaiExpat

Seems to me what we can discern from the current and recent immigration practice if we can accept what some are posting here, is that in certain cases, if not all, people applying for the "retirement" visa or extension based on the 800,000 baht in the bank(3 months) are being asked to provide original documentary proof from a bank that the source of the funds are from overseas.

The rules are the same the documents now required additional.

Right?

So we are playing with words to call it a "new retirement visa rule".

Just my guess but what think that even if the immigration require proof of the source of the funds, an original letter or form from the bank confirming the overseas origin of the funds ought to be sufficient.

Edited August 5, 2007 by R123

[Khun ?]

Looks to be like the days of the thousand $ a month farang are numbered.

If you only make enough to live in poverty back home, Thailand don't want the bottom wage earners either,

long term anyways.

[Fred Sanford]

Looks to be like the days of the thousand $ a month farang are numbered.

If you only make enough to live in poverty back home, Thailand don't want the bottom wage earners either,

long term anyways.

could be the case and if it is, a whole lot of people are gonna be shaken up about it

[chinthee]

I guess that's the reason for all the interest in Cambodia recently on this forum. Looks like the next stop for many from Thailand I would guess.

[tijnebijn]

If an extension on retirement turns more difficult in time , and when people find it hard to comply with .

Why not just stay with the multiple and renew it every year , no bureaucratic questions and papers required anymore.

......................... Just a thought . If not willing to do , do it this way for a while untill you got your savings on a level

that you feel comfortable with and go the extension road again .

Multiple? Can you explain a bit more?

Rich

Multiple entry non O , if you are over 50 years old . Its not hard to get in your home country at all.

They can ask for having a specific amount on your bank ( but not a heavy amount).

the oly thing with this visa you have to leave the country at any bordrepoint every 90 days , and when you leave ust before the expirydate of the given visa , another 90 days , so 15 months .

Their is no visits to any immigration office needed , only got to make a new multiple after the 15 months .

I mean can be a solution , at least you can stay not needing to bring the 800k in .

[Sheryl]

Does one, or does one not, still need a medical certificate? It is still listed on the mofa website but I seem to remember hearing it was dropped. I have to extend soon.

[Niloc]

Sheryl, seems to depend on where you apply for your next 12 months, the word here is that it has been removed but when I went up to Mae Hong Son in June, I ended up waiting four hours in the local hospital to see a doc for two minutes to provide the health certificate, not a complete waste of time as I needed one anyway to extend my drivers license for another year, the five year license has been scrapped for falang. now you renew every year...

Colin

Edited August 5, 2007 by Niloc

[Krub]

Does one, or does one not, still need a medical certificate? It is still listed on the mofa website but I seem to remember hearing it was dropped. I have to extend soon.

Should not be required anymorebut beter check with your local immigration office as someseem to still require it.

Bangkok, Pattaya and Phuket have done away with it for sure

[mellow1]

Looks to be like the days of the thousand $ a month farang are numbered.

If you only make enough to live in poverty back home, Thailand don't want the bottom wage earners either,

long term anyways.

could be the case and if it is, a whole lot of people are gonna be shaken up about it

The poverty level in Jan 2006 in the US is as follows.

Family of 3 $16,000/year or $1,383/month

" " 4 $ 20,000/year or $1,666/month

" " 5 $ 23,000/year or $1,950/month

A single person was just under 10,000

Most of the retired Farangs probably fall into the 3 to 5 category (pension no longer working).And although this would be the poverty level in the USA.I would say these same families here in Thailand would be far above the poverty level compared to actively working people,and living quite comfortably.If it wasn't for that,I have no idea why they would even be here.

[RichardEllis]

On the form as posted it says it is for transactions of 20,000 or more at market rate.

Do they mean 20K baht or 20K US dollars?

US Dollars.

If the form is only for over 20K dollars, I don't have any specific transfers above that amount, so it really would be impossible to get this form. Again, if it is for over 20K dollars as Mr. L says, maybe they only require it for transfers over 20K USD and the less official wire transfer form will suffice for smaller transfers? Egads! Did someone imply this was going to be simple.

TIT

I agree it is possible much more disturbing rule changes could be coming. I sure hope not. Again, I warn prospective future retirees considering Thailand that many of us are feeling we aren't welcome here.

Yes. I know it is politically incorrect to talk negatively about Thais on this board, but I have been feeling this for about a year, and many of my friends likewise. I doubt we are all wrong. Ah well.

Still, it *is* their country after all, and they are perfectly entitled to <deleted> it up if they want. And they do appear to want... at least the lazy, corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats seem to.

Rich

Edited August 5, 2007 by RichardEllis

[lotus eater]

They like for you to apply between 3-4 weeks early.

If the extension dates from the application/approval then they are lopping off the 3-4 weeks from the previous extension of 1 year, ie on this practice you are really being forced to pay every 11 months not 12. Is this so or is there a flaw in what I'm saying?

i am not a prophet and i hate to be a bearer of bad news. just trying to add 2+2 and use some common sense.

the result (from all indications) is that it is only a matter of time till immigration insists that we retirees prove that we not only possess BUT HAVE SPENT the 800k Baht per annum. through the grapevine i got this message from Pattaya immigration in february when i renewed our retiree visa.

I was wondering when you would dig this one up again.

I fail to understand how anyone can be expected to spend more money than they need to live on.

I for one would struggle to spend any where near that amount even if I wanted to.

I can understand having to have that amount in the bank for emergencies , but to spend it every year?

Many countries try to find a way to set the spending and/or assets bar at a particular level for the aspiring tourist and/or retiree. Thailand can/does also do this. The question is, have they set the assets bar at 800k with no spending stipulation or have they now set the spending minimum at 800k a year. I wish someone will disprove one of those suppositions by quoting his actual and recent experience. So far I see no such post.

If I assume the former and turn up 4 weeks before visa expiry with 800k in the bank for 3+ months, and in fact they were looking for a fresh 800k, I will be in a mess - and left with the hope that I can obtain, and get them to accept, proof that I've spent 800k acquired from atms and/or other foreign transfers.

As I said, it will be helpful if someone can assert that they got a visa, now, on the basis of showing a foreign sourced 800k in the bank and nothing else - but where some or all of the 800k was documented as having been there for more than 12 months.

[RichardEllis]

Thanks much for the sensible postings by the likes of Lopburi3, Maestro and ProThaiExpat

Seems to me what we can discern from the current and recent immigration practice if we can accept what some are posting here, is that in certain cases, if not all, people applying for the "retirement" visa or extension based on the 800,000 baht in the bank(3 months) are being asked to provide original documentary proof from a bank that the source of the funds are from overseas.

Yes but I am told by Immigration that ALL are required to present this proof, not just some. I thought this was clear but perhaps I have not been reading carefully enough.

The rules are the same the documents now required additional.

Right?

Right.

So we are playing with words to call it a "new retirement visa rule".

Only if you think that a new regulation isnt actually a new regulation but is in fact some kind of initiative test. oOr football or something.

Which you may do of course...

Just my guess but what think that even if the immigration require proof of the source of the funds, an original letter or form from the bank confirming the overseas origin of the funds ought to be sufficient.

Ought to be but isn't, at least according to Immigration, but it is possible you know better. I hate to interrupt your reverie with actual facts, but perhaps you ought to actually read the posts.

Is it really this hard to be understood here? Only it seems some people prefer their own assumptions, interpretations and prejudices rather than the facts provided by others who have actual experience. Hey ho, life is a great adventure.

As a mate once remarked, life is a bed of roses but you have to watch out for the pricks.

Rich

Edited August 5, 2007 by RichardEllis

[RichardEllis]

They like for you to apply between 3-4 weeks early.

If the extension dates from the application/approval then they are lopping off the 3-4 weeks from the previous extension of 1 year, ie on this practice you are really being forced to pay every 11 months not 12. Is this so or is there a flaw in what I'm saying?

i am not a prophet and i hate to be a bearer of bad news. just trying to add 2+2 and use some common sense.

the result (from all indications) is that it is only a matter of time till immigration insists that we retirees prove that we not only possess BUT HAVE SPENT the 800k Baht per annum. through the grapevine i got this message from Pattaya immigration in february when i renewed our retiree visa.

I was wondering when you would dig this one up again.

I fail to understand how anyone can be expected to spend more money than they need to live on.

I for one would struggle to spend any where near that amount even if I wanted to.

I can understand having to have that amount in the bank for emergencies , but to spend it every year?

Many countries try to find a way to set the spending and/or assets bar at a particular level for the aspiring tourist and/or retiree. Thailand can/does also do this. The question is, have they set the assets bar at 800k with no spending stipulation or have they now set the spending minimum at 800k a year. I wish someone will disprove one of those suppositions by quoting his actual and recent experience. So far I see no such post.

Neither do I.

If I assume the former and turn up 4 weeks before visa expiry with 800k in the bank for 3+ months, and in fact they were looking for a fresh 800k, I will be in a mess - and left with the hope that I can obtain, and get them to accept, proof that I've spent 800k acquired from atms and/or other foreign transfers.

This was not my experience. My 800k was 3 years old.

As I said, it will be helpful if someone can assert that they got a visa, now, on the basis of showing a foreign sourced 800k in the bank and nothing else - but where some or all of the 800k was documented as having been there for more than 12 months.

As I have already stated. I took the following:

Passport

Letter from the bank verifying bank balances

Bank books

FX transfer form verifying import of money 3 years ago

2 pictures 4cm x 6cm

A Thai legal eagle.

I got my visa renewed on August 1st, but I did have to go home first and collect the FX transfer form which neither I not anyone else had been a new requirement on August 1st.

That should help, everything else is speculation and troll bait.

Rich

Edited August 5, 2007 by RichardEllis

[Naam]

if... -repeat if- the impression is correct that the government wants to raise the financial bar permitting foreigners to live in Thailand, it is only logical that sooner or later just "showing" 800k once a year will not suffice but evidence will be asked that this money is also spent.

the next logical step would be to tax the foreign remittancies in case no double tax agreement exists.

[lotus eater]

If I assume the former and turn up 4 weeks before visa expiry with 800k in the bank for 3+ months, and in fact they were looking for a fresh 800k, I will be in a mess - and left with the hope that I can obtain, and get them to accept, proof that I've spent 800k acquired from atms and/or other foreign transfers.

This was not my experience. My 800k was 3 years old.

As I said, it will be helpful if someone can assert that they got a visa, now, on the basis of showing a foreign sourced 800k in the bank and nothing else - but where some or all of the 800k was documented as having been there for more than 12 months.

As I have already stated. I took the following:

Passport

Letter from the bank verifying bank balances

Bank books

FX transfer form verifying import of money 3 years ago

2 pictures 4cm x 6cm

A Thai legal eagle.

I got my visa renewed on August 1st, but I did have to go home first and collect the FX transfer form which neither I not anyone else had been a new requirement on August 1st.

That should help, everything else is speculation and troll bait.

Rich

Excellent. I'd better obtain and preserve a the bank transfer form.

The accompanying thai legal eagle I'll hope to do without.

[R123]

According to post # 16 , the immigration told that poster that a letter from the bank was sufficient for proving the source of the funds, so I am actually reading these postings, and recognize the sane ones from....... the others.

Have a nice day!

Edited August 5, 2007 by R123

[lopburi3]

They like for you to apply between 3-4 weeks early.

If the extension dates from the application/approval then they are lopping off the 3-4 weeks from the previous extension of 1 year, ie on this practice you are really being forced to pay every 11 months not 12. Is this so or is there a flaw in what I'm saying?

i am not a prophet and i hate to be a bearer of bad news. just trying to add 2+2 and use some common sense.

the result (from all indications) is that it is only a matter of time till immigration insists that we retirees prove that we not only possess BUT HAVE SPENT the 800k Baht per annum. through the grapevine i got this message from Pattaya immigration in february when i renewed our retiree visa.

I was wondering when you would dig this one up again.

I fail to understand how anyone can be expected to spend more money than they need to live on.

I for one would struggle to spend any where near that amount even if I wanted to.

I can understand having to have that amount in the bank for emergencies , but to spend it every year?

Many countries try to find a way to set the spending and/or assets bar at a particular level for the aspiring tourist and/or retiree. Thailand can/does also do this. The question is, have they set the assets bar at 800k with no spending stipulation or have they now set the spending minimum at 800k a year. I wish someone will disprove one of those suppositions by quoting his actual and recent experience. So far I see no such post.

If I assume the former and turn up 4 weeks before visa expiry with 800k in the bank for 3+ months, and in fact they were looking for a fresh 800k, I will be in a mess - and left with the hope that I can obtain, and get them to accept, proof that I've spent 800k acquired from atms and/or other foreign transfers.

As I said, it will be helpful if someone can assert that they got a visa, now, on the basis of showing a foreign sourced 800k in the bank and nothing else - but where some or all of the 800k was documented as having been there for more than 12 months.

You do not lose any time - it will be one year from end of current extension of stay.

There has been no requirement to spend any sum of money.

[Fred Sanford]

A year ago it was visa exempt that shocked an awed the thai visa world with hundreds of members pouring over threads with concern. Now it's the retirement people. One can only wonder who's next.

[Jingthing]

Lets get one thing straight.

I know of no country in the world that requires that a specific amount be SPENT in their country by foreign retirees. Name one. I challenge you. That is not going to happen, even in Thailand!

What might very well happen, and is indeed a policy in some countries is that they require a minimum amount to be TRANSFERRED into the country per year. If this does happen in Thailand, and it might, it will most likely effect both those with pensions and those using the bank account method.

If Thailand is going to go down this sad road, if you are reading this and have any voice in immigration, please consider that the required amount should be LESS for those owning their homes in Thailand (condos are legal anyway). This is what Mexico does. They require half the amount to home owners. If this policy comes into play and I decide to keep trying to stay, and there is no allowance for owners, I will probably sell my condo so I have to pay rent.

Also, this absurd speculation that this change has already occurred is totally bizarre and wrong. The thread has nothing to do with that speculation. It might come. It might not. It hasn't as of yet, so please let us deal with the situation as it is now. OK?

BTW, if it is really true that one really needs that official transfer form for your initial wire to Thailand, I personally will have to start all over. I never transferred in over 20K USD on one wire (I split them up) so I cannot produce that form.

Edited August 5, 2007 by Jingthing

[aznyron]

hi I just have a silly question to ask why does the 800.000 baht have to come from outside the country ?

and second of all I dont give a dam what they do any more

it seem to me there other countries willing to take your money with out the bull shit

I read some place that Vietnam let farlong have home ownership

Now correct me if I am wrong

[Mr_Dave]

It seems like for me at least they have implicitly added a "foreign-sourced income requirement" to the "800K deposit from abroad" requirement.

It is possible that things would have worked better if I'd had a Thai speaking attorney with me.

No, not any better.

On August 1st, I went in for the usual, one-year extension of time to stay for retirement.

Money sitting in the bank since 4 months ago, from abroad, all nice and proper.

But I had exactly the same problem described in the original post and by others on this thread.

I did have a Thai-speaking attorney with me.

Same attorney I've used in previous years: a visa specialist who goes to Suan Plu (Bangkok Immigration office) several times every week.

He does everything, I just follow along.

Previous years, never a problem.

This year, he seemed stunned.

He stumbled and stammered to explain to me.

I'd say, he was caught completely unaware.

I received extension of one month only.

[distortedlink]

The imposed rule: must have 800000 baht in a Thai bank for three months prior to visa application or extension is old hat, hardly worth mentioning.

Immigration sometimes ask where funds originate because as usual there are always some farangs that try to abuse the system, for example, borrowing money from friends or relatives to be able to show the correct financial amounts to Immigration then paying the monies back to the lenders, if the lenders are lucky.

Normally if applicants are regular annual visitors to immigration and their bank funds are in order, clear to see and don't appear iffy, these people will have no problems with few questions asked.

Be aware, be very aware, that those who do lend money to friends on good will, so as to help them acquire visas are putting their own future here in jeopardy if immigration insists in knowing how the funds were obtained and any names of lenders are mentioned.

Edited August 5, 2007 by distortedlink

[Jingthing]

hi I just have a silly question to ask why does the 800.000 baht have to come from outside the country ?

and second of all I dont give a dam what they do any more

it seem to me there other countries willing to take your money with out the bull shit

I read some place that Vietnam let farlong have home ownership

Now correct me if I am wrong

There is BS dealing with most any government. My home country the USA comes to mind. They care about the source because they want you for your new money and they don't want you to work or run a business in Thailand with a retirement visa (and no work permit).

Edited August 5, 2007 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

It seems like for me at least they have implicitly added a "foreign-sourced income requirement" to the "800K deposit from abroad" requirement.

It is possible that things would have worked better if I'd had a Thai speaking attorney with me.

No, not any better.

On August 1st, I went in for the usual, one-year extension of time to stay for retirement.

Money sitting in the bank since 4 months ago, from abroad, all nice and proper.

But I had exactly the same problem described in the original post and by others on this thread.

I did have a Thai-speaking attorney with me.

Same attorney I've used in previous years: a visa specialist who goes to Suan Plu (Bangkok Immigration office) several times every week.

He does everything, I just follow along.

Previous years, never a problem.

This year, he seemed stunned.

He stumbled and stammered to explain to me.

I'd say, he was caught completely unaware.

I received extension of one month only.

OK, there certainly does appear to be a pattern.

Can you tell us exactly what they asked of you? What forms? Going back how many years?

[dukkha]

Renewed my retirement visa in July, with embassy letter of pension verfication, the only document that was cited was the Embassy Letter, all my bank statements etc. were of no interest to the immigration officer and no medical certifcate requested.

Sheryl, seems to depend on where you apply for your next 12 months, the word here is that it has been removed but when I went up to Mae Hong Son in June, I ended up waiting four hours in the local hospital to see a doc for two minutes to provide the health certificate, not a complete waste of time as I needed one anyway to extend my drivers license for another year, the five year license has been scrapped for falang. now you renew every year...

Colin