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

[Krub]

I think it is simple what the immigration authorities require. They want to see that you have a regular source of funds from overses to support your living in Thailand. You are required to prove that either you have Baht800.00.- or so coming in every year from overseas which you spend or that you have a regular monthly income also coming in from overseas which you spend. Certain individuals abuse this, they borrow money from friends or have a friend remit the money that they need in through their account. Its not their money but because it is sitting in their account they think they can trick the immigration autorities. People who wish to support themselves on income from Thailand who do not have work permits are not welcome. They want money from overseas, brought into Thailand and spent here. (People who worked in Thailand and have since retired are a different case)

In order to satisfy themselves that you are a genuine applicant there is one final requirement: " The Immigration Officer reviewing the application reserves the right to ask more additional documents." That is much of the problem. They can actually put a fly in the ointment anytime they wish. All documents must either be issued by a competant Thai authority such as a Thai Bank (Not a foreign bank in Thailand) or a consular official. I don't think ATM receipts will cut the cake but I could be wrong. I don't think a deposit receipt from Bkk bank that is two years old will prove that you are bringing funds into the country every year. Nor is the fact that you have Baht 800,000 sitting in your account is sufficient proof that the money is yours. And they know it. Hence they try to insist that it remains in your account for the three months in the hope that no friends can lend you the money for so long.

Unfortunately many are trying to cut corners and cheat the system which means that genuine applicants have to jump through more hoops. "C'est la vie" as the Thais would say!

Yes the 3 month deposit is new from last year but at least we no longer have to produce a doctor's certificate when renewing this year.

Very balanced to the point for a first post.

One point is that you 'interpret' the official written rules which do not speak of fresh money at all but only mention a balance of 800K or a regular income/pension of at least 65K or a combiantion of both.

The actual text only says :

Account deposit with a bank in Thailand of no less than baht 800.000 as shown in bank transactions for the last 3 months

or

Proof of income of not less than baht 65.000 per month

The details of how to 'prove' these conditions are very varried and depend on the immigrtaion office and even within the same office on the individual officer.

The official written rules only ask for 'certificate of local bank account deposit together with copies of bank account records' for the 800K route and 'Proof of income e.g retirement pension, interest earnings, dividends, etc..' for the income route.

All other discussion on this board on the subject is on how each applicant has been treated and asked for different documents based on the above rules

[Krub]

Here is a scan of the article 7.21 related to the retiree rules for extension as of October 1 2006

I have not scanned the number 6 as it is related to retirees who have continously applied prior to October 21 1998

Edited August 5, 2007 by Krub

[lotus eater]

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.

At my (first) extensionearlier this year of my non immg o visa they extended for 12 months from that date - not from the visa expiry. But perhaps this happens only for the first extension.

[Magpies13]

Hello all, please be patient with me and try not to call me stupid. I am reading all about this retirement visa requirements and am left very confused. I am marrying a Thai girl in January next year and we own a condo in Bangkok. I am not planning on retiring to Thailand for about three years but have made some preliminary investigations at the Thai consulate in Melbourne, Australia. I was told that if I owned property OR met the money deposit requirements I would have no problem in obtaining a retirement visa. can anyone advise if this is the case. Thankyou

Magpies 13

[Krub]

Hello all, please be patient with me and try not to call me stupid. I am reading all about this retirement visa requirements and am left very confused. I am marrying a Thai girl in January next year and we own a condo in Bangkok. I am not planning on retiring to Thailand for about three years but have made some preliminary investigations at the Thai consulate in Melbourne, Australia. I was told that if I owned property OR met the money deposit requirements I would have no problem in obtaining a retirement visa. can anyone advise if this is the case. Thankyou

Magpies 13

What we are discussing in this thread is an extension of stay based on retirement for applicants who are already in Thailand and who apply within Thailand.

If you apply for a VISA in Melbourne, there are many options one of which would be to obtain a Non-Immigrant O-A visa which will be valid for 1 year with multiple entries of 90 days each within the validity of the visa.

Required documents for this visa depends on each Thai Embassy/Consulate so please check with them in Melbourne or where you plan to apply.

I do not think that ownership of a condo alone would allow you to either get a visa before you leave Thailand nor allow you an extension of stay whithin Thailand.

Edited August 6, 2007 by Krub

[Lance_A_Lot]

"First, if you haven't had the money in the bank for 3 months they will want to give you a 1-month visa."

I was concerned about this 'new' regulation for yearly extension(s) as my bank account was low. I asked the officer who handles retirement visa extensions at the Pattaya (Jomtien) branch of Immigration about this, and he replied that there is no need to worry. He said that since I've had extensions for years, the money only has to be in the bank for a couple of days before applying. I have heard on this forum that the regulation may be enforced at some point in the near future; but, who really knows in LOS?

Also, for extensions, the 800,000. Baht figure is not based solely on amount on deposit in Thai bank(s). Rather, it is the total of monthly retirement income multiplied by twelve (yearly income), plus the amount on deposit which must equal or exceed the 800,000. Bt. figure.

[Krub]

"First, if you haven't had the money in the bank for 3 months they will want to give you a 1-month visa."

I was concerned about this 'new' regulation for yearly extension(s) as my bank account was low. I asked the officer who handles retirement visa extensions at the Pattaya (Jomtien) branch of Immigration about this, and he replied that there is no need to worry. He said that since I've had extensions for years, the money only has to be in the bank for a couple of days before applying. I have heard on this forum that the regulation may be enforced at some point in the near future; but, who really knows in LOS?

Also, for extensions, the 800,000. Baht figure is not based solely on amount on deposit in Thai bank(s). Rather, it is the total of monthly retirement income multiplied by twelve (yearly income), plus the amount on deposit which must equal or exceed the 800,000. Bt. figure.

Yes it shows how the rules (which are very simple,I posted a copy of them 2-3 posts earlier) are interpreted differently by different immigration offcies/oficers.

the 800K figure has always been either a bank balance or a combination of a bank balance and of a yearly income. if solely yearly income it is a minimum of 65K a month.

Edited August 6, 2007 by Krub

[wowpow]

Pattaya Im migration Rules - as I found them

When I went to Immigration late January they confirmed that the 800,000 baht in the bank was only for the first time application. I also found that they reduced the extension to the 30 days permission to visit Visa free to 7 days but the fee of 1900 baht remains the same.

When I went to report my 90 days at the same address - now over 5 years. I was told that I had to renew my retirement Visa on 20th July - which I knew - he then said and no extension - I did not know than any extension was possible? I said "and 800,000 in the bank" he replies "Yes" I said " but three months not necessary?" reply " Three months is necessary" "Are you sure" "I am VERY sure".

On 19th July I went to renew my Visa. It is always a worry as you don't know what new "rules" they will spring on you. Also they don't like you applying before the last week of the old Visa. This means if anything goes wrong and you don't get the new Visa you have urgent problems. I go very early, I dress nicely, I smile a lot. In addition to the usual papers. I had to get photocopies of all my bank book pages back to when the money came in from abroad. I also had to get a photocopy of my first arrival stamp in my passport.

[Sheryl]

There is a form showing receipt of funds by wire transfer from abroad regardless of amount, I am out of country at present so can't check to see what it's called but the bank always has it (altho, at least in the case of my bank, doesn't give it to you un less you ask for it). They are small forms about the size of a half piece of paper in length. Last time I transferred in over US $20,000 and the form I got was much longer so m ay be a different form -- but there is a form for smaller amounts. And banks keep them on file at their HQ for at least a few years.

In both my original application (3-4 years back) and at every renewal since I have collected the transaction forms showing date of transfer of the money from abroad and gotten a letter from my bank certifying current balance and listing the transfers of income from abroad (date, amount). I have always brought along with me to immigration the actual transfer receipts but in past the Bank letter plus my bank book (and endless photocopies) have always been enough.

It looks to me that the only new thing is the requirement that the money have been transferred at least 3 months prior to the expiry of the visa...which has me very worried as due to a bank snafu my transfer this year came in just a week short of that period. I'll be trying to renew next week (in Bkk) & let you all know what happens....

It seems so obvious as not to be worth saying, but...it is important what impression you make on the immigration officer and they do have the discretionary power to ask for additional documents or simply refuse to grant you the extension no matter what. I always dress up for the occasion (as one would for say a serious business meeting) and take care to be polite and appear refined. Seems obvious I know but I do see farang guys in sloppy dress there. Shirt and tie, fellows, and closed shoes not sandals. You need to look like their conception of a "desirable"character!

[Lance_A_Lot]

"Also they don't like you applying before the last week of the old Visa."

Thai Immigration law states that an Non-Immigrant Retirement Visa may be extended three months before the expiration date.

Two years ago I did renew three months before expiration. The officer was curious as to my motives. I just told him that I was leaving for an extended period and that I would not return until after the stated expiration date. No problem encountered, extension granted.

[Krub]

"Also they don't like you applying before the last week of the old Visa."

Thai Immigration law states that an Non-Immigrant Retirement Visa may be extended three months before the expiration date.

Two years ago I did renew three months before expiration. The officer was curious as to my motives. I just told him that I was leaving for an extended period and that I would not return until after the stated expiration date. No problem encountered, extension granted.

Hi

Do you have a link to an official text saying this ?

Thanks

[R123]

Grateful to you WowPow for sharing your experiences at the immigration(post #188) in July.

Appears to me that if your experience is a reflection of the current immigration practice, then for applicants who seek to rely upon the 800,000 transferred here in previous years, (and relied upon to satisfy the financial condition of 800,000 baht) the immigration are seeking not only evidence of the source of the funds, but also evidence tracing it through Thai bank records, namely, from sourcing up to the present time.

What do others think?

Edited August 6, 2007 by R123

[OneeyedJohn]

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.

At my (first) extensionearlier this year of my non immg o visa they extended for 12 months from that date - not from the visa expiry. But perhaps this happens only for the first extension.

In April 2002 I arrived by air from Vientiane to C Mai with a 3 month Non O valid until July 2002. I applied for a long term visa in July and 3 visits later was granted a long term visa that was valid until April 2003. After that further extensions were always dated from the expiry date. ( 4 in total )

I presume the same thing will happen this year when my 3 month Non o ( acquired last week in Laos ) is converted into a 1 year .

[aznyron]

with all the talk about 800K baht in bank and 65K a month coming in to thai.

just would like to know when I did my visa they used the 40 to 1 formular

does that same formular still in practice or are they using the calculator to get the true amount

[TheWizardofRnR]

How does it work if I retired after working in Thailand for 14 years ....my money's here not there

[20yearsinthai]

How does it work if I retired after working in Thailand for 14 years ....my money's here not there

That is also my predicament--I was planning on using my savings from work here to meet the 800K requirment and to just keep that cash in low interest account as visa/emergency/opporitunity cash, while funding my day to day expenses from US investments (god bless Junk bonds). Makes no sense to send the money out and then back in again

cambodia beckons

[fredcyber]

The requirement that the money must come from overseas is not new and I guess they are perfectly entitled to ask for proof of this.

I draw my money down using a credit card and I have all of the card statements showing this. Does anyone know if these would be acceptable proof if asked?

The present regulations are illogical anyway. If the objective is to ensure that foreign retirees bring money of at least 65,000 baht a month into Thailand (and presumably spend it here ) the only way is to insist on the monthly income route.

This is difficult to square with the 40,000 a month requirement for a married person (in my experience marriage adds cost) and even more difficult to understand when a person aged over 50 with a thai child has no requirement to show any income ( when for sure, a wife plus children, is even more burdensome.

[Jingthing]

The requirement that the money must come from overseas is not new and I guess they are perfectly entitled to ask for proof of this.

I draw my money down using a credit card and I have all of the card statements showing this. Does anyone know if these would be acceptable proof if asked?

The present regulations are illogical anyway. If the objective is to ensure that foreign retirees bring money of at least 65,000 baht a month into Thailand (and presumably spend it here ) the only way is to insist on the monthly income route.

This is difficult to square with the 40,000 a month requirement for a married person (in my experience marriage adds cost) and even more difficult to understand when a person aged over 50 with a thai child has no requirement to show any income ( when for sure, a wife plus children, is even more burdensome.

People qualifying on pensions are NOT being required to transfer that money to Thailand. Although I have read reporsts that some quirky offices do require that such as Nong Khai, but generally not. Only prove that they receive such a pension. There is no requirement to spend at any specific level, no matter how you qualify. Yes, retirees have been tolerated for the economic benefit to Thailand, of course, but the emphasis of the visa laws has been to insure that the retirees don't become a financial burden to Thailand.

Edited August 6, 2007 by Jingthing

[pieterjh]

I don't know whether all applicants need a special foreign transfer certificate, but my experience was identical and the officer even required these documents to transfer the visa and permission to stay from my old passport to my new passport.

[Penkoprod]

People qualifying on pensions are NOT being required to transfer that money to Thailand. Although I have read reporsts that some quirky offices do require that such as Nong Khai, but generally not. Only prove that they receive such a pension. There is no requirement to spend at any specific level, no matter how you qualify. Yes, retirees have been tolerated for the economic benefit to Thailand, of course, but the emphasis of the visa laws has been to insure that the retirees don't become a financial burden to Thailand.

I'm not sure i understand the last part of your last sentence. What financial burden COULD a non Thai (or a Thai national, for that matter) bring to bear on the country

AFAIK Thailand is a PAYG, "shit or get off the pot" type of country, with no social security, no "free" healthcare, nobody doling out billions of Baht to the needy etc

Please clarify

Penkoprod

[RichardEllis]

The requirement that the money must come from overseas is not new and I guess they are perfectly entitled to ask for proof of this.

I draw my money down using a credit card and I have all of the card statements showing this. Does anyone know if these would be acceptable proof if asked?

The present regulations are illogical anyway. If the objective is to ensure that foreign retirees bring money of at least 65,000 baht a month into Thailand (and presumably spend it here ) the only way is to insist on the monthly income route.

This is difficult to square with the 40,000 a month requirement for a married person (in my experience marriage adds cost) and even more difficult to understand when a person aged over 50 with a thai child has no requirement to show any income ( when for sure, a wife plus children, is even more burdensome.

People qualifying on pensions are NOT being required to transfer that money to Thailand. Although I have read reporsts that some quirky offices do require that such as Nong Khai, but generally not. Only prove that they receive such a pension. There is no requirement to spend at any specific level, no matter how you qualify. Yes, retirees have been tolerated for the economic benefit to Thailand, of course, but the emphasis of the visa laws has been to insure that the retirees don't become a financial burden to Thailand.

I know this is a tad off-topic, but I am simply stunned to hear that migration officers have the discretion to refuse a visa extension, and that (presumably) there is no appeal. The context of the poster I am referring to seems to be that if you don't look the part then the officer can simply refuse. Also that there appears to be such a wide 'discretion' capacity that different offices can apply quite different criteria (by the sound of it).

I know Thailand resembles a banana republic more than anything else but they do say they *want* to join the developed world. Seems to me a considerable change of attitude ought to be necessary before that happens..

Rich

[Jingthing]

I don't know whether all applicants need a special foreign transfer certificate, but my experience was identical and the officer even required these documents to transfer the visa and permission to stay from my old passport to my new passport.

Was this for the ORIGINAL money transfer the first year, or for all transfers?

[Jingthing]

The requirement that the money must come from overseas is not new and I guess they are perfectly entitled to ask for proof of this.

I draw my money down using a credit card and I have all of the card statements showing this. Does anyone know if these would be acceptable proof if asked?

The present regulations are illogical anyway. If the objective is to ensure that foreign retirees bring money of at least 65,000 baht a month into Thailand (and presumably spend it here ) the only way is to insist on the monthly income route.

This is difficult to square with the 40,000 a month requirement for a married person (in my experience marriage adds cost) and even more difficult to understand when a person aged over 50 with a thai child has no requirement to show any income ( when for sure, a wife plus children, is even more burdensome.

People qualifying on pensions are NOT being required to transfer that money to Thailand. Although I have read reporsts that some quirky offices do require that such as Nong Khai, but generally not. Only prove that they receive such a pension. There is no requirement to spend at any specific level, no matter how you qualify. Yes, retirees have been tolerated for the economic benefit to Thailand, of course, but the emphasis of the visa laws has been to insure that the retirees don't become a financial burden to Thailand.

I know this is a tad off-topic, but I am simply stunned to hear that migration officers have the discretion to refuse a visa extension, and that (presumably) there is no appeal. The context of the poster I am referring to seems to be that if you don't look the part then the officer can simply refuse. Also that there appears to be such a wide 'discretion' capacity that different offices can apply quite different criteria (by the sound of it).

I know Thailand resembles a banana republic more than anything else but they do say they *want* to join the developed world. Seems to me a considerable change of attitude ought to be necessary before that happens..

Rich

Not really off topic.

The lack of an appeals process is definitely disturbing.

I guess we all should listen to the old saws: don't bring to Thailand what you can't afford to leave in Thailand.

[Jingthing]

People qualifying on pensions are NOT being required to transfer that money to Thailand. Although I have read reporsts that some quirky offices do require that such as Nong Khai, but generally not. Only prove that they receive such a pension. There is no requirement to spend at any specific level, no matter how you qualify. Yes, retirees have been tolerated for the economic benefit to Thailand, of course, but the emphasis of the visa laws has been to insure that the retirees don't become a financial burden to Thailand.

I'm not sure i understand the last part of your last sentence. What financial burden COULD a non Thai (or a Thai national, for that matter) bring to bear on the country

AFAIK Thailand is a PAYG, "shit or get off the pot" type of country, with no social security, no "free" healthcare, nobody doling out billions of Baht to the needy etc

Please clarify

Penkoprod

OK, you make a very good point, in general.

But I can certainly imagine where a poor expat could potentially cost the Thai government money.

Lets say he went insane, lost his memory, developed sudden Alzheimers, had a heart attack, yes he could just be left to die. But not very good diplomacy for Thailand. It could cost them money to process him and ship him out. With a fat bank account to raid, no worries.

[the gent]

I rather think not. The responsibility for repatriation would ultimately fall upon the consulates either funded by their governments or the destitute's family.

Retirement is and will be at no cost to the Thai.

[Jingthing]

I rather think not. The responsibility for repatriation would ultimately fall upon the consulates either funded by their governments or the destitute's family.

Retirement is and will be at no cost to the Thai.

Look, I said as much. But you are not using your imagination. Surely police resources and maybe prisons or public hospitals would be used until it is sorted out. If there were thousands of such destitute types from rich countries, do you think police would just let them die on the street? By making sure retirees have resources, they nip this problem in the bud.

In general I agree with your point and you have challenged my assertion, but not completely.

Edited August 6, 2007 by Jingthing

[snowy]

I extended my retirement visa in Pattaya, on the 3 of August. And I used the combined method of money in bank and pension. I obtained a certificate of pension from my Consulate in Patttaya, no trip to MFA was required. Then I went to my bank, asked them to confirm my bank balance and wiring of money to Thailand. Took all of this and required copies of my passport and copies of the first and last updated page of my bankbook, no 3 month rule. Took all of this to immigration, presented them to the officer and 10 min later I was out of the office, my extension approved and was told to come back, and pick up my passport in the afternoon.

encouraging news - i also need to renew in Pattaya soon using the same criteria - my current retirement visa expires on October 4 - any idea on how soon i can apply for renewal? it sound like the longer i wait the more complicated it may be

This 3 mth rule has been around for sometime now, when i renewed my retirement visa last year (Oct) in Pattaya i asked the im officer about the the 3mth rule as my funds had only been in my acc for 1wk, he told me that it did not apply to me, only to fresh applicants not renewals.

Am i right to assume this has now changed as i have been living on my 800k and will need to top it up before my next renewal which is in Oct.

[Jingthing]

I extended my retirement visa in Pattaya, on the 3 of August. And I used the combined method of money in bank and pension. I obtained a certificate of pension from my Consulate in Patttaya, no trip to MFA was required. Then I went to my bank, asked them to confirm my bank balance and wiring of money to Thailand. Took all of this and required copies of my passport and copies of the first and last updated page of my bankbook, no 3 month rule. Took all of this to immigration, presented them to the officer and 10 min later I was out of the office, my extension approved and was told to come back, and pick up my passport in the afternoon.

encouraging news - i also need to renew in Pattaya soon using the same criteria - my current retirement visa expires on October 4 - any idea on how soon i can apply for renewal? it sound like the longer i wait the more complicated it may be

This 3 mth rule has been around for sometime now, when i renewed my retirement visa last year (Oct) in Pattaya i asked the im officer about the the 3mth rule as my funds had only been in my acc for 1wk, he told me that it did not apply to me, only to fresh applicants not renewals.

Am i right to assume this has now changed as i have been living on my 800k and will need to top it up before my next renewal which is in Oct.

Read post 188. This would indicate you are correct, the money must be topped over 800K 3 months prior for subsequent extensions.

Don't you love it? They tell you one thing, you act on that, then you find out the situation is different sometimes too late to fix it.

We are being jerked around, folks.

Edited August 6, 2007 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

After all this, I am still unclear on exactly what I need from my bank.

So far, I think probably, some kind of official certificate about my INITIAL deposit. If your initial deposit was over 20K and they still have a record of it, no problem. In my case, I will probably have to ask for a special letter because I didn't go over 20K USD on the first transfer as I did multiple transfers. Apparently, my lack of psychic abilities during my first transfer may ultimately result in being denied an extension, if an officer demands that specific certificate (which I can't get) or if I try to transfer my old visa to a new passport. Clearly, this is all my fault.

Additionally, a foreign transfer receipt for all later deposits.

Again, I feel like I am reading tea leaves.

This could really be a big problem for people trying to these documents for past years. Were we supposed to have imagined their enforcement procedures in advance? And punished for not being psychic?

Edited August 6, 2007 by Jingthing

[ProThaiExpat]

Catch up post: Jingthing, my need and desire for Cherries Garcia is one of my last obsessions, but at 300 a pint, no way Jose. In Honolulu, one of the most expensive cities in the U.S., a pint goes for US 2.40 if you watch the sales.

The Baht has strengthened 20% or more but has the price of Ben & Jerries gone down. Of course not. Cheaper imports encourages outflows, which is a stated objective of BOT but the profit motive controls all.

The comments regarding a lack of appeal of an immigration officers exercise of discretion does not apply to Chiang Mai at least. Posted on a large permanent sign on the outside of the immigration building is the telephone number of the Chief of the Immigration Department which encourages all using the service to call the Chief if they have any complaint as to how they were treated. This sign went up last year or two when the new Chief was appointed.

Those who think Thailand is unique in the absence of appeal of an immigration officers decision should speak to the thousands of Thais who have been denied visas to the U.S. without an appeal.

Unfortunately many immigration rules are retaliatory in nature. Fortunately, the money motive in Thailand operates to make their immigration rules far less stringent that the U.S. or other countries too numerous to mention. As to retirees in general, I do know that Australia, Canada, the U.S. to name just a few, have no retiree program as Thailand does.