2 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

the money came from your account in Canada.

Of course I wouldn't produce anything they did not ask for, however one can never be over prepared. Simplifying the question , does money that you transfer yourself from a foreign bank qualify under the following rule?

Evidence of income such as pensions, interest or dividends, etc., and/or

16 minutes ago, JDMCanuck said:

I  was always under the impression that for a Retirement extension it had to be Pensions only or from a Government source,  which I know now was possibly wrong.

As pointed out in link in your post. 

For income method #3

Note... Pensions or interest dividends etc. 

 

Obviously that can include rentals etc. 

UK guys use the term "pension" 

If an Oz person states they have a pension then in general they mean old age pension. 

I for example into my 70,s and will never be able to receive a pension. 

I could take an income stream from superannuation hower with several rentals that's not necessary. 

I will never receive a "pension" 

 

Some immigration offices are insisting on some sort of proof of a pension. 

They are wrong, however they the ones with the stamps. 

 

Fortunately (for me) CW will accept my 12 monthly transfers from abroad by providing 12 month bank statement. 

 

1. Evidence of income such as pensions, interest or dividends, etc., and/or

22 minutes ago, JDMCanuck said:

Of course I wouldn't produce anything they did not ask for, however one can never be over prepared.

In my post above, I stated that I will provide 12 month bank statement. 

 

What I will also take is current "Superannuation statement" That lists balance + interest 

Will also take my bank statements from my Oz online banking app showing Rental deposits from tagged Rent from the payers.

 

They will only be shown after rigorous chat. 

Frankly an io wouldn't even know what they are looking at. 

 

Also in all the info out there such as this from Siam Legal .. 

Retirement Visa in Thailand | ThaiEmbassy.com https://www.thaiembassy.com/thailand-visa/retirement-visa 

 

In that link (non gov site) it states.

 

• If your embassy does not issue income letters: Supply a 12-month bank statement showing regular deposits of 65,000 THB into a Thai bank account.

9 minutes ago, JDMCanuck said:

Evidence of income such as pensions, interest or dividends, etc., and/or

It is a rather ambiguously worded requirement, though.

and/or ............... what?

 

Although one of the requirements to apply for an extension based on retirement is 'must be aged 50'.
How many of that age would be in receipt of a pension, or have sufficient investments that provided a monthly income of 65K, or dividends for that matter.

20 hours ago, lungbing said:

I extended my non 'O' retirement visa yesterday at Khon Kaen.  What a trek that now is!

The IO was a little surprised to see two bank books.  One was full, that's all.  But she spent ages checking the closing balance in one was the opening balance in the other and that the account numbers were the same.  But all was well, she stamped in the new visa extension and also did my 90 day report as well, that not being due until Oct.  But then she says "where does your money come from?"  I  said "England"  She asked where.  It's some years since I've been asked that but always bring with me in my "Possibly" folder statements from my pension providers.  I'm 77, where does she think it comes from.  I handed over the evidence, she looked at it and was satisfied.  But what has it got to do with them.  the law says I must bring 65,000 baht per month into a Thai bank.  It's nothing to do with them where it originates.  What if I had no proof?  Or am I wrong.  Any thoughts?

You answered your own question in your first post 😂 "should" has nothing to do with it. It is the current law, of a sovereign nation, whose jurisdiction you are under. End of.

18 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

You are wrong. An IO has every right to delve into sources of income.

Yes, he is wrong. Every single IO has the right to ask any follow up question that they deem necessary. Also, they have full right to ask where the money originates from as it´s for example international laws on money luandry.

I also don´t know why he must look down on so many posts, based on private opinion. As for example, one person posts that it´s possible to bring 500k in without declaring. Then that is not useful. I know many expat friends here in Thailand, that are frequently travelling back home more than 1 time a year. So, it will be useful for many. 

I miss Ubon Joe.

8 minutes ago, mikebike said:

It is the current law, of a sovereign nation, whose jurisdiction you are under

Show me the law. 

Does not need to be a pension. 

1 minute ago, DrJack54 said:

Show me the law. 

Does not need to be a pension. 

No one said it did. The question was why they have to know where the money comes from.

13 minutes ago, mikebike said:

The question was why they have to know where the money comes from.

A 12 month bank statement from your Thai bank showing those transfers from abroad should be sufficient. 

As I posted above I will have in my kitchen sink bag statements from WISE, My Oz bank statements etc 

 

Won't be required at CW. 

From @bamnutsak above in this thread... Report from friday

 

"No ask for the "source" of the 'income', although I have documentation to back-up the source.

My twelve Qualifying Foreign Transfers were scrutinized, three times by the Doc Check officer in cubicle L27" 

2 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

A 12 month bank statement from your Thai bank showing those transfers from abroad should be sufficient. 

 

No argument from me. And they are at my immigration office. But IOs have broad latitude in what they may require. Go with the flow, you'll live longer 😉

5 minutes ago, mikebike said:

No one said it did. The question was why they have to know where the money comes from.

Simply because different offices, and even different IO´s interpret the rules and regulations different, and they are also given a rather great area of personal discretion.

Like DrJack54 posts, it should be enough with your statements. However, they have all the right in the world to ask for additional information or ask additional questions.

So, some feel they need, and some feel they don´t.

1 minute ago, Gottfrid said:

Simply because different offices, and even different IO´s interpret the rules and regulations different, and they are also given a rather great area of personal discretion.

Like DrJack54 posts, it should be enough with your statements. However, they have all the right in the world to ask for additional information or ask additional questions.

So, some feel they need, and some feel they don´t.

You didn't read my post right above yours, did you 😂

6 minutes ago, mikebike said:

You didn't read my post right above yours, did you 😂

Nah, I was probably writing at that moment 😂

One can always argue if it´s right or wrong, that they should treat people different. Just like it is, and it´s just to like it. 🤣

To me the takeaway of the debate here (to me, anyway) is always bring everything to Imm. Previously I didn't bring my overseas account statements (origin of the money transfered), just the foreign outbound transfer slip, inbound slip at the Thai bank, and two letters from the Thai bank. But given this discussion, I will bring the foreign bank statements for the next extension - just in case the IO wants to know where the money came from (and maybe how much money I actually have). The 800k method I use would be a bit tight to live (solely) on given the number of months much of it has to remain at a certain amount and not fall below. Also good idea to bring other Thai bank account books if you have them. As mentioned various times in other posts recently, it really does look like Imm is trying to weed out those who are just scraping by on the minimum amounts.

17 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Yes, he is wrong. Every single IO has the right to ask any follow up question that they deem necessary.

Your formulation of the term is wrong, you’re confusing right with law with your response and attempting to conflate. Thai immigration authorities do have the authority to require information about the source of funds as part of visa applications, extensions, and entry requirements. This is primarily to ensure compliance with the Immigration Act B.E. 2522 (1979), which mandates that entrants and residents demonstrate "appropriate means of living" to avoid becoming a public burden (Section 12(2)). While the Act itself does not explicitly demand detailed "source of money" disclosures, Ministerial Regulations and Immigration Bureau guidelines enforce proof of financial self-sufficiency, often including verification that funds originate from legitimate, external sources.

10 hours ago, novacova said:

Bureau guidelines enforce proof of financial self-sufficiency,

 

Havent followed this thread closely, but FYI:

 

My bank -- NOT Immigration -- asked me how much I was earning back home. 

They took my word for it. They didn't ask me for pay stubs, but they wanted to guesstimate how much I have. 

 

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

My bank -- NOT Immigration -- asked me how much I was earning back home. 

Amazing. Which bank and when 

7 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Havent followed this thread closely, but FYI:

 

My bank -- NOT Immigration -- asked me how much I was earning back home. 

They took my word for it. They didn't ask me for pay stubs, but they wanted to guesstimate how much I have. 

 

Neither of my banks or immigration have ever explicitly asked where my funds come from or how much is generated. The IO just gets the statement from the bank and that’s it, no questions.

11 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

Amazing. Which bank and when 

 

Bangkok Bank ... earlier this year. 

Maybe around the time there was some changes going on where accounts were getting more difficult to open? 

 

 

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

Bangkok Bank ... earlier this year. 

Nothing BBL does would surprise me. 

1 hour ago, JDMCanuck said:

Simplifying the question , does money that you transfer yourself from a foreign bank qualify under the following rule?

Evidence of income such as pensions, interest or dividends, etc., and/or

 

YES!

 

Three key words...

 

"Evidence of income" AKA Show me the money.

 

That's it. Yes, a few examples are listed, but that list is not exhaustive.

 

 

BTW, we've had this debate several times here over the years.

 

 

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

 

Havent followed this thread closely, but FYI:

 

My bank -- NOT Immigration -- asked me how much I was earning back home. 

They took my word for it. They didn't ask me for pay stubs, but they wanted to guesstimate how much I have. 

 

Was this when you were opening the account in which case it’s a pretty standard question to be asked so they can get a gauge on what products they might be able to sell you, as you say they don’t look to verify it. 
 

Am sure anybody who remembers the old TM6 form remembers there was an “Annual Income” question on the back. 
 

 

3 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

Some immigration offices are insisting on some sort of proof of a pension. 

They are wrong, however they the ones with the stamps. 

 

Fortunately (for me) CW will accept my 12 monthly transfers from abroad by providing 12 month bank statement. 

Thank you DR, and all those with input!

 

The immigration officer at the desk can ask random questions and usually you just have to comply.

 

Once I had to refer to a senior officer to set a junior officer right, when it became ridiculous (no specifics here), and I received the closest thing I will ever get to an apology from an IO.

4 hours ago, bg53 said:

The immigration officer at the desk can ask random questions and usually you just have to comply.

 

 

Ken, I'll take 'Retirement Extension Financial Documentation' for $200.

 

Remember, your answer must be in the form of a question.

 

 

 

 

 

I had to declare income source on my very first application for extension years ago.

35 minutes ago, parallelman said:

I had to declare income source on my very first application for extension years ago.

Which immigration office...

What did you provide to show income source. 

What has been required recently. 

Assume you are using income method for extensions

Simple answer is PENSIONS

29 minutes ago, crazykopite said:

Simple answer is PENSIONS

What if you don't receive a "pension" 

What that means you cannot use "income method"? 

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

What if you don't receive a "pension" 

What that means you cannot use "income method"? 

Unfortunately, yes.

If the IO insists on seeing evidence of receipt of a pension, as mentioned in Immigration orders, and you are unable to do so, then they will/can refuse the extension application and inform you to use the 800K funds method, or an agent.
I've witnessed this on more than one occasion.

 

The now ceased Embassy letters were always based on evidence of receipt of pension, whether by an affidavit (US), Stat Dec (Aus), or physical documentation (UK).