Best Bank & Interest Rate For 800'000.- Baht-Account

[12DrinkMore]

It seems we're still waiting for the results of Chiang Mai's exploratory forage into immigration.

MM or not MM, that is the question....

I do hate it when these things are left open.

[chiang mai]

It seems we're still waiting for the results of Chiang Mai's exploratory forage into immigration.

MM or not MM, that is the question....

I do hate it when these things are left open.

And I still haven't been there yet to get my re-entry visa so must go soon, next week should see it done and dusted, apologies for causing you anxiety.

[JSixpack]

It seems we're still waiting for the results of Chiang Mai's exploratory forage into immigration.

MM or not MM, that is the question....

I do hate it when these things are left open.

And I still haven't been there yet to get my re-entry visa so must go soon, next week should see it done and dusted, apologies for causing you anxiety.

Nobody's holding his breath as the answer is already clear. It's always gratifying to witness the process of enlightenment by a TV member however.

But suppose your--well, not theory, as you called it, since there's no shred of evidence forming a basis, but rather fantasy--comes true. It would mean that even intangible property can be accepted in lieu of a bank deposit. Hence owners of tangible assets such as real estate, a better class of asset, can enjoy the same privilege. So large numbers of farang property owners can then dispense w/ the B800,000 requirement. As it stands under the current written requirements, even if you own a 20M baht penthouse, you still have to follow the bank deposit requirement. And if you sold that penthouse 3 days before applying for a new visa/extension, and immediately deposited the money in a bank account, it doesn't matter: you haven't had the money in a bank account for 3 months.

It has been a long-standing complaint by property owners that property ownership isn't acceptable for the visa. For some reason, Immigration keeps babbling on about "bank deposits." And then--incredulously--actually demands them for the visa/extension!

You see, if you are correct that the written requirement about bank deposit for 3 months doesn't mean bank deposit for 3 months , then it has far-reaching implications applicable to all the farang property owners in Thailand as well.

So, yeah, let's DO by all means hear what they tell you.

[chiang mai]

Property ownership cannot be assumed to be cash in any shape or form, it wasn't cash three months ago, it doesn't appear as an entry in a bank passbook unless sold and it isn't cash at the time of visa extention. Property ownership in the context of this debate is not remotely relevant.

[JSixpack]

Property ownership cannot be assumed to be cash in any shape or form, it wasn't cash three months ago, it doesn't appear as an entry in a bank passbook unless sold and it isn't cash at the time of visa extention. Property ownership in the context of this debate is not remotely relevant.

Oh, but it's entirely relevant. Shares in a MM fund are in fact a form of property and also cannot be assumed to be cash in any shape or form. You keep thinking erroneously that you've "deposited" money in an MM fund and that you then have a monetary "deposit." You don't. (And Immigration will point the fact out to you.) Similarly, from a legal standpoint, your property appears as an entry in the land office record and you have a deed. Selling it and converting it to cash, at whatever price the market dictates, is roughly equivalent to selling your shares in the MM fund at whatever price the market dictates and converting them to cash.

Now a 20M baht penthouse, which you perhaps bought 3 months ago or earlier, is at any time certainly worth at least B800,000 and moreover one could readily borrow B800,000 against it at any time. For that relatively small amount, you have perfect liquidity. It's quite close to a cash equivalent--but it still isn't cash and it isn't money held a government guaranteed bank deposit account.

Hence, we're just all ears. Next week is it? Nor is this a "debate," BTW.

Edited May 12, 2012 by JSixpack

[chiang mai]

Property ownership cannot be assumed to be cash in any shape or form, it wasn't cash three months ago, it doesn't appear as an entry in a bank passbook unless sold and it isn't cash at the time of visa extention. Property ownership in the context of this debate is not remotely relevant.

Oh, but it's entirely relevant. Shares in a MM fund are in fact a form of property and also cannot be assumed to be cash in any shape or form. You keep thinking erroneously that you've "deposited" money in an MM fund and that you then have a monetary "deposit." You don't. (And Immigration will point the fact out to you.) Similarly, from a legal standpoint, your property appears as an entry in the land office record and you have a deed. Selling it and converting it to cash, at whatever price the market dictates, is roughly equivalent to selling your shares in the MM fund at whatever price the market dictates and converting them to cash.

Now a 20M baht penthouse, which you perhaps bought 3 months ago or earlier, is at any time certainly worth at least B800,000 and moreover one could readily borrow B800,000 against it at any time. For that relatively small amount, you have perfect liquidity. It's quite close to a cash equivalent--but it still isn't cash and it isn't money held a government guaranteed bank deposit account.

Hence, we're just all ears. Next week is it? Nor is this a "debate," BTW.

I struggle trying to understand your logic and attitude JS, perhaps you've missed the fact that in my initial post on this subject I wrote, "if I cashed out the MM fund three days or so before the visa extention date", that in fact is what I proposed and have in fact done hence, there is the required amount of cash in the account at that time - how is that not cash?

Your logic regarding property ownership escapes me since that was never cash except at the time of purchase, it's equity but not cash, not quite the same thing, I suppose next that you'll be arguing that your tilac's gold bracelets would be evn more suitable for this purpose! The fcat that those things could potentially be borrowed against doesn't nearly begin to meet the criteria laid down, but I thnk you know that and are simply going to extremes for the sake of argument.

But the really interesting part of your comment is the phrase, "nor is this a debate", if it's not that, what is it, lessons in the ways of the world and logic according to JS which must be regarded as fact? If that's what you think that's very sad indeed.

I tell you what, drawn as I am to respond to some of your nonesence I suggest we both wait until Monday or Tuesday and simply wait for the answer, that's probably a lot more sensible and productive.

[chiang mai]

Finally:

And the lady at immigration says OK! My MM passbook shows an amount being deposited late last year, periodic inbound dividend payments since and finally encashment late last week with an amount greater than the required minimum being displayed.

The thinking here seems to be that the minimum amount required for the visa is shown going into the account initially, that amount is “maintained”, the account has been seasoned for three months and the minimum cash requirement is still available at the time of visa renewal, what happens on the money markets between the initial deposit and encashment appears not to be of interest, as long as the encashed value is in excess of 800k .

It goes without saying that if the encashed funds were less than the minimum of 800k then that account on its own would not be suitable although, I don't see why those funds couldn't be totalled with funds from another account to make up the difference – as a likely bone of contention I believe that multiple accounts should be OK, especially where they are all held at the same bank, as long as the bank letter aggregates them.

Over to you to rant and complain as necessary.

[chiang mai]

I'm surprised, so much bravado, bluster and B/S beforehand and now, nothing. Oh well!

[Darrel]

My only point is that just because your lady A accepts it today doesnt mean that she or someone else wont refuse it tomorrow. Maybe she just thought it was a regular savings account as it has a passbook.

[chiang mai]

My only point is that just because your lady A accepts it today doesnt mean that she or someone else wont refuse it tomorrow. Maybe she just thought it was a regular savings account as it has a passbook.

My only point is that just because your lady A accepts it today doesnt mean that she or someone else wont refuse it tomorrow. Maybe she just thought it was a regular savings account as it has a passbook.

Agreed on the first part but not the second, I believe she was quite clear about the nature of the account.

[12DrinkMore]

I'm surprised, so much bravado, bluster and B/S beforehand and now, nothing. Oh well!

Been a bit busy, can't spend my whole life around TV.

I am very surprised that it worked.

I was told by the immigration officer I spoke with quite explicitly that only savings and fixed deposits were valid. And that is the message I have had from other foreigners. In fact, you are the first to have had success.

I maintain that my advice is by far the best way. Do not assume anything, and check a few weeks before the 'seasoning' process begins that your MM account is going to be accepted.

I also believe that a couple of accounts in different banks are OK. Just have to present the passbooks and the letters from each bank with the total showing 800k over three months.

I am curious to know what MM account you have that pays dividends. I have only known accounts that pay interest or are funds, where you buy a number of units in the fund and the interest is returned over the unit price.

If the account bears interest or dividends then it would be subject to tax retention, the MM funds are not.

[chiang mai]

I'm surprised, so much bravado, bluster and B/S beforehand and now, nothing. Oh well!

I maintain that my advice is by far the best way. Do not assume anything, and check a few weeks before the 'seasoning' process begins that your MM account is going to be accepted.

I am curious to know what MM account you have that pays dividends. I have only known accounts that pay interest or are funds, where you buy a number of units in the fund and the interest is returned over the unit price.

Agreed on the first part.

The second part is terminology, indeed it is interest over the unit price.

No tax due or payable.

[12DrinkMore]

I'm surprised, so much bravado, bluster and B/S beforehand and now, nothing. Oh well!

I maintain that my advice is by far the best way. Do not assume anything, and check a few weeks before the 'seasoning' process begins that your MM account is going to be accepted.

I am curious to know what MM account you have that pays dividends. I have only known accounts that pay interest or are funds, where you buy a number of units in the fund and the interest is returned over the unit price.

Agreed on the first part.

The second part is terminology, indeed it is interest over the unit price.

No tax due or payable.

Sorry, I was a bit lax with the language.

In an MM fund the interest is accrued into the unit price and so there are no separate interest payments.

For example the SCB MM fund

http://www.scbam.com...nd-service.aspx

http://siamchart.com...d-chart/SCBTMF/

Maybe you can post the code of your fund?

Edited May 15, 2012 by 12DrinkMore

[JSixpack]

My only point is that just because your lady A accepts it today doesnt mean that she or someone else wont refuse it tomorrow. Maybe she just thought it was a regular savings account as it has a passbook.

Agreed. Accepting a MM fund for the seasoning isn't in line w/ the official regulations. Nice you may get away with it, congrats if so. Rules are often bent in Thailand, true. You know, I didn't even do my 90-day reporting last year but I wasn't fined and got my extension anyway. Immigration lady was busy talking on the phone and shufffling papers, barely glanced at my pport, and just went ahead and stamped the sucker! But I wouldn't try a MM myself as I don't regard the risk (merely a risk of a border run, to be sure) as worth it. I'd prefer to use high interest deposit accounts and take risks in the equity markets on the side, where the potential rewards are much greater. But each to his own, eh.

Edited May 16, 2012 by JSixpack

[chiang mai]

Just so you are aware: extending a visa sucessfully doesn't count as a 90 day visit (in my neck of the woods), just in case you were thinking of doing your next 90 day, 90 days after you recieved your visa extention. Methinks that problem hasn't gone away.

[Darrel]

Just so you are aware: extending a visa sucessfully doesn't count as a 90 day visit (in my neck of the woods)

It does in Pattaya.

[chiang mai]

Just so you are aware: extending a visa sucessfully doesn't count as a 90 day visit (in my neck of the woods)

It does in Pattaya.

Wow, I'm surprised, it didn't count in Phuket either so I guess Pattaya must have some rules of its own.

[Darrel]

I dont really understand how it could possibly not count as a report. After all, you present all your documents and details of your address for it.

[chiang mai]

I dont really understand how it could possibly not count as a report. After all, you present all your documents and details of your address for it.

There you go using logic again

In Chiang Mai and Phuket the 90 day notification process is separate and distinct from the visa extention process, even though the visa extention process checks all manner of things, the 90 day reporting slip in my passport remains untouched and the next reporting date unchanged.

This is just another example of how the rules vary from office to office but mostly I think, from region to region.

Actually, now I think about it, I extnded my visa in Bangkok a few years ago and that didn't do anything to the 90 day reporting either, so perhaps it's just Pattaya that's unique.

EDIT: afterthought

Edited May 17, 2012 by chiang mai

[JSixpack]

Just so you are aware: extending a visa sucessfully doesn't count as a 90 day visit (in my neck of the woods), just in case you were thinking of doing your next 90 day, 90 days after you recieved your visa extention. Methinks that problem hasn't gone away.

This I agree with--even in Pattaya, as I myself got caught out one year (but it was years ago). It's totally irrational, which is why I hadn't bothered when I got the visa extension. On that occasion, I wasn't very late and threw myself on the mercy of the Immigration lady, pleading ignorance (nothing less than the truth!) and got off w/ a warning.

Now, maybe things have changed in Pattaya since then. More members should weigh in. There have been past discussions on this very point.

But I didn't report this year after I got my extension (which again might have led to the fine) because I knew I'd be leaving Thailand to escape Songkran before the next reporting date anyway.

[chiang mai]

Just so you are aware: extending a visa sucessfully doesn't count as a 90 day visit (in my neck of the woods)

It does in Pattaya.

Just so you are aware: extending a visa sucessfully doesn't count as a 90 day visit (in my neck of the woods)

It does in Pattaya.

Darell, in light of JS's reply in post 140, are you still sure it does or are you now in the do do with Immigration?

[Darrel]

I accompanied a UK friend to Jomtien for his retirement extension about 2 months ago and once he had the extension the officer told him to come back 90 days later for reporting. I asked for confirmation from the officer and he repeated what he had said. As far as I know re-entering the country (with a re-entry permit) also counts as a 90 day reporting.

[chiang mai]

I accompanied a UK friend to Jomtien for his retirement extension about 2 months ago and once he had the extension the officer told him to come back 90 days later for reporting. I asked for confirmation from the officer and he repeated what he had said. As far as I know re-entering the country (with a re-entry permit) also counts as a 90 day reporting.

Re-entry does count as 90 day reporting, first I've ever heard of visa extention counting though. But, as we have all learned here, there's a first time for everything so I have to feed back to you the sentiment you gave me earlier: "My only point is that just because your lady A accepts it today doesnt mean that she or someone else wont refuse it tomorrow".

[chogiekim]

I want to take back about 700,000 baht to uk. What is the best way to do this? Transfer to my uk bank? Would i lose much in the exchange rate?

[chiang mai]

I want to take back about 700,000 baht to uk. What is the best way to do this? Transfer to my uk bank? Would i lose much in the exchange rate?

Do the exchange in Thailand it's a much better rate, you'll get raped in the UK. Anyway, you can't take that much Thai Baht out of the country, THB 50k is the limit.

[Sophon]

I accompanied a UK friend to Jomtien for his retirement extension about 2 months ago and once he had the extension the officer told him to come back 90 days later for reporting. I asked for confirmation from the officer and he repeated what he had said. As far as I know re-entering the country (with a re-entry permit) also counts as a 90 day reporting.

Re-entry does count as 90 day reporting, first I've ever heard of visa extention counting though. But, as we have all learned here, there's a first time for everything so I have to feed back to you the sentiment you gave me earlier: "My only point is that just because your lady A accepts it today doesnt mean that she or someone else wont refuse it tomorrow".

Re-entry doesnt count as 90 day reporting, it's just that having left Thailand you are not required to report until having been back in Thailand for 90 days. The 90 day reporting is just that, reporting that you have been in Thailand for 90 days so you report 90 days after coming back to Thailand.

Your first (and only your first) visa extension also counts as 90 day reporting. After that extension and 90 day reporting are totally separate processes.

Sophon

[Darrel]

Re-entry doesnt count as 90 day reporting, it's just that having left Thailand you are not required to report until having been back in Thailand for 90 days.

That seems like splitting hairs. No matter how you look at it, your reporting requirements reset themselves after a re-entry, and the 90 days is calculated from then.

Your first (and only your first) visa extension also counts as 90 day reporting. After that extension and 90 day reporting are totally separate processes.

The person I accompanied was indeed doing his first extension so that would explain it.

[Bangkokhatter]

Have recently extended my visa in BKK and my 90 day was due 10 days later. I had to return and do the 90 day report.

[Sophon]

Re-entry doesnt count as 90 day reporting, it's just that having left Thailand you are not required to report until having been back in Thailand for 90 days.

That seems like splitting hairs. No matter how you look at it, your reporting requirements reset themselves after a re-entry, and the 90 days is calculated from then.

Maybe so, but if people just realize that what they are reporting is having been in Thailand for 90 days, then they wouldn't be in doubt as to when they need to report after having left and re-entered the country. And to say that re-entering counts as reporting muddies the water, since it implies that a report was due which doesn't logically fit with that realization, and therefore creates doubt.

Sophon