brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 If you are so poor that you have to use that money, maybe it's time for you to go home? You're joking right? Immigration officers LIKE to see spending on the account. That's our function. To spend.It would be time to go home IF you are unable to top up the account for the upcoming extensions. I think the system is there to protect against deadbeats coming to Thailand to retire, getting into a financially desperate situation and becoming a burden to society in one way or another. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 If people kept the 800k overseas and got a better return on it....quite possibly better than the 9k fine....then they would not bother. The average is a better idea by far. The average is a horrible idea. The typical expectation is that it is a SPENDING account. How would they even CALCULATE an average? Not that they should. They could add up the ending balance for each banking day for the last 12 months and divide that by the number of banking days in the last 12 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) If you are so poor that you have to use that money, maybe it's time for you to go home? You're joking right? Immigration officers LIKE to see spending on the account. That's our function. To spend.It would be time to go home IF you are unable to top up the account for the upcoming extensions. I think the system is there to protect against deadbeats coming to Thailand to retire, getting into a financially desperate situation and becoming a burden to society in one way or another. Then how come people on the income method don't have to show any money in Thailand? The bank account method is multifunctional. It shows money to SPEND in Thailand which is HIGHLY approved of by Thai immigration and yes during much of the year for most people it is a money cushion. If the only intent was money cushion they wouldn't allow (and yes typically EXPECT) people to SPEND on it.Remember people on the income method are not required to import any of it. Edited July 10, 2012 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 If people kept the 800k overseas and got a better return on it....quite possibly better than the 9k fine....then they would not bother. The average is a better idea by far. The average is a horrible idea. The typical expectation is that it is a SPENDING account. How would they even CALCULATE an average? Not that they should. They could add up the ending balance for each banking day for the last 12 months and divide that by the number of banking days in the last 12 months. But why? It's a ridiculous idea for people who use the money to live on in Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I agree with Darrel & have multiple accounts some for spending & some for sitting. I do not agree that the one used for visa needs to be spent down to look legit. I tend to agree with Brit1984 I think the system is there to protect against deadbeats coming to Thailand to retire, getting into a financially desperate situation and becoming a burden to society in one way or another. Some could call it their emergency repatriation fund as well as visa required account. There is no way any govt official would complain about that + as stated by others we have multiple accounts & use that for expenses. Lastly with some countries US in my case getting more & more trigger happy about transfers in excess of 10k + the fees that inevitably are charged at some point of transfer ++ the fact that Thailand is smoking the US in interest given at roughly 3x greater amounts..... Well why would anyone bother transferring money in & out to satisfy this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) The status quo is indeed much better than the anti-expat measures some of you are suggesting. I think this thread has gone off the rails. I am requesting closure. Edited July 10, 2012 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Then how come people on the income method don't have to show any money in Thailand? That would be because............they have INCOME Like any system if you have repay-ability you have a better rating. A steady income stream is smiled upon. After all 65k times 12 months is............780k........hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 If you are so poor that you have to use that money, maybe it's time for you to go home? You're joking right? Immigration officers LIKE to see spending on the account. That's our function. To spend.It would be time to go home IF you are unable to top up the account for the upcoming extensions. I think the system is there to protect against deadbeats coming to Thailand to retire, getting into a financially desperate situation and becoming a burden to society in one way or another. Then how come people on the income method don't have to show any money in Thailand? The bank account method is multifunctional. It shows money to SPEND in Thailand which is HIGHLY approved of by Thai immigration and yes during much of the year for most people it is a money cushion. If the only intent was money cushion they wouldn't allow (and yes typically EXPECT) people to SPEND on it.Remember people on the income method are not required to import any of it. Why would they want people to spend below the 800k? Do you think they would be happy if someone has 0k in their account for the best part of the year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David48 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Didn't some septic guy down in pattaya make some similar modest proposals in an open letter to the PM....that got laughed out of the asylum also. Please leave your anti-American slang back in Pommie-land. JT ... samsiam is one of ours. Though the Poms would dearly love to have him I'm sure. JT (or anyone who definitely knows actually), out of curiosity ... how long has it been 800k ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Why would they want people to spend below the 800k? Do you think they would be happy if someone has 0k in their account for the best part of the year? They want people to spend lots of money! People who transfer out to earn interest may have a low balance during the year. No, they don't care as long as the money is back during the money seasoning period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 If people kept the 800k overseas and got a better return on it....quite possibly better than the 9k fine....then they would not bother. The average is a better idea by far. The average is a horrible idea. The typical expectation is that it is a SPENDING account. How would they even CALCULATE an average? Not that they should. They could add up the ending balance for each banking day for the last 12 months and divide that by the number of banking days in the last 12 months. But why? It's a ridiculous idea for people who use the money to live on in Thailand. To stop people gaming the system by living in a desperate financial situation for most of the year that is dangerous for themselves and dangerous for Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Why would they want people to spend below the 800k? Do you think they would be happy if someone has 0k in their account for the best part of the year? They want people to spend lots of money! People who transfer out to earn interest may have a low balance during the year. No, they don't care as long as the money is back during the money seasoning period. Unless they were to ask you to submit all your receipts how would they know you have been spending and not just repaying a loan that you begged your friends and family back home to send over to cheat your way past extension day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 I don't see how living your life during the year is gaming the system as long as you have outside resources to replenish your account annually. Nor does Thai immigration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 Why would they want people to spend below the 800k? Do you think they would be happy if someone has 0k in their account for the best part of the year? They want people to spend lots of money! People who transfer out to earn interest may have a low balance during the year. No, they don't care as long as the money is back during the money seasoning period. Unless they were to ask you to submit all your receipts how would they know you have been spending and not just repaying a loan that you begged your friends and family back home to send over to cheat your way past extension day? Someone living like that, a small minority, won't last forever. You want to punish all legit retirees over a small minority. Ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I don't see how living your life during the year is gaming the system as long as you have outside resources to replenish your account annually. Nor does Thai immigration. Of course it is gaming the system if you have next to no cash to your name for most of the year. It is pretty clear they have set the 800k at the level such that retirees have to pay for any emergencies themselves. If a retiree doesnt have money in the bank, the Thai taxpayers will end up cleaning up their mess (or at least part of it). It seems Thai immigration needs to find a stricter system to avoid people cheating the system. It also seems to me the 800k is outdated and needs to be inflation adjusted to today's money. To quote you if I may "This is a SERIOUS suggestion. I humbly suggest any reader close to the powers that be in immigration get this suggestion heard." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblether Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I would say from what I have read ( not experienced ) that it was abuse of previous visa regimes that caused this tightening up? I can also see a lot of members are delighted that the 800,000 figure has not been changed for years. You need to be careful what you ask for, the Law Of Unintended Consequences will come into play if you ask the Thai government to review retirement visa regulations. At that point many people may find themselves wishing for the old days of mere 90 day reporting. Let sleeping dogs lie Jingthing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StreetCowboy Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Why would they want people to spend below the 800k? Do you think they would be happy if someone has 0k in their account for the best part of the year? They want people to spend lots of money! People who transfer out to earn interest may have a low balance during the year. No, they don't care as long as the money is back during the money seasoning period. They never say anything about spending money. They insist that you have enough to support yourself, but whether you do or not does not seem to interest them SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsiam Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 If people kept the 800k overseas and got a better return on it....quite possibly better than the 9k fine....then they would not bother. The average is a better idea by far. The average is a horrible idea. The typical expectation is that it is a SPENDING account. How would they even CALCULATE an average? Not that they should. They could add up the ending balance for each banking day for the last 12 months and divide that by the number of banking days in the last 12 months. That would be a good idea. Do they understand leap years though ?? The status quo is indeed much better than the anti-expat measures some of you are suggesting. I think this thread has gone off the rails. I am requesting closure. Dont throw the toys out of the sandpit. The 800k could be sent out at 91 days.....the 800k average has been here all year and spent...they can see the history. An average and no more 90 days is the way to progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) Obviously they cannot monitor your spending. But if they weren't OK with people spending from the account during the year and topping it back up during the money seasoning period, they would indeed have a FIXED account requirement. Which they most definitely do NOT. Many reports over the years of immigration officers asking people showing up with static 800K accounts how it is that they DO live in Thailand. Such applications are more suspicious than spend down accounts from the point of view of illegal working. About money levels, in the past current people in the system have been grandfathered at their current levels and the new levels only applied to newer people in the system. No guarantee about the future of course. The money average idea is totally daft. No retirement system in the world does that and Thailand never will either. I consider absurd suggestions like that indeed to be troll suggestions. The money seasoning rules were put on to inhibit abuse because immigration had found that some applicants were getting short term loans to meet the money level, a quick in and out. In the current system, a person could STILL get a loan, they would just have to borrow the money for three months. In actuality, I don't think there is any specific rule about getting a loan but it is obviously not encouraged. Edited July 10, 2012 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David48 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I was hoping that someone could have definitely informed the discussion how many years ago the 800,000 figure was set. In a world of rising cost ... in today’s world is 800k enough? Should the figure be an even one million? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 The money average idea is totally daft. No retirement system in the world does that and Thailand never will either. I consider absurd suggestions like that indeed to be troll suggestions. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a "troll". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 I was hoping that someone could have definitely informed the discussion how many years ago the 800,000 figure was set. In a world of rising cost ... in today’s world is 800k enough? Should the figure be an even one million? The thread is about money seasoning rules. Also, like I said previously raises have grandfathered in current retirees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) The money average idea is totally daft. No retirement system in the world does that and Thailand never will either. I consider absurd suggestions like that indeed to be troll suggestions. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a "troll". I agree. But I find the money average idea so utterly ridiculous that I don't consider it serious. I think it is intended to provoke. Are you on retirement extensions, BTW, or only here to stir it up? Edited July 10, 2012 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblether Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) There may be some value in your suggestion that the money average idea is unworkable, however once you start people looking closer into this you may find the capital sum required will increase dramatically. Be careful what you ask for, sometimes you get it. I have a friend just now who is a mere 3 baht/ £ away from failing to qualify at the 65,000 baht a month level. If the authorities revisited that required income level figure a lot of people could be seriously caught out. Be very careful, and take into account fellow retirees that are decent people but are just on the edge of being disqualified. Edited July 10, 2012 by theblether Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) There may be some value in your suggestion that the money average idea is unworkable, however once you start people looking closer into this you may find the capital sum required will increase dramatically. Be careful what you ask for, sometimes you get it. I have a friend just now who is a mere 3 baht/ £ away from failing to qualify at the 65,000 baht a month level. If the authorities revisited that required income level figure a lot of people could be seriously caught out. Be very careful, and take into account fellow retirees that are decent people but are just on the edge of being disqualified. You really don't know what you're talking about, do you? Anyone short of the 65K can use the COMBO method. Mixing bank account sum with income. As far as the possibility of raising levels, that is something that can always happen at any time. It's not like you discovered some big dark secret. Also based on history it is fair to assume/hope that people in the system currently will be grandfathered at the current levels. No guarantees but that is is the precedent. Edited July 10, 2012 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblether Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 The guy has next to no capital JT. I'll accept your apology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trigz Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I have maintained the 800k account for 12 yrs now...it's a no hassle; renew is done at immigration (now chaengwattana) in a few minutes; no questions asked. The reason why things are required a particular way defies my sense of logic but TIT you have to remember. Good luck with wanting something changed your way; I bet it don't ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 The guy has next to no capital JT. I'll accept your apology. You won't get it. He'll be grandfathered in. Chill out. Do you think Thai immigration officials are morons? Do you think they need a thread from Jingthing to get the idea to consider raising levels, something they have done before? It is nothing new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brit1984 Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 The money average idea is totally daft. No retirement system in the world does that and Thailand never will either. I consider absurd suggestions like that indeed to be troll suggestions. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a "troll". I agree. But I find the money average idea so utterly ridiculous that I don't consider it serious. I think it is intended to provoke. Are you on retirement extensions, BTW, or only here to stir it up? Is this thread only open to those on retirement extensions? Sorry I must have missed your posting guidelines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lifer Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Unfortunately the only idea they will accept from an expat is the one that they can claim they thought of themselves. They don't want expats telling them what to do, might look bad. I'm sure posters could come up with a lot of ideas that make better sense than what they are doing. Why should somebody who lives here, retired or married have to go in every 90 days to tell them they live in the same place. It should only be done annually with the extension or if the address changes. It's not the long termers they should worry about. It's the ones that don't qualify to be here long term who are breaking the rules, lying about their situation, or making border runs to stay here a long time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now