Immigration vows strictness on retirement visa requirements

[peergin]

Why should a falang married to a thai be treated any different from what i have seen thai woman seem to cost more to keep than a falang wife think it is time to move onto the next door neighbours Malaysia, Cambodia or even the Philippines.

I would not recommend the Philippines! Dangerous for foreigners!

[shaurene]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}[/

The Thai wife is not applying for a visa. The immigration obviously see that the Falange does not need 800k to live on as his Thai wife will take care of him.

[wayned]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

The purpose of the financial requirement for the marriage extension is not to pay expenses for anybody other than the applicant himself.

Maestro,

If that is true, replacing marriage with retirement in your statement, isn't "The purpose of the financial requirement for a retirement extension is not to pay expenses for anybody other than the applicant himself"? If that's so, then why does it cost 400000 baht more per year for a person to live here after his 50th birthday? It really doesn't make any sense so that's why I use the Income affidavit method. At my age I can't even remember where I put my glasses ten minutes ago let alone keep track of which bank account has had 800k in it for the last 3 months. and since I'm married I could apply for either but the retirement is easier (one less trip to immigration each year}.

I

[jonesthebaker]

So many "whys" and none have a good answer.

Why do I have to check in every 90 days when I have a one-year visa.

Why do I need 800,000 baht in the bank when the minimum wage in Thailand is 300 baht per day for a Thai?

Why, oh why. '

It doesn't matter. They are Thai laws and we have to abide by them or leave.

I also have no empathy for othere people so this is the way i always think. leave if you dont like it. im ok and i dont care about anyone elses situation so long as im ok. rules are rules.

really!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edited December 5, 2013 by jonesthebaker

[chooka]

You only need 400k if married to a Thai because she is free to work and support herself, 800k for farang couples is an insurance policy that both have enough to support without working. The logic is to curb people trying to work illegally, if you both have 400k each then the chances of you needing to work are minimal.

I have my visa on the basis of my son and I have to show 400K also. My son is 6 and can't work or support himself in anyway he relies on me for everything.

He costs a lot more to support and raise a child than it does to live in retirement with your spouse.

Edited December 5, 2013 by chooka

[LawrenceN]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

This a retirement visa, farang have to show 800,000 Baht or equivelent even having a Thai wife, not a married visa.

I had a marriage visa. When I went to renew it last January, the officer in Chiang Mai insisted that I had to come pick it up on one particular day a month later. She was very inflexible on that point. Problem was, I was going to be out of the country for two weeks at that time, non-refundable plane tickets in hand. She said she could give me an ordinary retirement visa on the spot. I had no choice but to accept it. She seemed quite pleased with herself that she had gotten that marriage visa away from me, and told me that I could not get a marriage visa again.

I have no idea why it mattered to her. Any ideas? Does the paperwork for a marriage visa make much more work for the Immigration officers so that they hate to do them? It doesn't matter much to me, as I don't plan to work and can meet the income requirements. Just puzzled about her air of "victory."

I didn't see this woman there the last time I did my 90-day reporting, so maybe she was transferred or retired. I'm tempted to apply for a marriage visa again.

[ubonjoe]

You can change back to an extension based upon marriage there is no rule that says you can't.

[Robert2006]

Most of the retired single guys I know spend a lot of money here annually; I would think many multiples of that of the average Thai.

I don’t understand the reasons behind making Visa conditions more difficult for married retirees. Retirees are an abundant source of steady revenue into the communities and there are so many other places to retire on this planet.

If I was married and required to park $50k here to retire that would be a deal breaker for me, countries are like hotels whoever has the best deal for the money gets the retirement business.

[bikerider21]

Why should a falang married to a thai be treated any different from what i have seen thai woman seem to cost more to keep than a falang wife think it is time to move onto the next door neighbours Malaysia, Cambodia or even the Philippines.

My Thai wife is nearly fully self reliant. She runs (and owns) the hotel which I paid for in full.

The difference is that being a Thai, she is able to work as a retired wife is not.

Of copurse many Thai wives need supporting but but theoretically, they could work.

[bikerider21]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

This a retirement visa, farang have to show 800,000 Baht or equivelent even having a Thai wife, not a married visa.

I had a marriage visa. When I went to renew it last January, the officer in Chiang Mai insisted that I had to come pick it up on one particular day a month later. She was very inflexible on that point. Problem was, I was going to be out of the country for two weeks at that time, non-refundable plane tickets in hand. She said she could give me an ordinary retirement visa on the spot. I had no choice but to accept it. She seemed quite pleased with herself that she had gotten that marriage visa away from me, and told me that I could not get a marriage visa again.

I have no idea why it mattered to her. Any ideas? Does the paperwork for a marriage visa make much more work for the Immigration officers so that they hate to do them? It doesn't matter much to me, as I don't plan to work and can meet the income requirements. Just puzzled about her air of "victory."

I didn't see this woman there the last time I did my 90-day reporting, so maybe she was transferred or retired. I'm tempted to apply for a marriage visa again.

In CM, they have always insisted I get a retirement visa, or rather have convinced my thai wife that it is the only way. I have always wondered why.

[bikerider21]

What about the clause that says 65,000 per month or 800,000 in the bank or a mixture of both?

Is the mixture a reality?

Suppose you don't quite make the 65,000, can you then get away with say only 100,000 in the bank to make up the difference?

[Jools]

While I don't appreciate the obvious unfairness of this reasoning by Thai immigration, anything that discourages a man from marrying another farang should be applauded.

[ubonjoe]

What about the clause that says 65,000 per month or 800,000 in the bank or a mixture of both?

Is the mixture a reality?

Suppose you don't quite make the 65,000, can you then get away with say only 100,000 in the bank to make up the difference?

Yes it is possible and there are many that use it. You just have to be sure the total is 800k baht or more. There is no seasoning requirement in the rules but there are a few offices that want money to be in the bank for 90 days.

[mca]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

Yes, Why the difference from a farang married to a Thai ?

This is discrimination.

Like it is discrimination when they charge Thai people 50 bahts to enter a waterfall and charge farangs 300 bahts.

How would Thai people feel if they visit Europe and where charge 5 times up.

Europe don’t do that, only Thais do.

But it is not a very nice way to threat other people.

In my humble opinion I feel that, as in my case being married to an actual Thai citizen with a half Thai daughter the regulations should be more lenient on the basis of humanitarian grounds compared to somebody who has no actual ties to the country and merely wants to retire here. That's not even taking into consideration the considerable income tax I pay each year to this country which a retiree does not.

This is in no way an attack on retirees. When I'm old enough I'll most probably go the retirement extension myself to minimize the hassle.

[GeorgeO]

Those running the show should be able to quote the system correctly, since we regularly see people on this forum being corrected for wrongly referring to a "retirement visa", which doesn't exist. We have non-imm B, O, or whatever, which is then extended for retirement purposes...!

[GeorgeO]

What about the clause that says 65,000 per month or 800,000 in the bank or a mixture of both?

Is the mixture a reality?

Suppose you don't quite make the 65,000, can you then get away with say only 100,000 in the bank to make up the difference?

That was exactly how I first started here. My military pension was short of the required THB 65,000, but with a non-imm visa in my passport and the appropriate balance in my bank account, that was sufficient to get me the retirement extension.

[ubonjoe]

 

_{Why is a  "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

 Yes, Why the difference from a farang married to a Thai  ?

This is discrimination.

Like it is discrimination when they charge Thai people 50 bahts to enter a waterfall and charge farangs 300 bahts.

How would Thai people feel if they visit Europe and where charge 5 times up.

Europe don’t do that, only Thais do.

But it is not a very nice way to threat other people. 

In my humble opinion I feel that, as in my case being married to an actual Thai citizen with a half Thai daughter the regulations should be more lenient on the basis of humanitarian grounds compared to somebody who has no actual ties to the country and merely wants to retire here. That's not even taking into consideration the considerable income tax I pay each year to this country which a retiree does not.

This is in no way an attack on retirees. When I'm old enough I'll most probably go the retirement extension  myself to minimize the hassle. 

Agree with you.

Also would a farang wife be willing to live in small village in a house you built for about 400k baht 11 years ago. Or live in a house here in the city that only costs 2500 baht to rent that we moved into so our daughter and grand daughter could be in a better school.

Could she of gotten elected as village head and draw a salary of 8000 baht.

I could do an extension for retirement but after 6 extensions based upon marriage I still see no reason to change.

[uptheos]

.

Retirement Visa ?

I thought there is no such thing. I learnt here that it is only an extention of stay.

Correct...there is not such thing as a "Retirement Visa" or a "Marriage Visa"

It is an Extension of Stay based on retirement or marriage to a Thai national.

Someone go to Chiang Mai immigration and put them right please.

On my last annual renewal they stamped in red on the top (for some reason) 'Retirement Visa'

I wish these semantics would stop.....extension, renewal, visa......who the heck really cares what it is called, as long as it's for another year and we all know what the person means, so why the need to pick them up?

As I said if it really bothers you, pop along to CMI and give them a mouthful.

[wayned]

If the logic is that it takes 800000 baht for a person over 50 to support himself for a year, then why does it only take a person under fifty 400000 baht to support himself and possibly a wife that does not work and 1 or more children for a year?

I am over 50, have a Thai wife who doesn't work and still partially support my 28 year old stepson after putting him through 5 years of college. But I could extend my visa for marriage purposes and only have to have 400k. But if I got divorced and had to extend for retirement I would have to have 800k. They've got the whole requirement reversed!

Logic is not part of Thai society and humanitarian grounds has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of living!

I'm not suggesting that it should be made more difficult for anybody but cannot justify the difference in the requirements based on the reasoning given!

[zorroverde]

The rules since Nov. 2008 have already been posted in this thread and is how immigration handles cases.It might be that there is a lot lost in translation.

To me it seems that immigration might be trying to say is simply that a person applying for an extension based on retirement must fulfill the requirements by him/herself, so no joint accounts. (In the past a joined account was often allowed, provided it was at least 1,6 million baht).

If one of the partners doesn't have 800,000 baht or otherwise meets the financial requirements, he/she will have to apply as dependent and not for an extension based on retirement him/her self.

Mario2008,this is a sharp observation which could indeed explain the actual confusion.But would you agree that section/clause 2.20 of 777/2551

would allow the spouse of a retiree in any case,even when older than 50,to apply for an extension as dependent?So,the 2x B800K solvency requirement could easily be avoided,if only one of the spouses would apply for retiree extension of stay and the other,regardless the age,as dependent.

Would you agree on that?

[culicine]

What about the clause that says 65,000 per month or 800,000 in the bank or a mixture of both?

Is the mixture a reality?

Suppose you don't quite make the 65,000, can you then get away with say only 100,000 in the bank to make up the difference?

Yes it is possible and there are many that use it. You just have to be sure the total is 800k baht or more. There is no seasoning requirement in the rules but there are a few offices that want money to be in the bank for 90 days.

Can I ask how the pension is converted to baht? For example, if the OZ pension is say 550 dollars a fortnight, how is the calculated to baht for immigration purposes. If they use the exchange rate based in Australia, it's only about 26 baht to the dollar, while here it is about 30 baht to the dollar. Is Thai immigration using the Thai exchange rate for the calculations? I ask this because my mum may retire here and her pension does not amount to 800K a year, so will need to put some in a bank here.

[ubonjoe]

 

What about the clause that says 65,000 per month or 800,000 in the bank or a mixture of both?

Is the mixture a reality?

Suppose you don't quite make the 65,000, can you then get away with say only 100,000 in the bank to make up the difference?

Yes it is possible and there are many that use it. You just have to be sure the total is 800k baht or more. There is no seasoning requirement in the rules but there are a few offices that want money to be in the bank for 90 days.

 

 

Can I ask how the pension is converted to baht? For example, if the OZ pension is say 550 dollars a fortnight, how is the calculated to baht for immigration purposes. If they use the exchange rate based in Australia, it's only about 26 baht to the dollar, while here it is about 30 baht to the dollar. Is Thai immigration using the Thai exchange rate for the calculations? I ask this because my mum may retire here and her pension does not amount to 800K a year, so will need to put some in a bank here. 

They use exchange rate for the day you apply they get from a bank here.

[TroyT]

.

Retirement Visa ?

I thought there is no such thing. I learnt here that it is only an extention of stay.

Correct...there is not such thing as a "Retirement Visa" or a "Marriage Visa"

It is an Extension of Stay based on retirement or marriage to a Thai national.

Someone go to Chiang Mai immigration and put them right please.

On my last annual renewal they stamped in red on the top (for some reason) 'Retirement Visa'

I wish these semantics would stop.....extension, renewal, visa......who the heck really cares what it is called, as long as it's for another year and we all know what the person means, so why the need to pick them up?

As I said if it really bothers you, pop along to CMI and give them a mouthful.

Someone must have picked up the wrong stamp!

Just looked at my retirement extensions for the last few years from CM Imm. The stamp mark [just in English] at the top for the last two years states 'Retirement' ------------- no 'visa' and no 'extension' Prior to that it was just in Thai.

Just trying to make the water fractionally less muddy for others

[Maggusoil]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

I had that same thought, the reason that popped into my head was that a Thai can work.

Although 400,000 for a falang/Thai couple and 1,600,000 for a farang couple sure is some difference.

I can see many reasonable differences, even spiritual ones that may be why its less for a Thai/farang couple. For example the Thai/farang couple would have many more "family" expenses than a completely independent retired "couple" or don't have to fee anyone else.

My question is, regarding the op, where it says that the alternative to the banked amount of 800,000 is 3 months of pension or investment income of at least 65,000 baht a month prior to the application, does anyone know if there is a similar income level applied as an alternative to the Thai/ Farang's amount of 400,000?

[uptheos]

If the logic is that it takes 800000 baht for a person over 50 to support himself for a year, then why does it only take a person under fifty 400000 baht to support himself and possibly a wife that does not work and 1 or more children for a year?

I am over 50, have a Thai wife who doesn't work and still partially support my 28 year old stepson after putting him through 5 years of college. But I could extend my visa for marriage purposes and only have to have 400k. But if I got divorced and had to extend for retirement I would have to have 800k. They've got the whole requirement reversed!

Logic is not part of Thai society and humanitarian grounds has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of living!

I'm not suggesting that it should be made more difficult for anybody but cannot justify the difference in the requirements based on the reasoning given!

Absolutely, I'm with you. It should be double what a retired person pays, to support a wife, children, parents, buffalo and all the hangers on.

Edited December 6, 2013 by uptheos

[ubonjoe]

 

_{Why is a  "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

 

I had that same thought, the reason that popped into my head was that a Thai can work.

Although 400,000 for a falang/Thai couple and 1,600,000 for a farang couple sure is some difference.

 

 

I can see many reasonable differences, even spiritual ones that may be why its less for a Thai/farang couple. For example the Thai/farang couple would have many more "family" expenses than a completely independent retired "couple" or don't have to fee anyone else.

 

My question is, regarding the op, where it says that the alternative to the banked amount of 800,000 is 3 months of pension or investment income of at least 65,000 baht a month prior to the application, does anyone know if there is a similar income level applied as an alternative to the Thai/ Farang's amount of 400,000?

Income of 40k baht for extension based upon marriage.

There is no 3 month income proof needed for either type of extension unless it is for marriage and the applicant has a work permit and showing tax payments for proof.

[culicine]

What about the clause that says 65,000 per month or 800,000 in the bank or a mixture of both?

Is the mixture a reality?

Suppose you don't quite make the 65,000, can you then get away with say only 100,000 in the bank to make up the difference?

Yes it is possible and there are many that use it. You just have to be sure the total is 800k baht or more. There is no seasoning requirement in the rules but there are a few offices that want money to be in the bank for 90 days.

Can I ask how the pension is converted to baht? For example, if the OZ pension is say 550 dollars a fortnight, how is the calculated to baht for immigration purposes. If they use the exchange rate based in Australia, it's only about 26 baht to the dollar, while here it is about 30 baht to the dollar. Is Thai immigration using the Thai exchange rate for the calculations? I ask this because my mum may retire here and her pension does not amount to 800K a year, so will need to put some in a bank here.

They use exchange rate for the day you apply they get from a bank here.

Thanks, that's good news, given the lousy exchange rate in OZ.

[samran]

The rules since Nov. 2008 have already been posted in this thread and is how immigration handles cases.It might be that there is a lot lost in translation.

To me it seems that immigration might be trying to say is simply that a person applying for an extension based on retirement must fulfill the requirements by him/herself, so no joint accounts. (In the past a joined account was often allowed, provided it was at least 1,6 million baht).

If one of the partners doesn't have 800,000 baht or otherwise meets the financial requirements, he/she will have to apply as dependent and not for an extension based on retirement him/her self.

So this is really much ado about nothing?

The other partner just applies as a dependent. Shows nothing except a marriage certificate and life goes on??

Say it ain't so. The whiners at TV will have nothing to whinge about!!

[redutedog1]

ok How can an Australia on a pension that is only about 21,000 Baht per fortnight prove that he gets 65,000 Baht per month ??

i know many Aussie on the pension living there with nothing but their pension and the 800,000 baht in bank of cause

An alternative is to show a regular pension or investment income of at least 65,000 baht a month, he said. Applicants must show proof of this income for the three months prior to submitting the application.

[Maggusoil]

_{Why is a "married to a Thai" visa only requiring 400,000? Makes no sense that it should be 400,000 when two people are being supported. Why not 1,600,000 baht for a married farang?}

I had that same thought, the reason that popped into my head was that a Thai can work.

Although 400,000 for a falang/Thai couple and 1,600,000 for a farang couple sure is some difference.

I can see many reasonable differences, even spiritual ones that may be why its less for a Thai/farang couple. For example the Thai/farang couple would have many more "family" expenses than a completely independent retired "couple" or don't have to fee anyone else.

My question is, regarding the op, where it says that the alternative to the banked amount of 800,000 is 3 months of pension or investment income of at least 65,000 baht a month prior to the application, does anyone know if there is a similar income level applied as an alternative to the Thai/ Farang's amount of 400,000?

Income of 40k baht for extension based upon marriage.

There is no 3 month income proof needed for either type of extension unless it is for marriage and the applicant has a work permit and showing tax payments for proof.

Thank you.

According to my most recent enquiries with the Thai Consulate in Sydney, I can apply for a Thai/Spouse visiting visa to see my 5yr old Thai daughter, for e.g. $225 for an multiple entry 12 month visa with no banking or income requirements needed.

The Thai Consulate staff maintain that the 400,000 quoted in the Phuket Gazette article was incorrect.

I had to pressure for this info over the phone. The information they kept referring me to on the website substantiates it.