Using 5 year fixed interest deposits in UK on maturity as income

[spambot]

Today I took a further step forward trying to reverse the situation I was in - Identified from previous post http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/685676-i-had-my-british-embassy-income-letter-rejected-by-immigration-for-my-annual-extension-of-stay-ban/ - I actually have taken a number of steps so far (I will post latter once I reach a conclusion with Thai immigration and British Embassy - Both have been contacted and asked to contribute to find out what the problem might be - However please until I get to a clear point of conclusion don't ask questions about the process so far - I will post fully once I get this full disclosure).

Anyhow - One of the steps I took was today to meet again with the same immigration officer that was involved with my initial rejection for my income statement letter (I met him at one of the temporary offices for extension of stay - due to and because of the protests) - And I presented him with support documentation to support my income provided on my original British Embassy income letter.

One of the sources of revenue was from a five year bond that then paid every month into a UK bank account.

He had no issue with this source or this form of income (well at least today he didn't - And I have been invited to meet with him again latter once he is back in his old offices after the protests make this possible - so this might not be the same situation in the end story).

However assuming that he is of the same mind that he was today - And that this source of income satisfies the criteria as allowable income (for extension of stay on earning shown on the Embassy letter) he raised an important issue that initially I thought I was going to sink me, but then found a reply that seemed to hit a silence and some reflective thought.

He pointed out that the bond matures this year 2014 and that no further income will derive from this fixed deposit since the five years was now completed this year. I suggested that rather than considering this as a dead source that he consider this now - not as a smaller interest being paid, but rather a bigger amount of revenue being released from the same place the revenue was being generated - So the £3,000 per year interest that was going away for earnings this year - This was being replaced by a payment from the underlying deposit that was being released which was £85,000 - And this should be considered as earning.

Needles to say this created somewhat of double think for the officer - since if he accepted the principle of unearned income was legitimate and acceptable sources for income contributions then why would he not consider the unearned income from the release of the capital be considered in the same way?

He asked me to meet again after the protests get him back his office and so I will understand more fully how he interprets this then.

But in conclusion I was not really sure if my argument that I actually present was actually of any value since I was simply clutching at straws in that moment.

But then thinking about this afterwards I realised that there is no real difference in the two since the source of the capital was mine that created this acceptable revenue (Thai immigration position) - I was not being paid for any work performed for the revenue (hence it was not earned revenue) it was revenue from my capital and so when I got this capital back it should be see in the same way as a gain for the year from this same capital creating any revenue - just as the interest would be see as a gain and since neither is really earned - Just made available through the timing that was created through a financial instrument - Then there is no real difference - just a consideration of what amount of capital is available at what point in time.

OK - I know that this is subjective, but for immigration if they accept one argument for interest on the capital then they should accept the other for the release of the capital.

When I meet with him next time I do not expect a philosophical or an economics reasoning on this - Its going to be one way decision and not a conversation - I know this and so there is no point trying to torture out any betrayal of brutal truth on this, but it might (just) work (on a slow day) for someone.

So has any one else claimed interest from a fixed interest bond and found it acceptable (or indeed found it unacceptable) as income that contributed to their income letter from their Embassy?

- I would love to know.

- I would love to know even more if someone has managed to convince immigration that matured funds was income and should be considered as just the same as interest being paid from that capital.

Obviously - Only a consideration if an income letter has been challenged!

Edited January 13, 2014 by spambot

[wym]

Not answering your question I know, but why not just use the asset method rather than income?

[spambot]

Not answering your question I know, but why not just use the asset method rather than income?

If I read you correctly I think that you are asking why I do not simply deposit funds into a Thai bank - and only use this as my method.

Forgive me if I am getting your question wrong and not reading you correctly......

However assuming I got this right - Then this suggests means giving up on a choice that has been made available.

Since it has been offered as a choice it should remain exactly that..

I hear what you are saying and I am assuming that you are interested and have some curiosity for what is the source of needing this choice - so just to answer this - The bottom line is my desire is to retain choice to maximise optimum currency rates for when and how funds are converted - Wishing to make this choice based upon the market opportunity and not the demands of immigration .

However really the main issue is that because I have been given a choice - I wish to use it.

[vaultdweller0013]

Return of principal is not "income" (at least not "net income"); it is return of capital, and if you wish to use capital as a proxy for income in your visa application, it needs to be in a Thai bank, per Thailand's prerogative.

Think of it this way, if I have GBP 2000 and repeatedly invest it in 1 month fixed term deposits at 1% yearly interest, is my yearly income from this GBP 24,020 or GBP 20? Yes, this is quite different than a 5 year fixed term deposit maturing, but it demonstrates how your proposed definition of "income" to include returned principal gives some odd results.

Will you be declaring the GBP 85,000 to the UK government as net income, and paying the appropriate tax on it? I am assuming the answer is no. In which case, the question is if the UK government doesn't treat it as income (an thus subject to tax), why should the Thai government treat it as income?

Now, in an ideal world it would make sense for Thailand to grant you an exception; if you can legitimately claim that either (1) you intend to bring over THB 800,000 of the principal into Thailand after maturity or (2) you will re-invest the money and receive sufficient income from that. However, I have no idea whether Thai Immigration even considers such exceptions and if they do, what your chances of succeeding are.

Edited January 14, 2014 by vaultdweller0013

[spambot]

Return of principal is not "income" (at least not "net income"); it is return of capital, and if you wish to use capital as a proxy for income in your visa application, it needs to be in a Thai bank, per Thailand's prerogative.

Think of it this way, if I have GBP 2000 and repeatedly invest it in 1 month fixed term deposits at 1% yearly interest, is my yearly income from this GBP 24,020 or GBP 20? Yes, this is quite different than a 5 year fixed term deposit maturing, but it demonstrates how your proposed definition of "income" to include returned principal gives some odd results.

Will you be declaring the GBP 85,000 to the UK government as net income, and paying the appropriate tax on it? I am assuming the answer is no. In which case, the question is if the UK government doesn't treat it as income (an thus subject to tax), why should the Thai government treat it as income?

Now, in an ideal world it would make sense for Thailand to grant you an exception; if you can legitimately claim that either (1) you intend to bring over THB 800,000 of the principal into Thailand after maturity or (2) you will re-invest the money and receive sufficient income from that. However, I have no idea whether Thai Immigration even considers such exceptions and if they do, what your chances of succeeding are.

Yup I do get this entirely - And you are 1000% right

- The real underlying point however here is not so much about taxation on capital - cos that is an entirely different ball game - But its the value that is placed on 'ability' to access funds over 12 months' - cos this is what immigration is really trying achieve (see explanation further below - visit to British Embassy) in its policy of determining your financial fitness and no burden to the kingdom as the alien granted extension to stay. And they do not care about taxation or relief on sources of funds by personal allowances etc - Just raw hard access to new money - available for you in the next 12 months.

And I am playing devils advocate here when I do this mental framing of the money thing with release of the underlying capital, but its what immigration have defined that they want to see. It is a definition that fits their principles since there are no further rules on this principle.

The real issue.

Unfortunately immigration have no real underlying principles or guidance on what it is that drives good sources vs bad sources of new access (to funds).

So your point again - completely correct as a principle used in taxation - I would not expect anything different since this principle is at the heart of determining taxation system for interest earned from underlying capital.

The real purpose for throwing this up it to illustrate a point that seems bizarre (if we were actually looking at say taxation principles as you pointed out). Immigration has a special world of money that immigration has created the rules for (or indeed lack of rules to guide retirees) - It is a secret book and provides nothing to follow.

This might help - And might be new information to some - Gained from visit to British Embassy:

Without going deep into a meeting I had at the British Embassy (as a result of writing to them about the central incident around rejection of the income statement by immigration) I was interested to learn while talking with the vice consult - that there are two templates (not one template as I first thought to be the case).

The two template system might be the source of some of the confusions when presenting income letters by some to immigration.Hence you do need to identify which letter template you have been issued with

- One template is for pension statements:

This is where actual pension letters and documents have been provided by the pension source company either private of government sourced.

- The other (second) template is based upon non pension source income and these are more difficult to word. So the Embassy takes the easy route and simply provides a notarised letter to say that they have identified an amount of funds that goes into a bank account

The interesting bit for me was that the non pension funds letter will identify the total funds for the year based upon calculating an entire 12 months - sometimes by seeing the regular monthly incoming of funds shown in three monthly consecutive statements of your bank account, but also from one off payments that are shown at any time during the year - for example some accounts for interest payments are paid once per year and not monthly.

When pushing the point at the British Embassy - The only concern that was seen to be critical to interviewing a retiree for their extension of stay application at immigration was to really just to id if there was going to be a lack of funds.

The only way that they currently have is subjective opinions on what constitutes - Good vs bad sources of funds to determine that you might have sufficient funds.

At this point all kinds of bells started to ring and I started to understand a lot more of the context for what had happened earlier to myself in this principle being deployed.

- What is a good source of funds for the Income letter?

This seems to be at the heart of most of the issues around income letter confusions

Since what immigration want to see is a release of capital being made available to an alien in a specific year - The problem is they have no definition of what are the good sources these funds might originate from

Typical examples:

• Is income from rental of property a good source (or a bad source)?

• Is income from a five year bond a good source? - And therefore should income from an instant access account be considered a less good source?

• Or perhaps you gamble on line and you are pretty good at this and it provides revenues?

• Maybe you just buy a house on a buy 2 let mortgage and take out a 100% mortgage (ok I know not really going to happen - just a point I'm making) and you get tenants who pay to you the equivalent amount of the 800K that immigration want to see you earn each month from outside Thailand, but the mortgage payments is the same amount as the income being gained - Hence zero revenues.

And the point made was that Thai immigration have no guidance for you or me on what they are thinking of what are good sources vs bad sources for this revenue.

So my frankly ludicrous way of attempting to show that any lump of money you might have back home in whatever wrapper, formation or indeed of any exorbitant amount - still is potentially under the spotlight of subjective day to day guesswork from who you get on the day when immigration to look at your letter.

One final comment - Please always take your sources of your income with your application (if you have the second template letter from the British Embassy) - Not my words, but quoted at me by one of the people I also met at one of my visits to the British Embassy.

This was information - I do not see anywhere from either Immigration or the Embassy freely published as guidance.

[Suradit69]

Return of principal is not "income" (at least not "net income"); it is return of capital, and if you wish to use capital as a proxy for income in your visa application, it needs to be in a Thai bank, per Thailand's prerogative.

Think of it this way, if I have GBP 2000 and repeatedly invest it in 1 month fixed term deposits at 1% yearly interest, is my yearly income from this GBP 24,020 or GBP 20? Yes, this is quite different than a 5 year fixed term deposit maturing, but it demonstrates how your proposed definition of "income" to include returned principal gives some odd results.

Will you be declaring the GBP 85,000 to the UK government as net income, and paying the appropriate tax on it? I am assuming the answer is no. In which case, the question is if the UK government doesn't treat it as income (an thus subject to tax), why should the Thai government treat it as income?

Now, in an ideal world it would make sense for Thailand to grant you an exception; if you can legitimately claim that either (1) you intend to bring over THB 800,000 of the principal into Thailand after maturity or (2) you will re-invest the money and receive sufficient income from that. However, I have no idea whether Thai Immigration even considers such exceptions and if they do, what your chances of succeeding are.

Yes if you're getting a return of principal, that would not be considered "earnings." It would have the potential to generate income if reinvested and the periodic payments were available to you for living expenses, but only those dividends or interest payments would qualify as income.

Quite honestly you seem to be going overboard in taking what ought to be a fairly straight forward requirement that rather a large number of people other than you have been able to satisfy without difficulty and you are acting as if you're enlightening people with your expertise. More probably they will soon find you annoying rather than instructive. Tilting at windmills may be a pleasant pastime for you, but will most likely just result in the embassy and Immigrations becoming more entrenched in their views and less willing to waste time listening to more reasonable applicants.

This was being replaced by a payment from the underlying deposit that was being released which was £85,000 - And this should be considered as earning.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Suradit69

[menorah]

Not answering your question I know, but why not just use the asset method rather than income?

If I read you correctly I think that you are asking why I do not simply deposit funds into a Thai bank - and only use this as my method.

Forgive me if I am getting your question wrong and not reading you correctly......

However assuming I got this right - Then this suggests means giving up on a choice that has been made available.

Since it has been offered as a choice it should remain exactly that..

I hear what you are saying and I am assuming that you are interested and have some curiosity for what is the source of needing this choice - so just to answer this - The bottom line is my desire is to retain choice to maximise optimum currency rates for when and how funds are converted - Wishing to make this choice based upon the market opportunity and not the demands of immigration .

However really the main issue is that because I have been given a choice - I wish to use it.

You seem to be analysing things to the 'enth degree' !

You talk about...... choice, to maximise currency rates for when & how funds are converted. However, there's precious little choice to take funds from a 5 year bond !!

Your 'argument' not to deposit the 800K in a Thai bank is unfounded, especially since you can choose to deposit the money into a 4 month, 6 month or 15 month high interest fixed rate bond at just over 3% less tax. that's far better than a UK bank is currently offering.

Choice is an 'overworked' term theses days and one particularly liked by politicians.......many of whom talk a great deal but achieve very little !

Given a choice between all the unnecessary 'maneuvering' with Thai immigration, or a simple, logical and straightforward deposit in a fixed rate bank account, I know which choice makes most sense.

Sometimes it's better not to 'over think' things.

Foot Note:

Further to your original Post and subsequent Posts, I foresee changes to Thai immigration's financial capability requirements coming any day soon.

Quite frankly, when an individual seeks to 'baffle and bamboozle what essentially 'boils down' to 2 options, either a lump sum deposit in a Thai bank or a 'normal pension income, the authorities then feel compelled to 'cross the T's & dot the I's, with the result the vast majority of responsible ex patriots suffer at your expense ! Don't say you haven't been warned.

Edited January 14, 2014 by menorah

[wym]

What a waste time and energy.

And "what they are really trying to achieve"!!?? Maybe the one clueful guy that wrote the rule in the first place.

For the thousands of bureaucrats working on the ground that follow, they couldn't give a toss about rationality or the real world, they have their rules, and if you want to deal with them efficiently and move on to more productive pursuits you simply provide what their rules state in the format requested, they put stamps all over the papers and you move on with your life.

Put some of that creative intelligence into an activity where you'll actually receive some real benefit in return.

[spambot]

What a waste time and energy.

And "what they are really trying to achieve"!!?? Maybe the one clueful guy that wrote the rule in the first place.

For the thousands of bureaucrats working on the ground that follow, they couldn't give a toss about rationality or the real world, they have their rules, and if you want to deal with them efficiently and move on to more productive pursuits you simply provide what their rules state in the format requested, they put stamps all over the papers and you move on with your life.

Put some of that creative intelligence into an activity where you'll actually receive some real benefit in return.

What am I trying to achieve?

OK its a fair question>

Simply this.....Knowledge of what works and what does not work.

Asking why ?

• Is healthier than moaning about confusion.

• Being curious rather than accepting - bit by bit - will be useful forever.

The personal benefit so far - Having a friendly and very open relaxed conversation with the officer formed a kind of a relationship that was comfortable enough for him to gave me his personal details - This is not time spent trying to 'change face' in a transaction - This is time invested in a conversation.

Edited January 15, 2014 by spambot

[spambot]

Not answering your question I know, but why not just use the asset method rather than income?

If I read you correctly I think that you are asking why I do not simply deposit funds into a Thai bank - and only use this as my method.

Forgive me if I am getting your question wrong and not reading you correctly......

However assuming I got this right - Then this suggests means giving up on a choice that has been made available.

Since it has been offered as a choice it should remain exactly that..

I hear what you are saying and I am assuming that you are interested and have some curiosity for what is the source of needing this choice - so just to answer this - The bottom line is my desire is to retain choice to maximise optimum currency rates for when and how funds are converted - Wishing to make this choice based upon the market opportunity and not the demands of immigration .

However really the main issue is that because I have been given a choice - I wish to use it.

You seem to be analysing things to the 'enth degree' !

You talk about...... choice, to maximise currency rates for when & how funds are converted. However, there's precious little choice to take funds from a 5 year bond !!

Your 'argument' not to deposit the 800K in a Thai bank is unfounded, especially since you can choose to deposit the money into a 4 month, 6 month or 15 month high interest fixed rate bond at just over 3% less tax. that's far better than a UK bank is currently offering.

Choice is an 'overworked' term theses days and one particularly liked by politicians.......many of whom talk a great deal but achieve very little !

Given a choice between all the unnecessary 'maneuvering' with Thai immigration, or a simple, logical and straightforward deposit in a fixed rate bank account, I know which choice makes most sense.

Sometimes it's better not to 'over think' things.

Foot Note:

Further to your original Post and subsequent Posts, I foresee changes to Thai immigration's financial capability requirements coming any day soon.

Quite frankly, when an individual seeks to 'baffle and bamboozle what essentially 'boils down' to 2 options, either a lump sum deposit in a Thai bank or a 'normal pension income, the authorities then feel compelled to 'cross the T's & dot the I's, with the result the vast majority of responsible ex patriots suffer at your expense ! Don't say you haven't been warned.

• The Baht/GBP has fluctuated by over 20% in 12 months
• Not sure how 'trying to bamboozle' fits - Rather this is trying to understand.
• Sorry that you feel - Choice is a bad thing.

[Gsxrnz]

What a waste time and energy.

And "what they are really trying to achieve"!!?? Maybe the one clueful guy that wrote the rule in the first place.

For the thousands of bureaucrats working on the ground that follow, they couldn't give a toss about rationality or the real world, they have their rules, and if you want to deal with them efficiently and move on to more productive pursuits you simply provide what their rules state in the format requested, they put stamps all over the papers and you move on with your life.

Put some of that creative intelligence into an activity where you'll actually receive some real benefit in return.

What am I trying to achieve?

OK its a fair question>

Simply this.....Knowledge of what works and what does not work.

Asking why ?

• Is healthier than moaning about confusion.

• Being curious rather than accepting - bit by bit - will be useful forever.

The personal benefit so far - Having a friendly and very open relaxed conversation with the officer formed a kind of a relationship that was comfortable enough for him to gave me his personal details - This is not time spent trying to 'change face' in a transaction - This is time invested in a conversation.

Next time you go to see your "friend", hand him an envelope with 10,000 baht in it and he will suddenly see your unique form of logic.

That's why he's talking so amicably to you.

[chiang mai]

I fell asleep trying to read the OP, sorry!

[spambot]

What a waste time and energy.

And "what they are really trying to achieve"!!?? Maybe the one clueful guy that wrote the rule in the first place.

For the thousands of bureaucrats working on the ground that follow, they couldn't give a toss about rationality or the real world, they have their rules, and if you want to deal with them efficiently and move on to more productive pursuits you simply provide what their rules state in the format requested, they put stamps all over the papers and you move on with your life.

Put some of that creative intelligence into an activity where you'll actually receive some real benefit in return.

What am I trying to achieve?

OK its a fair question>

Simply this.....Knowledge of what works and what does not work.

Asking why ?

• Is healthier than moaning about confusion.

• Being curious rather than accepting - bit by bit - will be useful forever.

The personal benefit so far - Having a friendly and very open relaxed conversation with the officer formed a kind of a relationship that was comfortable enough for him to gave me his personal details - This is not time spent trying to 'change face' in a transaction - This is time invested in a conversation.

Next time you go to see your "friend", hand him an envelope with 10,000 baht in it and he will suddenly see your unique form of logic.

That's why he's talking so amicably to you.

Thinking this - Died a long time ago - It is lazy and unhelpful to others.

[Gsxrnz]

What a waste time and energy.

And "what they are really trying to achieve"!!?? Maybe the one clueful guy that wrote the rule in the first place.

For the thousands of bureaucrats working on the ground that follow, they couldn't give a toss about rationality or the real world, they have their rules, and if you want to deal with them efficiently and move on to more productive pursuits you simply provide what their rules state in the format requested, they put stamps all over the papers and you move on with your life.

Put some of that creative intelligence into an activity where you'll actually receive some real benefit in return.

What am I trying to achieve?

OK its a fair question>

Simply this.....Knowledge of what works and what does not work.

Asking why ?

• Is healthier than moaning about confusion.

• Being curious rather than accepting - bit by bit - will be useful forever.

The personal benefit so far - Having a friendly and very open relaxed conversation with the officer formed a kind of a relationship that was comfortable enough for him to gave me his personal details - This is not time spent trying to 'change face' in a transaction - This is time invested in a conversation.

Next time you go to see your "friend", hand him an envelope with 10,000 baht in it and he will suddenly see your unique form of logic.

That's why he's talking so amicably to you.

Thinking this - Died a long time ago - It is lazy and unhelpful to others.

Suit yourself. It's as obvious as dog's balls that he's playing with you and leaving his answer open ended. Did he rub his chin and give you that inscrutable look as he considered your investment maturity suggestion?

You don't meet the criteria - end of.

He's implying that he could possibly consider your 85k investment as "income" and will sleep on the matter. This means he is waiting for you to wake up and smell the coffee at your next meeting.

If you feel uncomfortable handing him an incentive, don't. It happens a million times a day all over Thailand and he won't be offended.

[spambot]

In Reply Gsxrnz

You might be right - But mostly irrelevant - Unless you have the data - Even point to members here that have done that in the last 12 months - This would be helpful.

[RandomSand]

The Baht/GBP has fluctuated by over 20% in 12 months

If you had bought a Thai asset, which is cash, notes, bonds or indeed anything else and the asset then declined when priced in pounds; you'd record a capital loss on your UK accounts.

Also; don't underestimate that the whole purpose of the immigration requirements is to get workable capital into Thailand.

[Gsxrnz]

In Reply Gsxrnz

You might be right - But mostly irrelevant - Unless you have the data - Even point to members here that have done that in the last 12 months - This would be helpful.

[spambot]

Reply to

RandomSand

Hi Random Sand -

I think we might be at crossed purposes here. My original post was (admittedly) a long winded way of just pointing out that there is a gap in the way immigration and British embassy are not joined together on the use of Income letters and my second post was to illustrate that point with examples of absurd ways of thinking about this gap to just illustrate the gap - The capital in a 5 year bond was a tool I used to help (or not) show a real case where the lack of guidance could mean anything then could be used as earning for purpose of application at immigration - I was being purposefully mischievous by using something that should not be reasonably used for this purpose, but because there is no clarity then I suggested that this source had every reason it should be acceptable from immigration - directly because of lack of guidance

The 20% gain is the fluctuation rate of conversion and if you bought THB at the bottom and then compared this with buying at the top the amount of THB more gained is around 160,000 Baht (on a transfer conversion of 800K THB). This was used to compare the potential gain from transferring the 800k on currency when the imbalance is not in your favour and gave much more benefit than 3% interest over 12 months than that which in available from a Thai bank account deposit.

Apologies for the two long posts not hitting the mark - Hope this helps.

Edited January 15, 2014 by spambot

[wym]

Gsxrnz is right, and all your theoretical speculation is wasting an incredible amount of your time and brainpower.

Just pony up to meet their picayune requirements and put your energy into solving real issues in your life, really!

[SheungWan]

Unless you have identifiable pension income that meets the threshhold figure (and rental income does not count) then 800k deposit it is.

Just get on with it.

[spambot]

Reply

wym

I love it that you have stood up and said what you said.

This is not about fighting and winning - Rather its about understanding and knowing.

Because then - There is no need to look up from below and hoping - Rather you can look straight ahead and connect.

[spambot]

Reply

SheungWan

Not true - Rental income is acceptable and was confirmed 3 days ago to me by immigration - Can you provide your data point defining that rental is not acceptable.

[SheungWan]

Reply

SheungWan

Not true - Rental income is acceptable and was confirmed 3 days ago to me by immigration - Can you provide your data point defining that rental is not acceptable.

Royal Thai Consulate Documents required with visa application non-immigrant category O for persons aged 50-64.

Quote:

Point 3: Copy of ...bank statements for last 3 months showing monthly salary or pension equivalent to THB65k or lump sum of amount of THB800k. Income through other means such as rented out property is not accepted.

[spambot]

Reply to - SheungWan

Sorry you have lost me:

This subject is about an extension to stay - And not about a visa application.

It may be a slip of the keyboard from your end - If so please correct the terms used and respond back accordingly.

[SheungWan]

Reply to - SheungWan

Sorry you have lost me:

This subject is about an extension to stay - And not about a visa application.

It may be a slip of the keyboard from your end - If so please correct the terms used and respond back accordingly.

If you want to think the rules are different then good luck and bon voyage.

[spambot]

Reply to

SheungWan

I think we might have a communications gap - I still do not get what you are saying.

If you can just post the link to the info that states what you say - That rental income is not accepted for an extension application by the Thai immigration or by the British Embassy when applying for an income letter.

[chiang mai]

Communication gaps with whatever his name is today are not uncommon, I urge you to persist regardless.

[spambot]

chiang mai

Thanks Chaing Mai - Good to get the heads up and a sense of perspective - Appreciated!

[menorah]

Not answering your question I know, but why not just use the asset method rather than income?

If I read you correctly I think that you are asking why I do not simply deposit funds into a Thai bank - and only use this as my method.

Forgive me if I am getting your question wrong and not reading you correctly......

However assuming I got this right - Then this suggests means giving up on a choice that has been made available.

Since it has been offered as a choice it should remain exactly that..

I hear what you are saying and I am assuming that you are interested and have some curiosity for what is the source of needing this choice - so just to answer this - The bottom line is my desire is to retain choice to maximise optimum currency rates for when and how funds are converted - Wishing to make this choice based upon the market opportunity and not the demands of immigration .

However really the main issue is that because I have been given a choice - I wish to use it.

You seem to be analysing things to the 'enth degree' !

You talk about...... choice, to maximise currency rates for when & how funds are converted. However, there's precious little choice to take funds from a 5 year bond !!

Your 'argument' not to deposit the 800K in a Thai bank is unfounded, especially since you can choose to deposit the money into a 4 month, 6 month or 15 month high interest fixed rate bond at just over 3% less tax. that's far better than a UK bank is currently offering.

Choice is an 'overworked' term theses days and one particularly liked by politicians.......many of whom talk a great deal but achieve very little !

Given a choice between all the unnecessary 'maneuvering' with Thai immigration, or a simple, logical and straightforward deposit in a fixed rate bank account, I know which choice makes most sense.

Sometimes it's better not to 'over think' things.

Foot Note:

Further to your original Post and subsequent Posts, I foresee changes to Thai immigration's financial capability requirements coming any day soon.

Quite frankly, when an individual seeks to 'baffle and bamboozle what essentially 'boils down' to 2 options, either a lump sum deposit in a Thai bank or a 'normal pension income, the authorities then feel compelled to 'cross the T's & dot the I's, with the result the vast majority of responsible ex patriots suffer at your expense ! Don't say you haven't been warned.

• The Baht/GBP has fluctuated by over 20% in 12 months
• Not sure how 'trying to bamboozle' fits - Rather this is trying to understand.
• Sorry that you feel - Choice is a bad thing.

....and almost 30% in the last 3 years.

bamboozle, as in the Thai officials must be wondering exactly what you're trying to ascertain. They have a set of guidelines upon which the financial requirements are based and these simple guidelines are easily negotiated by the majority of foreigners seeking to stay in The Kingdom.

I don't feel choice is a bad thing....but you're taking 2 basic choices, dissecting each choice semantically.

[chiang mai]

There is an opportunity cost associated with taking 800k baht, putting it into a Thai bank at say 3.6% tax free and forgetting about it Regardless of whatever exchange rate you used to bring the 800k over here, chances are that over time you will see fluctuations but are unlikely to loose, if you plan on being here for the longer term and as long as you don't exchange at the bottom of the scale.