How many knew about this?

[kowpot]

I was on the Thai immigration web site checking out the new online 90 day report procedures, when I came upon this. In bold. Maybe some of you already knew this, but I am sure others didn't.

In the case of retirement:

Criteria for Consideration

The alien:
(1) Must have been granted a non-immigrant visa (NON-IM).
(2) Must be 50 years of age or over.
(3) Must have evidence of having income of no less than Baht 65,000 per month; or
(4) On the filing date, the applicant must have account deposited (saving / fixed account) in a bank in Thailand of no less than
Baht 800,000 for the past three months. For the first year only, the applicant must have proof of a
deposit account in which said amount of funds has been maintained for no less than 60 days prior to
the filing date; or
(5) Must have an annual earning and funds deposited with a bank totaling no less than Baht
800,000 as of the filing date.
(6) An alien who entered the Kingdom before October 21, 1998 and has been consecutively
permitted to stay in the Kingdom for retirement shall be subject to the following criteria:

(a) Must be 60 years of age or over and have an annual fixed income with funds maintained in
a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht 200,000 or have a monthly income of
no less than Baht 20,000.

( If less than 60 years of age but not less than 55 years of age, must have an annual fixed
income with funds maintained in a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht
500,000 or have a monthly income of no less than Baht 50,000.

Documents to be submitted

1. Application form
2. Copy of applicant’s passport
3. Evidence of income such as a retirement pension, interest or dividends; and/or
4. Account deposited (saving / fixed account) certificate issued by a bank in Thailand and a copy of a bankbook
5. Only in the case of Criterion (6), the applicant must submit documents equivalent to Clauses 1-4
stated above.

[crazygreg44]

So you must be at least 67+ by now and have been in Thailand since 1998 on a retirement-extension status since.

How many of us can meet this criteria ?

and my opinion on this:

( If less than 60 years of age but not less than 55 years of age, must have an annual fixed
income with funds maintained in a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht
500,000 or have a monthly income of no less than Baht 50,000.

how would you have been able to enter Thailand before 1998 with a Non Imm O and gain retirement status, as an "under 50 year old" ?? Very contradictory. You simply CANNOT now be under the age of 60 if you came here to retire, in or before 1998.

Edited April 25, 2015 by crazygreg44

[Jingthing]

Yes, it's called grandfathering old requirements for those who started on those requirements and have continued to do so without any break.

Cheers.

[Anthony5]

So you must be at least 67+ by now and have been in Thailand since 1998 on a retirement-extension status since.

How many of us can meet this criteria ?

and my opinion on this:

( If less than 60 years of age but not less than 55 years of age, must have an annual fixed

income with funds maintained in a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht

500,000 or have a monthly income of no less than Baht 50,000.

how would you have been able to enter Thailand before 1998 with a Non Imm O and gain retirement status, as an "under 50 year old" ?? Very contradictory. You simply CANNOT now be under the age of 60 if you came here to retire, in or before 1998.

What the OP reads is that someone who applied for a retirement visa/extension in 1998 needed to be 60 years of age and prove 200.000 Baht in the bank, while at a later date this was changed to 55 year and a 500.000 Baht requirement. We all know that it is now 50 years of age and 800.000 Baht in the bank.

Those that retired in 1998 at 60 years of age, and those at the later date when 55 years was the eligible age, are now still retired and are grandfathered concerning the financial requirements.

[crazygreg44]

thanks for bringin light to it, Jingthing. I never assumed that 'grandfathers' who came here 17 years ago, can stay under lightened rules than newcomers. WOW, that's what I call news

However I guess it does and will not help anyone out there who wishes to enter him/herself into the retirement extension process.

Edited April 25, 2015 by crazygreg44

[Jingthing]

thanks for bringin light to it, Jingthing. I never assumed that 'grandfathers' who came here 17 years ago, can stay under lightened rules than newcomers. WOW, that's what I call news

However I guess it does and will not help anyone out there who wishes to enter him/herself into the retirement extension process.

OK, I see it is new information to some, but it is hardly news.

It's a very old established reality.

Many of us on current retirement extensions hope that when the requirements change again that the requirements we are on will be grandfathered as well.

However, there is no assurance of that at all.

[kowpot]

I guess what surprised me the most, is that in only 17 years, the requirement has jumped by 600,000 baht. Now I am not complaining and I do understand that some are grandfathered in. But, has the cost of living really gone up that much? Or are the early one's living in poverty?

[Jingthing]

I guess what surprised me the most, is that in only 17 years, the requirement has jumped by 600,000 baht. Now I am not complaining and I do understand that some are grandfathered in. But, has the cost of living really gone up that much? Or are the early one's living in poverty?

By international standards of retirement visa financial requirements, Thailand's current levels are on the lower end. That is of those countries offering retirement visas, as the vast majority don't. Don't assume that the grandfathered people actually have that little, that's the requirement, doesn't mean they don't have much more.

[CharlieH]

Wrong forum

MOVED to Visa

Please do not use colored font !

[ubonjoe]

Nothing new. The same clause has been in the police orders for extensions of stay for many years now.

[dave2]

Re

Must be 60 years of age or over and have an annual fixed income with funds maintained in
a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht 200,000 or have a monthly income of
no less than Baht 20,000

Yaayy

bring in a new rule for 66 year old farts like me

I would be much happier having 200 odd thousand in the bank than the ridiculous 800 odd thousand for three months we have to now

a single person needs 800 thousand

a married couple needs 400 thousand

wheres the logic in that ?

dave2

Edited April 26, 2015 by ubonjoe
Changed to default fond and removed a off topic image.. This not the photo forum.

[ubonjoe]

Somebody needs to read that clause again. You have to be on extensions of stay based upon retirement prior to those years mentioned to qualify for the lower amounts.

[OJAS]

However I guess it does and will not help anyone out there who wishes to enter him/herself into the retirement extension process.

However, it will, of course, help those of us who have entered the process since 21/10/1998 if and when the existing 65,000/800,000 minimum limits are increased but similarly "grandfathered".

Edited April 26, 2015 by OJAS

[TerryLH]

"So you must be at least 67+ by now and have been in Thailand since 1998 on a retirement-extension status since."

My calculator says 77.

[billd766]

I guess what surprised me the most, is that in only 17 years, the requirement has jumped by 600,000 baht. Now I am not complaining and I do understand that some are grandfathered in. But, has the cost of living really gone up that much? Or are the early one's living in poverty?

Just think how much pensions and salarieswere back in those days. What the exchange rates were and how much the cost of living was then.

A simple example is that when I bought my Ford Ranger pickup truck in 2001 the cost of diesel was less than 10 baht per litre. Now it is about 25 but has been as high as 44 baht in some places.

You were talking about 17 years ago in 1998 which was also only a year after the Tom Yang Gung currency crisis in 1997 when the Thai baht crashed and those figures had been in place for a long while before that.

Edited April 26, 2015 by billd766

[Godders]

Wow! This is good news to me. I came over in July 1998, when I was 60, but was on a marriage visa for a few years, until my wife and I parted. Subsequently, I went for a "retirement" visa and assumed I would be liable for the same qualifying income figure (800,000 or monthly equivalent) as those who had arrived after the October 1998 deadline.

I wonder what would happen, after all these years, if I turned up at Immigration for a visa extension with proof of a declared income only 200,000 baht instead of a bank account stuffed with 800,000?

Of course, I don't have any records going back to 1998 and I have had couple of new passports since then. Would Immigration have their own records which could be checked, I wonder.

Anyway, thanks Kowpot for the heads up. It would certainly make my life easier, having lived on the same frozen state pension for the last 17 years and watched the pound fall like a stone recently!

[Jingthing]

Wow! This is good news to me. I came over in July 1998, when I was 60, but was on a marriage visa for a few years, until my wife and I parted. Subsequently, I went for a "retirement" visa and assumed I would be liable for the same qualifying income figure (800,000 or monthly equivalent) as those who had arrived after the October 1998 deadline.

I wonder what would happen, after all these years, if I turned up at Immigration for a visa extension with proof of a declared income only 200,000 baht instead of a bank account stuffed with 800,000?

Of course, I don't have any records going back to 1998 and I have had couple of new passports since then. Would Immigration have their own records which could be checked, I wonder.

Anyway, thanks Kowpot for the heads up. It would certainly make my life easier, having lived on the same frozen state pension for the last 17 years and watched the pound fall like a stone recently!

I am reading your post that you don't qualify.

You seem to be saying you have not had continuous retirement extensions since 1998.

Your marriage extensions don't count.

I understand how you might see it differently, but I don't think that is the case ... entering means entering and beginning on retirement extensions from that date and NEVER breaking that chain until the present. It sounds like you didn't even start the chain on time with RETIREMENT extensions.

Edited April 26, 2015 by Jingthing

[maccraw]

Very interesting--I have been here since before the Oct 1998 date but have always provided the higher,800,00 qualification at Pattaya/Jomtien.

Would love to hear from anyone who has actually got the extension on the "Grandfather:"basis--would certainly make it easier .

[ubonjoe]

Very interesting--I have been here since before the Oct 1998 date but have always provided the higher,800,00 qualification at Pattaya/Jomtien.

Would love to hear from anyone who has actually got the extension on the "Grandfather:"basis--would certainly make it easier .

I am certain that the people that qualified for the lower amount at the time the new money in the bank and income rules came into effect have been getting their extension with lower amounts as long as they kept getting a new extension every year.

You have to been on an extension to stay based upon retirement at the time the rules came into effect.

[akentryan]

Had a friend who recntly passed away. He qualified at the 200.000 level for years.My retirement has not been continuous so i do not qualify.

Edited April 26, 2015 by akentryan

[MaeJoMTB]

I guess what surprised me the most, is that in only 17 years, the requirement has jumped by 600,000 baht. Now I am not complaining and I do understand that some are grandfathered in. But, has the cost of living really gone up that much? Or are the early one's living in poverty?

Exchange rates changed too.

Before 1998 25bht/$1, 35bht/1GBP.

[Acharn]

So you must be at least 67+ by now and have been in Thailand since 1998 on a retirement-extension status since.

How many of us can meet this criteria ?

and my opinion on this:

( If less than 60 years of age but not less than 55 years of age, must have an annual fixed

income with funds maintained in a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht

500,000 or have a monthly income of no less than Baht 50,000.

how would you have been able to enter Thailand before 1998 with a Non Imm O and gain retirement status, as an "under 50 year old" ?? Very contradictory. You simply CANNOT now be under the age of 60 if you came here to retire, in or before 1998.

What the OP reads is that someone who applied for a retirement visa/extension in 1998 needed to be 60 years of age and prove 200.000 Baht in the bank, while at a later date this was changed to 55 year and a 500.000 Baht requirement. We all know that it is now 50 years of age and 800.000 Baht in the bank.

Those that retired in 1998 at 60 years of age, and those at the later date when 55 years was the eligible age, are now still retired and are grandfathered concerning the financial requirements.

No. My wife died in 1995, and my visa status changed because I had been on the "supporting a Thai national" extension. At that time there was a two tier retirement financial requirement. If you were 60 or older you could show a monthly guaranteed income of ฿25,000. If you were over 55 but less than 60 you had to show a guaranteed monthly income of ฿50,000. I remember it well because I was 58 and my Army pension was less than ฿50,000 (remember that at that time the dollar was ฿22.5). The good people at Immigration told me to do visa runs from August 1996 to August 1997, and then I would be 60 and the lower requirement would apply. I always had a good relation with the officers at Immigration. I don't remember now when they raised the income requirement to ฿65,000, but I think it must have been 1999 or later, because I was able to start my Social Security just in time. And, of course, the baht went to 40 to the dollar for a while.

Anyway, this is very interesting. I've had some anxiety for many years because my income isn't that much above the requirement, and the dollar is 'way overvalued so I expect it to crash. Luckily Obama has prevented that and the dollar is even stronger than ever now. Since I'm now only required to have ฿20,000 a month I'm pretty safe, unless the Tea Party force the government to default, which still seems to be one of their goals.

[Sawan Chan 7]

Same as I need to show 200k for my extension based on marriage.

[smotherb]

"So you must be at least 67+ by now and have been in Thailand since 1998 on a retirement-extension status since."

My calculator says 77.

yeah, well, rather normal on TV, can't read or do math.

[GOLDBUGGY]

If you entered this country in 1998 for a Retirement Visa at age 50, the youngest you could possibly be now is 67 Years Old.

So what is all this part about being younger than 60 but older than 55 mean? As from what I can see and calculate, this is not possible.

[Jingthing]

If you entered this country in 1998 for a Retirement Visa at age 50, the youngest you could possibly be now is 67 Years Old.

So what is all this part about being younger than 60 but older than 55 mean? As from what I can see and calculate, this is not possible.

OK.

Here goes.

Currently the minimum retirement visa or extension age is 50.

Back then the minimum was 55.

Back then there were two sets of financial requirements depending on if you were over 60 or between 55 and 60.

In 1998 the current system went into effect for all new people and the people already in the system could be grandfathered at the levels at that time indefinitely as long as they continue getting extensions.

[Suradit69]

I guess what surprised me the most, is that in only 17 years, the requirement has jumped by 600,000 baht. Now I am not complaining and I do understand that some are grandfathered in. But, has the cost of living really gone up that much? Or are the early one's living in poverty?

"But, has the cost of living really gone up that much? Or are the early one's living in poverty?"

Immigrations laws are not set to ensure that immigrant retirees are comfy-cozy ... in any country.

Thai laws are primarily intended to serve the interests of Thailand. You don't have to spend Baht 800,000 every year, just have that minimum amount available, but naturally, since Thailand is not a designated economic refugee camp for farang retirees, they want people here who have money to spend. Grandfathering in earlier long-stay immigrants ( As JT mentions, this is fairly widely known) demonstrates that they are compassionate and don't want to screw people who came here under less onerous conditions.

Whether or not someone can carry on with only Baht 200,000 a year is not the responsibility of immigrations. It's all they are required to show to renew their extensions of stay, but for most they probably spend more than that each year.

Edited April 26, 2015 by Suradit69

[Farang99]

So you must be at least 67+ by now and have been in Thailand since 1998 on a retirement-extension status since.

How many of us can meet this criteria ?

and my opinion on this:

( If less than 60 years of age but not less than 55 years of age, must have an annual fixed

income with funds maintained in a bank account for the past three months of no less than Baht

500,000 or have a monthly income of no less than Baht 50,000.

how would you have been able to enter Thailand before 1998 with a Non Imm O and gain retirement status, as an "under 50 year old" ?? Very contradictory. You simply CANNOT now be under the age of 60 if you came here to retire, in or before 1998.

The requirements for 200,000 in the bank apply to all those who entered the kingdom and otherwise qualified before 21 October 1998! Guess what - I entered the kingdom on 21 October and got screwed. For the first two years I needed only 200,000, but when the new regulations came into force I was immediately slapped with a demand for 800,000!

[kaorop]

try telling that to an immigration clown whoops sorry, officer

i know one fellow who has been here since before that date and old enough

but HAS to provide the current amounts to get his extensions, no ifs buts or maybes!

[Jingthing]

Having "been" here since that time isn't good enough. The rule is very specific. No breaks allowed at all in continuous retirement extensions from that time. This report of the grandfathering not being honored is way too vague in that regard.