As Pib has said, you can get someone to file your FBAR for you:

 

Quote

If you are NOT filing the FBAR as an individual (as in the case of an attorney, CPA, or enrolled agent filing the FBAR on behalf of a client) you must obtain an account to file the FBAR by registering to Become a BSA E-Filer.

 

Even more interesting, a financial institution can register as a BSA E-Filer, on behalf of his clients:

 

Quote

http://bsaefiling.fincen.treas.gov/Enroll.html

Click on this icon to register and submit forms as a business. This icon should be used by both large institutions (such as publicly traded corporations) and small institutions (such as unincorporated sole proprietorships, personal service corporations, or similar small business entities), whether they are financial institutions (such as banks, insurance companies, money services businesses, broker-dealers, and casinos) or non-financial institutions (such as dealers in precious metals, car dealers, or any other types of business).

 

Now, this doesn't specifically address FBAR filing -- FinCEN has several other filing requirements other than FBAR. So, registering as a business might not be an umbrella for FBAR filing for the business's US clients. But, I bet large financial institutions, say, in Singapore and Switzerland, provide full service for their well-heeled US clients, including filing their FBARs. But, maybe by having their attorney or in-house CPA registering, per the first quote in this post.

I think the main point of this side-discussion on FBAR is simply that the paperwork people here encounter when dealing with Thai banks is NOT -- contrary to what some posters believe -- satisfying the annual FBAR reporting requirements. And the Thai banks are NOT going to do the required FBAR reporting on behalf of their American customers.

 

The FBAR requirements apply, as mentioned above, if the account holder is an American citizen with greater than $10,000 total in foreign bank deposits. And that reporting requirement would be triggered by any U.S. citizen keeping 800,000+ baht in Thai bank deposits sufficient to meet Thai Immigration's bank deposits financial requirement for retirement extensions.

 

This topic just got a lot shorter after several off topic posts were removed. Topic is not about FATCA or FBAR.

11 hours ago, Moonlover said:

Mansell.

 

The penny's dropped. You've just given me a great idea. I'm going to forget all about lump sums and 'seasoning accounts' and all that stuff.

 

Next year I'm going to march in there, wifey in tow and, no matter what my income is at the time, over 65K or not, I shall apply for a marriage extension.

 

I shall let you all know what happens.

I abandoned my second marriage extension id favour of retirement when they said I would have to bring in witnesses again and that immigration would come to the house to take the photos.

 

It all comes down to what you consider the lesser of 2 evils.

10 hours ago, Pib said:

 

Well, keep in mind there are financial requirement for a marriage extension of stay also, which are a  minimum of Bt400K in the bank for 2 months prior to the application date or a certified (by your embassy) income of a minimum 40K.

Dropping from 65K to 40K would put the pound at around 26 baht, I suspect that many would be long gone before that happens.

 

11 hours ago, Evilbaz said:

 

If you can't show this then

(a) the GBP is stuffed

(b) you can't afford to live here

 

And (a) applies, I doubt if I'll able to afford to live anywhere!

 

This does, in fact raise, in me, an intriguing question. Why is the financial requirement lower for a marriage extension than that for retirement? My extensive experience of life on both sides of the fence suggests that the opposite ought to apply!

 

Got an IO house visit today. First time I've ever experienced such an intrusive visa extension procedure!

 

(Beware of going too far off topic folks!)

5 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

And (a) applies, I doubt if I'll able to afford to live anywhere!

 

This does, in fact raise, in me, an intriguing question. Why is the financial requirement lower for a marriage extension than that for retirement? (Beware of going too far off topic folks!)

The extension based upon marriage is for humanitarian purposes verses one of convenience like retirement is.

Also the wife could be working  or have a business to help support the family.

Are the Thai authorities assuming the wife can work?

That's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

I abandoned my second marriage extension id favour of retirement when they said I would have to bring in witnesses again and that immigration would come to the house to take the photos.

 

It all comes down to what you consider the lesser of 2 evils.

 

I would also be very happy to do so this time around. And I would do so if it weren't for the 'unwritten rule!'

2 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

The extension based upon marriage is for humanitarian purposes verses one of convenience like retirement is.

Also the wife could be working  or have a business to help support the family.

 

Well, not much chance of the latter, but thanks for the explanation. I guess it does make sense.

7 hours ago, Moonlover said:

This does, in fact raise, in me, an intriguing question. Why is the financial requirement lower for a marriage extension than that for retirement? My extensive experience of life on both sides of the fence suggests that the opposite ought to apply!

IMO it is simply to control the numbers of 50+ expats. The lower the financial requirement the more will come/stay.