800,000 Baht (1-year) Term Deposit To Meet Requirement

[retiree]

Another thread is suggesting that ordinary term deposits can't be used to meet the 800K retirement requirement. This doesn't quite make sense, given the other new requirement to keep the cash on deposit at least 3 months. After all, term accounts generally can be closed early in case of emergency (forfeiting interest, of course), and if 3 months is good in the bank is good, isn't 12 months better?

Can anybody confirm that Suan Phlu is indeed disallowing term deposits? And if so, can anybody suggest who the appropriate party to write in order to try to change this rule is?

Thanks,

Retiree

[lopburi3]

I believe other threads referred to foreign currency and stock funds. Have not seen anyone say a normal fixed deposit was not accepted (but have only seen one or two post that it was).

[ProThaiExpat]

My recent experience of obtaning a "pension letter" from the U.S. Counsulate in Chiang Mai makes me think any investment that can be structured so that you receive regular monthly income payments would be satisfactory.

The form I signed at the counsulte, was merely a statement under oath, an affidavit if you will, in which I stated, without quoting the source, that I rceived a governtment or other pension every month in a stated amount.

No proof or explanation as to what I was referring to was required or even inquired about. I had my bank statements available but they were not requested.

The funds from which the monthly pension would be payed from need not be in Thailand under this method of satisfying your retirement financial obligations at immigration.

If anyone disagrees with the foregoing, please cite your authority for your opinion as I was amazed how loose the process was given all the postings about the advisability of the 800K baht bank deposit as the best approach over the past few years.

Definition of a pension "a regular payment to a person that is intended to allow them to subsist without working"

wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn -

Since a retirment letter is required every year you obtain a new extention of your non-imm O visa, it seems to me any monthly fixed income investment lasting a year or longer would suffice in meeting the intent of the financial qualification for a retirment extention.

[lopburi3]

The question was about having 800k in a Thai account using that method rather than pension income.

FYI: Bangkok is currently asking to see supporting paperwork for pension income in addition to letter from Embassy so that will probably be your case next time. So be sure to take with you when you visit immigration.

[ProThaiExpat]

Make a lot of sense, lopburi3, I was somewhat amazed that they would be so trusting, not requiring documentation to suffort ones sworn statement. I can see the counsulate not caring, but immigration is another story.

As you have always advised and I have always done, being honest with my declaration, even though I was only one month from a "bump up" in amount of my pension, immigration has no documentation that conflicts with what I say now, so no fear of them stumbling on a lie and losing credibilitym if not my visa privileges at worst.

[dalmatian]

Just a note about my experience in Pattaya but certainly not gospel so needs further checking with immigration. Anyhow:-

I was refused Monday this week on the basis that my 800,000 was in a Kasikorn income fund. I asked why as this was valid last year for my visa. The officer advised that the savings deposit account was the only acceptable vehicle for the 800,000 despite my suggestion that I had a term deposit book as well. Went back Wednesday with my Income Fund (800,000 baht) and my savings deposit book (802,000). Photo copies of both were taken although I suspect the Income fund account was photo copied purely to confirm that I had in fact had 800,000 in a bank for 3 months prior to the visa renewal but in itself was not accepted for the visa renewal. (hope that makes sense i.e the new account was only 1 day old but I was given the visa on the basis I did indeed have the funds in a bank for 3 months). Why they couldn't have just accepted that account I don't know. As this was a renewal and not a first time application I got the 12 months stamped.

A gentleman who I met the day before in the bank happened to be in immigration and he was given a 3 month stay but required to go back again to apply for the retirement visa only once the account had shown 800,000 for the 3 month period. This was his first application.

Hope that helps but please, please check directly with immigration as I have yet to read any concrete evidence of what immigration require in terms of the bank account funds and therefore this may have been an individual immigration officer's interpretation. The trouble is this is the same guy I saw last year and therefore there may not be too many officers who will offer any other type of interpretation.

[retiree]

I was refused Monday this week on the basis that my 800,000 was in a Kasikorn income fund.... Went back Wednesday with my Income Fund (800,000 baht) and my savings deposit book (802,000).

So as I understand this experience, the original question is still open: can an ordinary fixed-term account of a year or more be used to meet the 800K deposit requirement?

Btw, I did confirm the early withdrawal rules: before 3 months forfeit all interest, after 3 months get only standard daily deposit rate.

Retiree

[Sunbelt Asia]

So as I understand this experience, the original question is still open: can an ordinary fixed-term account of a year or more be used to meet the 800K deposit requirement?

Btw, I did confirm the early withdrawal rules: before 3 months forfeit all interest, after 3 months get only standard daily deposit rate.

Retiree

Just depends on the officer.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[ProThaiExpat]

I may be missing something here, but as lopburi3 and Sunbelt have posted before, the purpose of the 800K savings bank deposit is to ensure immigration that you are retired and living on your savings in Thailand.

If a fixed inicome account of 800K is used for this purpose, as I understand it, you would not be drawing from it for living expenses. My read on this area is that immigration wants to see evidence of you drawing living expenses from your 800K "retirment fund" and thus assure them you are not working and living off that income stream or some other illegal income stream.

When I got my first year's extension in BKK, I had to prove that the money came from overseas, the institution from which it came, the account and name of holder of that account, when it came and a document from my bank attesting to all of that. On renewals in Chiang Mai, much less strict.

As it has been said many times, depends on the officer, depends on your age, country of origin (in my view) and your overall appearance. Clearly, the longer your retired here without difficulty, the easier renewal gets.

[lopburi3]

Actually it is normally not checked for living on retirement type visa extensions - it comes into play as a working account more for those under age 50 on the old support extensions where if there is no funds movement suspicions are raised about illegal employment or borrowing the money. For retirement it is proof you have the funds to support your stay for the time period your extension covers and as such it should not matter what kind of local bank account it is in if you have access to it. Fixed deposit account here do allow access (but with interest loss) so believe that is the reason many officials will allow them. They did not make sense for the support extensions because in that case the person was expected to be using account on a weekly/monthly basis to provide the support. I would hope that the investment type accounts should become standard as it would benefit everyone (except perhaps the banks themselves).

//Edit - word should have been fixed rather than investment//

[RickFarang]

I accept Sunbelt's statement that it depends on the immigration officer.

Has anybody received a renewal of his or her retirement visa based on a fixed term savings account?

[JimGant]

PTE,

No bank account needed in conjunction with pension verification?

I ask because someone recently using CM was asked for his bank book, even tho' he qualified solely under the monthly pension criteria, as verified by the American Consulate. Believe they wanted to see at least 200k in his account.

I guess Thai Immigration is truly like a box of chocolates.

[ProThaiExpat]

PTE,

No bank account needed in conjunction with pension verification?

I ask because someone recently using CM was asked for his bank book, even tho' he qualified solely under the monthly pension criteria, as verified by the American Consulate. Believe they wanted to see at least 200k in his account.

I guess Thai Immigration is truly like a box of chocolates.

Hi JimGant: Note what lopburi3 said about bank books in relation to retirment visas.

My recent experience was that the shortfall in the pension I was using to qualify was approximately 100k, and I had an additional 75K more left in my bank account and there was no problem. That account shows regular living expense withdrawals. However, the account was 50K short of 200K at the time of my application.

Am keeping my funds in Thailand at a minimum until the dollar strengthens, so I will be skating near the edge for quite a while.

In theory, if I understand lopbuiri3 correctly, there is no perusal of bank acount to determine if you are using the funds for living expenses, just a check to see if you have enough to live on.

Using that analysis, they would want to see funds in your account, in my case 150K was enough to satisfy.

Theoretically, if your going the pension route, you could show up at immigration without anything in the bank here and use the pension letter as your sole "means" test. This approach would scream the question, "what is he living on".

My guess is that it is all fine and good if you have a qualifying pension as a source of income, but without you showing you have funds in Thailand, sufficient to cover a normal retirees expenses, you will be in trouble.

My bank book showed a great deal more money in my account this past year and five years of substantial monetary outflows, so a good deal of discretion on the part of the immigration officer seems to be the practice, according to lopburie3 and Sunbelt.

[gdhm]

I may be missing something here, but as lopburi3 and Sunbelt have posted before, the purpose of the 800K savings bank deposit is to ensure immigration that you are retired and living on your savings in Thailand.....

I may ALSO be missing something.

In the situation being discussed: As Thai Immigration requires 800,000 baht in an account for 3 months prior to Visa extension and you cannot let it go lower during that period (IF you using the 800,000 baht in bank method of proof of savings) then there is NO REASON why Thai Immigration should refuse term deposits AFTER ALL you cannot use the money (they insist on that fact). So they already know you are NOT using the 800,000 baht to live on. The 800,000 is "dead money" (except for interest on it) because if you DID use in the 3 months then you would not have enough to support the extension and if you paid it back then it would not be in the account for 3 months (a breach of the requirements)

Therefore is seems to me its just Immigration flexing its muscles and proving who is boss and being illogically unreasonable

It is a VERY sad state of affairs that Sunbelt need to correctly say "It depends on the Officer". This is NO WAY for a country to run its Immigration Policy. As usual its a case of Immigration having no coherent written rules that you can RELY on ALL officer following.

( please don't waste Forum space telling me "TIT" or "Thailand can make whatever rules it likes" or "You don't have to stay here, if you don't like the ways things are done".

We ALL know this and have heard it a million times (well maybe not a million on the Forum, BUT that does NOT change the fact that it is reasonable that the World know Thai Immigration rules, know that they are consistently applied AND can be confident that the Official Thai immigration Bureau Website is up to date and giving correct advice (which it is NOT, and there is NO excuse for this as it is the FIRST port of call for huge numbers of foreigners wishing to visit Thailand). If the Website is not up to date, then it is better they close it, because at least nobody will be misinformed and waste their time and money on incorrect documentation and travel plans.

One person said on this Forum to me, that the Immigration Bureau are busy with all the rule changes and 2 months (as it was then) in not much out of date. I DISAGREE, much of the "busy" is probably self generated due to the lack of the website being accurate AND "Individual Officers" confusion or self interpretation when applying the rules. I also believe that IF Thai Immigration Bureau cannot be bothered to keep its own Important Website up to date, how can they can they expect Visitors not to get confused or make innocent errors and waste their own, and Immigration Officers time with incorrect documentation.

Just in case you are wondering .

NO I have NOT been affected by the variations in interpretations, individual officers interpretations nor have I been refused (YET). I speak as a reasonable law and rule abiding Pensioner living legitimately in Thailand on a Retirement Visa (and married to a Thai Lady with son) who loves this Country and its people but who is very saddened at its inability to precisely administer its Visas and Immigration policy consistently and clearly, when Thailand needs tourists and their money so much to help improve its peoples standard of living.

Of course people like me saying the obvious are not listened to "we are just spitting in the Wind" but what I cannot understand is why all our Embassies do not try to help and protect their citizens and formally approach Thai immigration and point out the difficulties Visa applicants and Visitors to this lovely Country are having, in complying with the Immigration and Visa rules SOLELY due to lack of clarity of the regulations and consistency of application by Immigration.

I have nothing personal against Immigration or its Officers - they are all trying to do their job to the best of their ability, but I just wish they would appreciate that MOST visitors wish to comply 100% with their rules and all we ask in return is that when we go to an Immigration Office or Embassy, we know ALREADY what is required and acceptable (or NOT) and that we do not need to have to worry about the "individual Officer" factor.

If the rules are good, clear, well written and easy to understand then there should be no need for "Individual Officer" interpretation.

As I said "Spitting in the Wind" but I live in hope.

Regards, Dave

[gdhm]

On an extension to the original question:

If a person is applying for a Retirement Extension by showing 85% pension AND 15% savings in a Thai Bank account can you THEN have your money in a Term Deposit account AS the pension is essentially proving what you are living off and that it is form outside Thailand whereas the money in the Term Deposit account is merely a "top up" to meet the "pre 1st October 2006 grandfathering rules"

Regards

Dave

[Maestro]

As Thai Immigration requires 800,000 baht in an account for 3 months prior to Visa extension and you cannot let it go lower during that period (IF you using the 800,000 baht in bank method of proof of savings) then there is NO REASON why Thai Immigration should refuse term deposits AFTER ALL you cannot use the money (they insist on that fact).

1. You can have more than 800k in the account 3 months before application and make withdrawals during the 3 months until application but never let the balance go below 800k; or

2. You can withdraw enough cash before the 3 months before application to keep you going until the application date, making sure that the balance remains minimum 800k, then leave the balance untouched until application.

--

Maestro

[ProThaiExpat]

While in an ideal world, Thai Immigration could do better, they have come a long way in my five years here and the latest commanding general was quite a fresh breeze in my view. Lopburi3 may agree or not, but I find the pension requirements quite easy to deal with.

Imagine if they required you to deposit into a Thai account the minimum 65K a month to qualify for pension based retirement. Certainly a fair approach but far less flexible than what is allowed now.

Individual officer interpretation is a hallmark of police forces everywhere. We musn't forget that in Thailand, immigration is a police function, not a service function to make life easier for expats.

If we start to think of the major problems immigration deals with, not only the porous borders, but the influx of illegals from bordering countries, its any wonder they have time for expats at all.

What service and allowances we do get from iimmigration is money generated, as each immigration office generates a tremendous profit from dealing with us.

While Australian immigration administration appears more rule based and legalistic, I never met an immigration officer in the dealings I had with that department. Counter people sure, but they had no answers, just here is what the immigration officer has decided based on the law and if you wish to appeal, do so. I prefer Chiang Mai immigration, even with their flaws. In and out in an hour and with close attention to the posts in T.V., nary a problem.

Compare the uncertainty of Thai Immigration policy with the admissability of Thai tourists to the U.S. or Australia and Thailand wins hands down.

I believe there is a policy in Thai immigration regarding the granting of a one year retirment extention that the retiree be interview by an immigration officer, not just an enlisted paper processor.

Each time I have gotten an extention, a new check off sheet was fillled out by the immigration officer in my presence and in doing so questions were asked, rarely the same questions each year. This year, no questions, and only a few boxes were checked off.

Lazy officer, different interpretation of what an interview consists of, no English speaking officer. Who knows. While I do not believe the number of retirement extentions previously given are a consideration from a policy point of view, how can it not affect an individual officer's evaluation of the applicant as a risk to Thailand's laws.

The mere presence of the sign on the outside of Chiang Mai immigration building from the commanding general to e-mail him if one detects any individual unfairness or rule breaking is a major step in the right direction, in my view. I suspect that sign is on the wall of all immigration offices?

Would like to hear from lopburi3 and Sundbelt regarding their view on changes in the operation of the immigration department in recent years.

[dalmatian]

Another thread is suggesting that ordinary term deposits can't be used to meet the 800K retirement requirement. This doesn't quite make sense, given the other new requirement to keep the cash on deposit at least 3 months. After all, term accounts generally can be closed early in case of emergency (forfeiting interest, of course), and if 3 months is good in the bank is good, isn't 12 months better?

Can anybody confirm that Suan Phlu is indeed disallowing term deposits? And if so, can anybody suggest who the appropriate party to write in order to try to change this rule is?

I think the original question has been answered but not conclusively.

I can only comment again that I was advised that the Term deposit account was not acceptable at the time of my application despite suggesting that I would transfer money into this account. Personally, like earlier posts, I see no reason why I could not use the term deposit. Posts have mentioned that this account should be preferable as immigration can see that money should be remaining in there for a set amount of time (term deposit shows a certain level of committment).

As suggested you would think that committing to 12 months should keep immigration happy, well I was willing to commit to 5.4 years on my income fund (although that was not explained to me by Kasikorn when opening it) yet this is not acceptable. The very account which allows people to borrow from a friend (3 months prior to application) is the one they want now and this account also allows you to take the money out the next day (after renewing visa), it's crazy!

I thought the whole idea of this new procedure was to protect genuine retirees who can fund their retirement through regular pension or a large investment/deposit (dead money!) rather than still allow the ability to circumvent the rules by borrowing money still (even if for 3 months) and then just taking it out again the day after receiving a visa.

I am happy that I received my visa eventually but was not aware of the new rules, not sure if the Pattaya Expats club is aware as this would make an interesting topic, certainly Kasikorn bank were not aware!. What it does though is to leave that uneasy feeling inside and does make one assess whether this is the place where you want to retire, my god they keep making me feel that way.

[Sunbelt Asia]

Would like to hear from lopburi3 and Sundbelt regarding their view on changes in the operation of the immigration department in recent years.

They have some shortcomings but would agree, they are getting better every year.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[teacher]

About six weeks ago i went to Pattaya Immigration with my FIXED TERM bank book. Handed the officer the book and asked if i could use this to renew my Retirment visa?

Without even looking inside he said,"YES NO PROBLEM, can use"

Although he did look inside it and as he handed it back to me saying "THIS OK"

I do have another account that i use (WITH LESS THAN 800,000bt) for my everyday expenses but this book was in my pocket with no need to show the office.

I have 2 million on a guaranted 4% fixed term for 12 months that started from June 2006.

[Anniesamui]

I had my one year visa renewed last week for the third time, using my (french) consulate statement : pension paid by the governement -since I was a civil servant -, and the amount over the minimum required.

This time, they didn't ask for any medical analysis, but they ask for my bank book and took a photocopy of it : my pension is directly paid by the french embassy to my local account.. The officer noticed that it was a discrepancy between the consulate statement and the monthly amount received. I had to explain that it was because of the fluctuation of the euro, the french income taxes and social security deducted !

He said that my "taxes" were more than his own salary !!

They asked for 8800 baths (last year it was 7000 !) for a multiple entry visa, but the good is was that now, I don't have to come back every three months..

[lopburi3]

I don't know what you have paid for but the cost of a one year extension of stay from Immigration is 1,900 baht total and is so indicated on the TM.7 form you fill out.

As for not having to go back every 3 months that has never been required. You have to report your address every 3 months but that can be you, a friend, or done by mail. Are you saying you do not have to report your address every 90 days under some new system?

Another expense for people who plan to travel would be a re-entry permit at either 1,000 baht for single or 3,800 baht for full year multi entry.

So from what you say you received the 1,900 baht and 3,800 baht items and paid 8,800 baht?

[rcav8r]

Another thread is suggesting that ordinary term deposits can't be used to meet the 800K retirement requirement. This doesn't quite make sense, given the other new requirement to keep the cash on deposit at least 3 months. After all, term accounts generally can be closed early in case of emergency (forfeiting interest, of course), and if 3 months is good in the bank is good, isn't 12 months better?

Can anybody confirm that Suan Phlu is indeed disallowing term deposits? And if so, can anybody suggest who the appropriate party to write in order to try to change this rule is?

Reading these posts and other similar threads about the Bt800,000, it does seem that those experiencing problems are the individuals who are trying to find ways - albeit thought to be legal - around the normal rules and regulations. That is, they want to bring in their funds of Bt800,000 and then deposit them without spending any of them.

I am curious - does this mean that these individuals expect to place their funds in deposit without any withdrawals ? And how then would they meet their day to day expenses for the rest of the 12 months they are staying in Thailand. Presumably by separate remittances as and when needed ? And does that mean that the initial deposit stays untouched for the duration of their stay ie however many years they remain in Thailand - D or A ?e

A further observation and supplementary question - I help answer a number of incoming Retirees' questions from different countries around the world with whatever queries they may have - the most frequent and repetitive problem is this one of the Bt800,000 deposit. And it is the Americans in this group who seem to have the most problems - and they are the ones who seem to want to use interesting and innovative ways of circumventing the normal rules and regulations. Brits, Ozzies, Kiwis, Springboks and Europeans all seem to follow the rules and avoid any difficulties.

I wonder - is this a cultural thing ? Or is the US Embassy or Consulates not giving the right advice and help to US citizens ? I have personal experience of the US Embassy in Bangkok giving the wrong advice about a US Visa. Reluctantly, they gave me a written explantion of what they had done to show the INS officials. They told me, "If we're wrong, you can always come back and complain when you return". Well, they were wrong - there was a problem - and the written explanantion did help to appease the INS officials. And I did complain (politely) when I came back to Thailand - but - you guessed right - no apology was forthcoming.

So, my suggestion is that if you follow the rules & regs to the letter, there should be no problem.

[lopburi3]

You might also infer that Americans are more keen on obtaining a reasonable rate of return for money that has to be parked in an account and thus would want to use the investment at 4.5% rather than the savings passbook at 0.75% for the larger amount and thus keep small amounts of money in the passbook account. But I believe even the "Brits, Ozzies, Kiwis, Springboks and Europeans" would agree.

[gdhm]

...So, my suggestion is that if you follow the rules & regs to the letter, there should be no problem...

I agree with what you say.

IF you are trying to circumvent rules and find loopholes (even if technically legal), BUT following the rules & regs to the letter is the problem.

I for one do not want to do a 3 hour journey to Nong Khai from Khon Kaen to be told by an "individual Officer" that he is interpreting the Rules differently that day from his own Bangkok Immigration Bureau Head Office. Forgive me for being lazy but I do not wish to do the wasted 3 hour return journey home and THEN ANOTHER 6 hours travel there and back with the Officers extra or unexpected requirements.

You have to ALSO bear in mind that if you phone or email to check an individual Offices requirements (even if you get your wife to do it in Thai that emails are not replied to usually (well 4 of mine to Head Office and Nong Khai have not been). Getting any information over the phone is just as difficult in my experience (and cannot be proved in the event of subsequent problems).

2 examples of where you cannot just follow the laid down "Rules & Regs to the letter" are:

1) Retirement Extension Visa:

The Thai Immigration Bureau says you can download their forms from their official website for use with applications. It is also OK to type the details, and then to sign the forms

Nong Khai and Udon Thani (sub Office) Immigration Offices say NO you cannot use the Official downloaded forms and you MUST collect one of their identical forms that have their office rubber stamped logo. They ALSO demand that the forms are completely in handwriting and written out twice

2) I have seen NOTHING in the "Rules & Regs" that says what type of Thai Bank Account you must leave your money in (maybe I have missed it) and as I said earlier, in MY case, my Pension income is 85% of my financial requirements so I see no logic to the 15% having to be in a very low paying interest flexible Savings Account as I am NOT living on that 15% I am living on my proved pension.

It must be remembered there is a condition in the Visa rules that any office or officer can ask for additional information as seen fit. I am sure this is intended for where there is doubt or suspicions about an application but it is being used extensively to change basic and conventional requirements (2 of which are stated above) and I have personally run into No. 1. I made the mistake supplying 2 handwritten Official downloaded forms. SILLY ME for not guessing that Udon Thani will not accept their bosses official downloads .

I am not from the USA, but from the UK. In my humble opinion, the UK loves its rules and bureaucracy as much as anybody, BUT in MY experience all offices and officers are CONSISTENT with their interpretation of the Official rules & regs so a person knows exactly where they stand.

To sum up following the "rules & regs to the letter" is the problem (which letter do we follow for each office?)

I also agree with Lopburi3. Anybody (USA, UK or other citizen) who would leave huge amounts of baht in a Savings Account at .75% are seriously in need of some sound business advice OR very well off that they AR happy to waste money. Thailand is essentially worried that Retirees live off funds NOT obtained from working within Thailand. Surely then, they must see the logic that greater interest earnings helps safeguard that requirement, and ALSO protects the Thai families that MANY Retirees have, thus reducing their families possible burden to the state.

Regards

Dave

[dalmatian]

Reading these posts and other similar threads about the Bt800,000, it does seem that those experiencing problems are the individuals who are trying to find ways - albeit thought to be legal - around the normal rules and regulations. That is, they want to bring in their funds of Bt800,000 and then deposit them without spending any of them.

I am curious - does this mean that these individuals expect to place their funds in deposit without any withdrawals ? And how then would they meet their day to day expenses for the rest of the 12 months they are staying in Thailand. Presumably by separate remittances as and when needed ? And does that mean that the initial deposit stays untouched for the duration of their stay ie however many years they remain in Thailand - D or A ?e

So, my suggestion is that if you follow the rules & regs to the letter, there should be no problem.

The writer above slightly misses the point, the issue was what constitutes the 800,000 baht requirement as originally posted by 'retiree'. The question posed was also where are the rules and regs. Obviously daily expenses must be met from other sources, we can't live here free of charge. Also, if there were rules and regs then the experience that I encountered (not accepting an income fund of 800,000) would not have occured as an income fund would have been the last place that I would put the 800,000 (especially for 5.4 years). I was under the impression I had just to deposit the money, almost like dead money to get the retirement visa prior to some pensions that will come in later (I am only 51)

When I first enquired through friends including members of the Pattaya expats club it was pointed out that the money could be in some sort of deposit. The Kasikorn advised that it was acceptable to put the money in the income fund as it would reach a higher level of interest (a natural need of any farang) I did in fact spend more than 800,000 baht using my savings deposit account in the first year I was here and some way through the first year of retirement. Las year immigration accepted my Income fund book without requiring to see any other accounts or confirmation of spending so I assumed that this year would be the same. I did not seek ways of circumventing the system, I just tried to do the right thing. This year it had changed and my stress was immense. I managed to input more money into my savings deposit account to bring it above the 800,000 level 2 days after first refusal and now things are ok but where are the rules and regs. There are many farangs who will go for a retirement visa over the coming months who will have the same problem as I did. Kasikorn told me today of one foreigner who has 2 million baht in an income fund and has also been refused, is this a sensible approach, is this showing immigration using initiative and sensitivity. I totally agree that if the Immigration website annotated exactly what is required then we would have no excuses but like many times before we foreigners are left to interpret the 'supposed rules and regs' on an indivdual basis or utilise the professional services of good companies like Sunbelt Asia etc.

I can assure all readers I want to do the right thing, I am not here to get migraines everyday!

[Anniesamui]

I don't know what you have paid for but the cost of a one year extension of stay from Immigration is 1,900 baht total and is so indicated on the TM.7 form you fill out.

As for not having to go back every 3 months that has never been required. You have to report your address every 3 months but that can be you, a friend, or done by mail. Are you saying you do not have to report your address every 90 days under some new system?

Another expense for people who plan to travel would be a re-entry permit at either 1,000 baht for single or 3,800 baht for full year multi entry.

So from what you say you received the 1,900 baht and 3,800 baht items and paid 8,800 baht?

The form has been filled by the immigration officer for me.. I never seen the "price" indicated on it ! I just had to sign it !... I suppose this "service" costs 3100 bahts more.. What can I do now ??

Last year I had to report every 3 month (in person) to the immigration office : every time they staple a form in my passeport with the date of the next report ! This year they just told me "see you next year" !

It's Samui.. may be a little different !

[Maestro]

Last year I had to report every 3 month (in person) to the immigration office : every time they staple a form in my passeport with the date of the next report ! This year they just told me "see you next year" !

It's Samui.. may be a little different !

If after any entry into Thailand you stay longer than 90 days you must still report you current address to the immigration office every 90 days.

--

Maestro

[tartempion]

As Thai Immigration requires 800,000 baht in an account for 3 months prior to Visa extension and you cannot let it go lower during that period (IF you using the 800,000 baht in bank method of proof of savings) then there is NO REASON why Thai Immigration should refuse term deposits AFTER ALL you cannot use the money (they insist on that fact).

1. You can have more than 800k in the account 3 months before application and make withdrawals during the 3 months until application but never let the balance go below 800k; or

2. You can withdraw enough cash before the 3 months before application to keep you going until the application date, making sure that the balance remains minimum 800k, then leave the balance untouched until application.

--

Maestro

To be honest, this new "extension" of the rule is a load of crap.

It means you now need 950k in a thai bank and this 3 months BEFORE the date you request your retirement extension in order to have sufficient funds to live "decently" for the 3 months prior to your request.

Requirements to stay in LOS are changing all the time, its a moving target (in the wrong direction). These will put off many people in the end, and I guess that is the REAL objective of the authorites in this country.

[Maestro]

"Jobsworths" would be the apt -- and politically correct -- description, I believe. But that's British slang, I think. What might a US Americans say, politically correct? Surely, they must have some endearing term, too.

--

Maestro