New Income method - Gross or net income?

[AAArdvark]

Why is this so difficult?  They don't care what your income is or if it is gross or net.  They only care that you have foreign transfers into a Thai bank of at least 65K per month.  To be sure, add 3K or so in case of fluctuations.  If you miss a deposit for some reason, double the next one and hope they accept that.  Or, season 800k or use the combination method.

When I pay my rent, the only thing that the landlord cares about is getting the agreed amount.

As people do their extensions everyone will learn more.

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, roath said:

6 hours ago, elviajero said:

No you’re not. I argued that point for years. It was a convenient, for some, loophole that is now closed to anyone not using the embassy certification.

Lots of people without either a legal or accounting background making assumptions as to what should and shouldn't constitute income. If the Thai government wanted people to declare net income (after tax and deductions) they were always quite capable of doing so. They didn't so it wasn't a loophole. It was simply complying with their requirements.

In the context of, for example a retirement extension, it always has been net income. The fact they don’t specify net - because it’s implicit - is what creates the ambiguity (loophole) that people have exploited by using embassy letters quoting a gross income without specifying it as gross.

 

The rules specify a minimum income of 65K per month. 65K being the amount of income the applicant has available to fund their stay. A gross income of 65K producing a net income of 60K doesn’t meet that requirement.

 

Quote

If you are self-employed, for example, your net income will vary from period to period and will only anyway be capable of calculation after two years when the tax return is filed and income is calculated at that point. It's not as simple for everyone as people think (and I suspect that those people will have had normal jobs where they were paid monthly and paid tax monthly). 

 

Even saying after tax isn't always helpful as some taxes (e.g. National Insurance in the UK) isn't actually compulsory (the additional payments anyway) so should that be included or not.

 

Likewise, even establishing (if you are self-employed) what is your actual income as opposed to income declared for tax (i.e.; after deductions) could vary significantly

All entirely irrelevant.

 

The extension is for people over 50 that are not working (retired) and want to live full time in Thailand. As retirees they are expected to have a passive income from pensions or investment — not employment.

 

Quote

so lots of keyboard warriors saying that other people were cheating when it simply (in many cases) exposed their narrow mindedness (as to what other people do) and ignorance (as to law, modes of taxation, and accounting etc)

Indeed, “keyboard warriors” are big on self interested opinion, and like to fit the laws/rules to that opinion. 

 

Quote

The new system has at least a simplicity in that you either transfer 65K a month into Thailand or you don't. It would just be useful to know if a) that is a minimum monthly figure (e.g. so if you transfer 820k baht a year into your account, but not in equal amounts, that won't qualify) and b) confirmation that the combination method is still available (it seems it will as it hasn't been removed, but as always, clarification is better than supposition)

Based on the written rules;

 

a.) you must make 12 transfers of at least 65K to rely solely on the income method. Presumably a retirees monthly passive income isn’t expected to vary.

 

b.) The combination method is still available because no change has been announced. They have simply added an extra way to prove the income part.

 

The new option proves the fact that only actual (net) income counts, and is what they have been asking proof of all along.

 

If immigration enforce their requirement that the embassy verify the income the days of using gross income to get over the line could be numbered.

Edited January 14, 2019 by elviajero

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, roath said:

The new system has at least a simplicity in that you either transfer 65K a month into Thailand or you don't. It would just be useful to know if a) that is a minimum monthly figure (e.g. so if you transfer 820k baht a year into your account, but not in equal amounts, that won't qualify)

The new rules state "monthly" - so I would definitely make mo-xfers that meet the minimum needed. 

 

2 hours ago, roath said:

and b) confirmation that the combination method is still available (it seems it will as it hasn't been removed, but as always, clarification is better than supposition)

Combo is still available - and the math is the same for it.  Two components - seasoned "money in the bank" and "income".  The "income" part now has a new way to qualify (for those w/o embassy letters), in addition to embassy-letters (from those who can still get them).

You must transfer the full 65K in monthly to "prove" you have this much total, gross, monthly income.  If they were to make allowances for taxes and such from gross, they would be back to dealing with foreign-docs, etc.  The point of the new system was to avoid all that, which is why the full required amount must be transferred, vs only what you actually need for living here.

[jacko45k]

4 hours ago, Time Traveller said:

I highly doubt that the money has to be transfered from outside the country into thailand each month. 

What about people whose income is from within Thailand?

In anycase, transferring money each month to thailand is NOT evidence of income is it?

The only thing it demostrates is just that you have money you can transfer around between countries. Again, Thai immigration totally have no clue whatsoever, and just opening up more loopholes for the scammers.

 

It  looks to be that is what is specified as an option for a retirement extension. If you have income in Thailand you would have a work permit wouldn't you?

It is the evidence that has been required of you, no point arguing semantics.

[jimn]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

If you cannot get an embassy-letter any more, I see two possible workarounds:

 

• Use the "combo method" - so put some money in a Thai bank account and season it for 3 months.  The amount in the Thai account will need to "make up the difference" between your Monthly-Transferred total for the year, and 800K Baht.  To do the math, take what you actually get transferred monthly in baht, and multiply by 12.  Subtract this amount from 800K.  The result is the amount you need to have seasoned for 3-mo in a Thai bank account.  I would add a little extra, to cover exchange-rate fluctuations.

- OR -

• Transfer 65K Baht into your account every month manually.   Because your "net after taxes" income does not reach that threshold, such that your passport-country source bank-account will be depleted over time, you could periodically send back what you need to cover the tax-difference.  Dee Money is one way to send money out of a Thai account to a bank-account in another country.

I see what you suggesting especially the option using Dee Money (150 baht) to send back. I have looked at this option sending the same 65k backwards and forwards. The numbers just dont add up, it costs far to much all in to do it, with exchange rate fluctuations and fees. At the end of the day why bother. 2 options for me are agent in Pattata 12,900 baht all in or the one I will probably use is Non OA visa from the UK for 2 years 8,200 baht.

[cleopatra2]

2 hours ago, elviajero said:

In the context of, for example a retirement extension, it always has been net income. The fact they don’t specify net - because it’s implicit - is what creates the ambiguity (loophole) that people have exploited by using embassy letters quoting a gross income without specifying it as gross.

 

The rules specify a minimum income of 65K per month. 65K being the amount of income the applicant has available to fund their stay. A gross income of 65K producing a net income of 60K doesn’t meet that requirement.

 

All entirely irrelevant.

 

The extension is for people over 50 that are not working (retired) and want to live full time in Thailand. As retirees they are expected to have a passive income from pensions or investment — not employment.

 

Indeed, “keyboard warriors” are big on self interested opinion, and like to fit the laws/rules to that opinion. 

 

Based on the written rules;

 

a.) you must make 12 transfers of at least 65K to rely solely on the income method. Presumably a retirees monthly passive income isn’t expected to vary.

 

b.) The combination method is still available because no change has been announced. They have simply added an extra way to prove the income part.

 

The new option proves the fact that only actual (net) income counts, and is what they have been asking proof of all along.

 

If immigration enforce their requirement that the embassy verify the income the days of using gross income to get over the line could be numbered.

The gross v net income would surely dependent upon the home taxing regime, with-holding , PAYE or assessment at end of year.

[jackdd]

3 hours ago, roath said:

Only for those on retirement visas, although in theory, it's possible that you could obtain that level of income from interest in a Thai account, or from dividends from investments in Thai companies, neither of which avenues would require a work permit

I don't know the income affidavits from all countries, but for example the US one specifically says income from the US.

For example the French version asks for your income in Euro, which effectively means you can only declare income which you receive in Euro. If you would take income from a non-Euro source and convert it by yourself, this would be true for one month, but most likely not for the other months, the form asks you for your monthly income, so you would declare a wrong income.

[onera1961]

 

5 hours ago, Time Traveller said:

ok, so you can have no income, just transfer 65k each month to Thailand, so it appears there is income, and immigration are satisfied?

Yes. Immigration does not care where your money is coming from. From lottery win to  your savings. It covers every thing.
 

5 hours ago, Time Traveller said:

What about people whose income comes from WITHIN thailand with Thai tax returns?

They can show Thai tax returns. It is only a concern for people who were Thai tax cheaters earlier and getting away with an income letter. 

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, jimn said:

I see what you suggesting especially the option using Dee Money (150 baht) to send back. I have looked at this option sending the same 65k backwards and forwards. The numbers just dont add up, it costs far to much all in to do it, with exchange rate fluctuations and fees. At the end of the day why bother. 2 options for me are agent in Pattata 12,900 baht all in or the one I will probably use is Non OA visa from the UK for 2 years 8,200 baht.

It is not my suggestion for anyone to send the full 65K back and forth, though I predict some may do this, now that the risk of a felony in ones passport-country (from lying on an affidavit) is off the table.  As one is spending something here to exist, it would never be the full 65K, in any case.  Anyone wanting to cheat could just - as you say - pay an agent - much simpler, and not terribly expensive.

 

I DO suggest using transfer-services to periodically replenish a passport-country account to make up for passport-country expenses, tax-deductions, (in this case), increase investments there (if don't need to spend 65K Baht/mo here), etc.  This assumes one does have the total income required by-law to qualify for retirement.

 

For those who have the money, but the income-method as-is does not work for them, your use of the Non-OA is a better idea than an agent, because it avoids involvement in the corruption.  I use a Visa in lieu of an agent, myself - even though the cost is about the same, and I spend more time/hassles using the Visa.

[Pennywise]

20 hours ago, robblok said:

I am not 100% sure but I believe the Dutch Embassy office did gross income. They ask for tax forms and these show gross income. BUT I havent done it for years so I can't be sure.

That is a NO-NO. Having done it for this and last year, the Embassy writes the Nett figure in the affidavit. Makes sense to me as one can only spend the money one receives in the account, which, in case of pension, nett income, unless one has a tax-exempt from his/her country of origin.

 

[wgdanson]

7 hours ago, Formaleins said:

Let's see, how difficult can this be - "MONEY PAID INTO A THAI BANK"  now, I wonder, is this Gross or Net?

65k into a Thai bank monthly. Immigration do not give a monkey's about gross or net. Put the money in the bank.

[wgdanson]

5 hours ago, AAArdvark said:

Why is this so difficult?  They don't care what your income is or if it is gross or net.  They only care that you have foreign transfers into a Thai bank of at least 65K per month.  To be sure, add 3K or so in case of fluctuations.  If you miss a deposit for some reason, double the next one and hope they accept that.  Or, season 800k or use the combination method.

When I pay my rent, the only thing that the landlord cares about is getting the agreed amount.

As people do their extensions everyone will learn more.

Why would fluctuations in the exchange rate make any difference...65k is 65k.

[ubonjoe]

6 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Why would fluctuations in the exchange rate make any difference...65k is 65k.

I think he meant when you transfer the money into the country. You have to be sure to send enough so it is 65k baht or more. 

[wgdanson]

17 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

I think he meant when you transfer the money into the country. You have to be sure to send enough so it is 65k baht or more. 

Thanks for your last reply to me. So if someone sends varying amounts for nine months, adds them up and deposits the difference between them and 800k, be it 500k or 10k, would that satisfy the Combination Method rules?

And if those transfers were into a Foreign Currency Account, which by it's name suggests the money is coming from outside Thailand, would that be acceptable do you think please.

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by wgdanson

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Thanks for your last reply to me. So if someone sends varying amounts for nine months, adds them up and deposits the difference between them and 800k, be it 500k or 10k, would that satisfy the Combination Method rules?

Nine months would work for this year. But I think they would want 12 months next year. 

[Lacessit]

I would suggest if someone is sailing so close to the wind they cannot cater for fluctuations in exchange rates to achieve 65K baht each month, every month they should look elsewhere in SEA.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, wgdanson said:

And if those transfers were into a Foreign Currency Account, which by it's name suggests the money is coming from outside Thailand, would that be acceptable do you think please.

In theory, they should be fine - but check with your local office - preferably get a supervisor to give you the "A-OK" first.

[AAArdvark]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

In theory, they should be fine - but check with your local office - preferably get a supervisor to give you the "A-OK" first.

You need to prove it, not suggest it.  You need a letter from the bank stating where the money comes from or a bank book stating where it comes from, which is sometimes in a code/abbreviation.

Until multiple people get an extension with the new proof method, no one will be sure and probably every IO in Thailand will interpret the proof differently. 

[farangx]

3 hours ago, wgdanson said:

And if those transfers were into a Foreign Currency Account, which by it's name suggests the money is coming from outside Thailand, would that be acceptable do you think please.

 

Can you transfer money from one Foreign Currency Account in Thailand to another Foreign Currency Account in Thailand?

 

[ubonjoe]

9 hours ago, farangx said:

Can you transfer money from one Foreign Currency Account in Thailand to another Foreign Currency Account in Thailand?

 

I don't know for sure but it might be possible. Perhaps look through the info here to see if you can find an answer (I could not find it by doing a quick look at it).

https://www.bangkokbank.com/en/Personal/Save-And-Invest/Save/Domestic-Special-FCD-and-Domestic-FCD-Account

[jacko45k]

10 hours ago, farangx said:

Can you transfer money from one Foreign Currency Account in Thailand to another Foreign Currency Account in Thailand?

 

Are you asking in the hope that this will qualify to demonstrate monthly income to obtain an Extension? It would not.

[KhunFred]

Excuse the stupid question but why would IMMIGRATION be interested in your NET income? They want to know the largest amount they can GIG you for, which would be GROSS income. <removed>

Edited January 15, 2019 by ubonjoe
inflammatory comment removed

[ubonjoe]

11 minutes ago, KhunFred said:

Excuse the stupid question but why would IMMIGRATION be interested in your NET income? They want to know the largest amount they can GIG you for, which would be GROSS income.

They don't care if it is net or gross income as long as you can show a income equal to or greater than 40k or 65k baht coming into the country to prove your income which has not changed. Been the same for many years.

[JackThompson]

14 hours ago, JackThompson said:

15 hours ago, wgdanson said:

And if those transfers were into a Foreign Currency Account, which by it's name suggests the money is coming from outside Thailand, would that be acceptable do you think please.

In theory, they should be fine - but check with your local office - preferably get a supervisor to give you the "A-OK" first.

 

13 hours ago, AAArdvark said:

You need to prove it, not suggest it.  You need a letter from the bank stating where the money comes from or a bank book stating where it comes from, which is sometimes in a code/abbreviation.

Until multiple people get an extension with the new proof method, no one will be sure and probably every IO in Thailand will interpret the proof differently. 

In regard to checking with the local-office, I was referring to the use of a foreign-currency account.  

Agree that the bank-code showing foreign-origin will likely be the key to its inclusion in a letter used to show income.

[bkk6060]

What ever the amount says transferred in your Thai account.

Simplest rule ever to follow....

Edited January 15, 2019 by bkk6060

[wgdanson]

1 hour ago, KhunFred said:

Excuse the stupid question but why would IMMIGRATION be interested in your NET income? They want to know the largest amount they can GIG you for, which would be GROSS income. <removed>

They are not interested in your net or gross INCOME. All they want is 40/65k coming into your Thai bank.

[farangx]

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

I don't know for sure but it might be possible. Perhaps look through the info here to see if you can find an answer (I could not find it by doing a quick look at it).

https://www.bangkokbank.com/en/Personal/Save-And-Invest/Save/Domestic-Special-FCD-and-Domestic-FCD-Account

 

5 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Are you asking in the hope that this will qualify to demonstrate monthly income to obtain an Extension? It would not.

 

I was responding to a post that suggested that the money is coming in from overseas because it was going to a foreign currency account.  This won't work if it is possible to transfer foreign currency between 2 local Thai bank accounts.

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by farangx

[Blue bruce]

What part of deposit 65000/40000 into a Thai bank account every month dont some thick headed members don' t understand. Some of you people try to turn this 1000 different ways. It's really very simple. kiss. Keep it simple stupid

[sandyf]

On 1/14/2019 at 2:12 PM, JackThompson said:

Combo is still available - and the math is the same for it.  Two components - seasoned "money in the bank" and "income".  The "income" part now has a new way to qualify (for those w/o embassy letters), in addition to embassy-letters (from those who can still get them).

It may be available but hardly the same.

Before the referendum I did my retirement extension on income and following that had to use the combo method, based on gross income. Now the income is effectively net, the money in the bank is almost what I would need for a marriage extension.

May well think about going back to a multi non O.