Jump to content

Consequences of illegally using 800K for retirement extension after March 1, 2019


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

I just spent 3 weeks trying to get a bill paid because a clerk at the bank entered a wrong number.  What happens if a bank messes up and you don't get the transfer?  SS might stop payment for a month because of paperwork problem?  Happened to me a few years ago.  If you miss a payment are you out?  When?  In jail? 

Under the rules as written, if you're using the income method without embassy letter, the requirement for monthly incoming transfers is clearly specified. So yes you would be in violation missing one month. Harsh and horrible, right? There is a "leniency" memo good for the first year only that suggests to officers it is OK to have less than a full 12 months back during the first year only. So maybe just maybe a missed transfer during the first leniency year would be excused, but that's not really the intention of the memo. It clearly implies you can start it "late" the first years but doesn't suggest missing transfers after you started is excused. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Geordie59 said:

Where this new rule falls down IMO is that reason you had to show the 800k in the bank was to prove you had enough money to support yourself for the year. This is equivalent to transferring in 65k/month for the same reason. 

Now it seems you can't access the money you are supposed to be using to live. 

Yes it's kind of crazy. Bring your money in, we want you to spend money in our economy, but oh wait a minute, don't spend it or you become an illegal alien. Kafka would have been able to relate. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, balo said:

Just use an agent. 

Well in Pattaya they're already quoting their triple cost rate. Sure you can. But if you do you're part of the corruption food chain, which might (doesn't mean it will) someday come crashing down on you. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That is a very valid question! Many people will be leaving now. Will they feel (or will it even be true) that drawing down their own money makes them an illegal alien during the time (and it can be many months) that they are trying to leave Thailand. Again, this is very serious stuff.

In that situation can you not have a quick flight out of the country, come back in on a visa exempt or tourist visa, empty you bank, have a party, transfer money back, stuff your pockets with money etc. and bye bye. No rule breaking. No burning of bridges (only in your mind perhaps), rules could change later, but doubtful if there would be any repeat inward investment on a possible return...

Edited by johnwf1963
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, johnwf1963 said:

In that situation can you not have a quick flight out of the country, come back in on a visa exempt or tourist visa, empty you bank, have a party, transfer money back, stuff your pockets with money etc. and bye bye. No rule breaking.

That might work for many, but it really depends on a person's specific situation. As I've been saying for some people it can take years to extract themselves from Thailand. I think the most important thing is to not get blacklisted so that you would have such options to keep coming in legally as long you needed to do.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Henryford said:

Exactly so those using the 800k method STILL have to transfer say 65k a month to live on. So why use the 800k method?

But they don't. Using the 800K method has never required incoming transfers. Of course as the account is locked up to varying levels for all year, you would of course need a source of living expenses on top of that 800K. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greenhill said:

What is 'income'?   Isn't it, money coming in?    65k coming into Thailand every month does show 'income'!    If not, please explain further what 'income' means?

good question.  what does "income" mean to immigration?  is it earned income or pension only?  is unearned income or passive income treated differently?  will funds from savings "coming in" to thailand be considered "income?"

 

an embassy affidavit that certifies monthly stated "income" does not specify the source.  how could it when some embassies require no documentation? 

 

will applicants be required to provide a statement from a pension to prove income?  if "income" is not from a pension, what will be needed.....and will the new requirement(s) be uniform at all offices?

Edited by ChouDoufu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Income is not well defined by Thai immigration. They've had the out by replying on embassy letters. In most of the world, income for retirees means pensions only. In some cases, private pensions are much harder to get accepted than government pensions. It's my opinion if Thai immigration are put into the role of questioning income directly they are probably going to tend to be able process pensions as valid much more easily than other types of claimed income. For example, Americans claiming IRA withdrawals as income, they are not going to understand that, are they? The 65,000 baht question is that how often in future officers actually ask for backup on incoming foreign transfers. CM seems to be into it. Will it spread? I think nobody knows. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

good question.  what does "income" mean to immigration?  is it earned income or pension only?  is unearned income or passive income treated differently?  will funds from savings "coming in" to thailand be considered "income?"

 

I consider the following as income.  Selling of items from a music collection, works of art collection, gold coins and bars and some diamonds.  Selling properties, cars and business accumulated over the years.  Cashing out other financial investments.  Not that these have to be done monthly, sometimes not at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, farangx said:

I consider the following as income.  Selling of items from a music collection, works of art collection, gold coins and bars and some diamonds.  Selling properties, cars and business accumulated over the years.  Cashing out other financial investments.  Not that these have to be done monthly, sometimes not at all.

 

And people wonder why Thai immigration wanted to outsource that to embassies. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Longcut said:

What if you plan on leaving Thailand in a year after your next extension. How is one to draw down their 800K over the year? It is almost impossible to transfer funds out of Thailand unless you use a service like DeeMoney.com. Will there be a penalty if one gets caught living on the 800K? If I were leaving, I would not want to be bringing more money into the country when I already have 800K in the bank. At one point possibly midyear, I would be dipping below the 400K baht threshold. How is someone suppose to draw down their funds before leaving?

If you do not have reason to attend immigration, it is unlikely they will know anything about your accounts. 

You can transfer quite a sum out of Thailand by putting it in you pocket. If over $10,000 consider declaring it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jacko45k said:

If you do not have reason to attend immigration, it is unlikely they will know anything about your accounts. 

You can transfer quite a sum out of Thailand by putting it in you pocket. If over $10,000 consider declaring it.

True dat, but we have no idea if they're going to require follow up meetings to show accounts after extensions, especially after the first three months. There are some clues already that they might but at this point the fair answer is that we don't know and we can't know until a later time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

True dat, but we have no idea if they're going to require follow up meetings to show accounts after extensions, especially after the first three months. There are some clues already that they might but at this point the fair answer is that we don't know and we can't know until a later time. 

They don't have the resources to review 12,000 retired expats at Jomtiem. 

I was at the Expats Club today and the presentation there left me feeling they don't want to  increase their workload. If what you say was true, they would need to issue 90 day extensions, not one year ones. Again, see preceding point.

Edited by jacko45k
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jacko45k said:

They don't have the resources to review 12,000 retired expats at Jomtiem. 

I was at the Expats Club today and the presentation there left me feeling they don't want to  increase their workload. If what you say was true, they would need to issue 90 day extensions, not one year ones. Again, see preceding point.

So if that's the case, and it might be (only might) what are the consequences of showing up for your next application with a post-extension seasoning application? I'm guessing they didn't say because nobody knows, right? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

The primary loss from all the "tightenings" is to Thailand, and the primary beneficiaries are other countries - particularly in the region - who will have more capital influx to use to accelerate their development, relative to Thailand.

Pure speculation. It will take years for the economies of Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and the Philippines to catch up with Thailand.  That is if they do catch up.  How much "tips" at these countries restaurants the farangs from here need to give for anything to happen? ????

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

They don't have the resources to review 12,000 retired expats at Jomtiem. 

I was at the Expats Club today and the presentation there left me feeling they don't want to  increase their workload. If what you say was true, they would need to issue 90 day extensions, not one year ones. Again, see preceding point.

And therein lies the rub. With an entire country of expats totally confused, and with an already overloaded immigration office experience, where one often goes and has to return the next day because the queue is so long (or give a tip to expedite your application), these new rules will make an already excruciating experience for both applicants and IO staff insufferable.

 

Something will break....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

So if that's the case, and it might be (only might) what are the consequences of showing up for your next application with a post-extension seasoning application? I'm guessing they didn't say because nobody knows, right? 

If you are applying for an extension based on 800k, it is expected you will have to show at least 400k maintained over the year and 800k seasoned for 2 months. Show up with anything less and expect the application to be rejected, or be told to go and talk to an agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jacko45k said:

If you are applying for an extension based on 800k, it is expected you will have to show at least 400k maintained over the year and 800k seasoned for 2 months. Show up with anything less and expect the application to be rejected, or be told to go and talk to an agent.

You were told this by somebody with inside info or did you just make it up? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

And therein lies the rub. With an entire country of expats totally confused, and with an already overloaded immigration office experience, where one often goes and has to return the next day because the queue is so long (or give a tip to expedite your application), these new rules will make an already excruciating experience for both applicants and IO staff insufferable.

 

Something will break....

People will break. It's so sad and totally unnecessary.

Embassy letter cut off -- create a way for expats to legalize clear income streams such as pensions directly at immigration for an extra service fee

Corruption and cheaters -- go after the agencies directly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jingthing said:

People will break. It's so sad and totally unnecessary.

Embassy letter cut off -- create a way for expats to legalize clear income streams such as pensions directly at immigration for an extra service fee

Corruption and cheaters -- go after the agencies directly

And.., I think Immigration will break. They will rescind, remand, or reform these directives. Otherwise it will be chaos this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

And.., I think Immigration will break. They will rescind, remand, or reform these directives. Otherwise it will be chaos this year.

Could be. In any case this is a really big MESS, and that's why I am pushing back so hard on the Pollyanna brigade pushing total B.S. that these are trivial changes that every legit expat will have no problem quickly adjusting to. 

Edited by Jingthing
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

True dat, but we have no idea if they're going to require follow up meetings to show accounts after extensions, especially after the first three months. There are some clues already that they might but at this point the fair answer is that we don't know and we can't know until a later time. 

The rules were for the application of an extension, it is either approved or not.  Nowhere did it said anything about policing the money is still there in the bank account(s) other than conjectures from some IO and some here owing to their paranoia, hysteria, excitement about new rules, etc.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, keemapoot said:

And.., I think Immigration will break. They will rescind, remand, or reform these directives. Otherwise it will be chaos this year.

Or the new regulations are 'applied loosely'.....

But you may too be correct.

People who used money in the bank, need to just leave it there, hopefully they can afford t.. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, farangx said:

The rules were for the application of an extension, it is either approved or not.  Nowhere did it said anything about policing the money is still there in the bank account(s) other than conjectures from some IO and some here owing to their paranoia, hysteria, excitement about new rules, etc.

 

It sounds like you aren't aware of the new rules for seasoning AFTER the extension that actually lasts ALL YEAR. Nobody knows yet for sure what the actual enforcement will be for that at this early stage. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jingthing said:

Could be. In any case this is a really big MESS, and that's why I am pushing back so hard on the Pollyanna brigade pushing total B.S. that these are trivial changes that every legit expat will have no problem quickly adjusted to. 

It won't be the foreigners who will cause the crisis (though the huge new workload at immigration will be daunting with everyone switching to marriage extensions, etc., ), it will be the dependent Thai wives and families who uprise and cause change. 

 

Yes, I agree with you on Pollyana brigade, but also think you and others who are so vocal should probably dial it back a bit, especially after seeing who will probably be the next PM after today's announcement. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...