Jump to content
BANGKOK
Tanoshi

Marriage/Retirement - Interpretations explained.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, overherebc said:

800,000 for 2 months before and three after total 5.

3 months before following renewel would total 8 months and leave 4 months at 400,000.  For subsequent years it would be 3 before and 3 after plus 3 before the next so 9 months at 800,000 and 3 at 400,000. You would have to have income for living during the 800,000 baht months obviously.

Er No.

3 months before, then 3 months after = 6 months.

Then a further 6 months before topping up to 800K, 3 months before next application.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Er No.

3 months before, then 3 months after = 6 months.

Then a further 6 months before topping up to 800K, 3 months before next application.

OK.

When I draw it out as a table I see it. 😆

Does this fit for first application and leading to second.

20190211_181805.jpg

Edited by overherebc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Delight said:

 Just to clarify the income method -65K and 40K per month respectively

Can I assume that they are only looking at deposits from overseas –i.e income – and not looking at expenditure.

So with the case of retirement extension –an applicant having proven that a total of 800K was brought into Thailand over the prior 12 months can show a bank balance close to zero at the time of the application –simply because the money’ in ‘was matched by money ‘out’.

They were only interested in monthly incomes from overseas, not expenditure or balance.

 

They even showed me examples of local bank statements, then the same statement from HQ, which gave precise details of the overseas source of income, sometimes with pension providers names where they were paid directly into their Thai bank account, others as Foreign TT transfers (Transferwise as an example) and government state pensions paid direct through the bank of Thailand, which clearly state a Bahtnet deposit.

They'd highlighted only the monthly overseas transactions, not any other transactions.

 

Something I'd probably do myself before submitting, just to make it clear to the IO.

The letter by the way just confirmed name, account and balance details, no details of transactions.

All the proof is in the bank statements from their HQ.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, overherebc said:

800,000 for 2 months before and three after total 5.

3 months before following renewel would total 8 months and leave 4 months at 400,000.  For subsequent years it would be 3 before and 3 after plus 3 before the next so 9 months at 800,000 and 3 at 400,000. You would have to have income for living during the 800,000 baht months obviously.

that would be spread over 15 months, you can not count the before money twice in the same year, so it would be 3 months after and 3 months before the next extension, leaving 6 months at 400,000

Edited by steve187
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, steve187 said:

that would be spread over 15 months, you can not count the before money twice in the same year, so it would be 3 months after and 3 months before the next extension, leaving 6 months at 400,000

Yep, that's where I made the mistake.

Posted this table showing where I went wrong.

20190211_181805.jpg

Edited by overherebc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, overherebc said:

OK.

When I draw it out as a table I see it. 😆

Does this fit for first application?

20190211_181805.jpg

Yep, correct, that just confirms what I stated.

6 months @ 400K, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sept, before topping up to 800K again.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, this clarification (thanks to Tanoshi BTW) illustrates pretty clearly that for those who do not wish to tie up 800k in a low interest bearing Thai bank account, and even better, not touch it for fear of messing up the new seasoning rules, that the preferred methods going forward for many people might either be combination method (tying up less cash), in either marriage extension or Retirement, or simply the monthly income method only in either marriage or retirement amounts.

 

Before we had this clarification, there was doubt as to whether the combination method was viable anymore, so I think this clarifies that, at least for now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tanoshi said:

The commanding officer from Roi Et Immigration and her commanding officer from the regional office in Khon Kaen.

I did get their names, but not a chance of spelling them. :smile:

   Good  info ,  Roi Et , be there soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job!

 

1) 2 routes exist for the income method:  monthly deposit route OR income letter

 

Just some points of clarification.  Where you show income method you have two numbered points: 1) the monthly deposit route and 2) the embassy letter route. 

 

I'm hoping this is meant to be obvious but it's one or the other right?  1 or 2?  Not both?

 

In other words, the embassy letter route remains for those who can obtain one, and for those who can't the monthly deposit route is acceptable without one?

 

2) Monthly deposit transaction codes: required to be international or not

 

You mention that the monthly deposits may be marked as international (e.g., FTT) or domestic (e.g., BNT).  Are both acceptable?  In other words, they are not insisting that everything be an FTT, are they?  A deposit that had a domestic marking would be acceptable?

Or am I misunderstanding and you are saying they regard Bahtnet as an international transfer code? 

 

3) Source of income needs to be documented or not (pension vs. investment earnings)

 

About the source of the transferred money.  From what you've written they don't seem to be interested in the source.  Is that right?  I'm talking about the monthly deposit route of the income method.  The money speaks for itself?  I understand that if you use the embassy letter route you might be expected to offer documentation to substantiate the income, but for the monthly deposit route is that also required?  If it's deposited in the account they aren't interested in seeing a statement from a pension?  Income derived from investments is OK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

400k in bank + embassy income letter =400k+ is enough ?

 

can i use the bank money during the year ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks OP, good report. I'm in the money in bank method retirement. 

I would suggest that I won't be the only one now electing to just put 800k in a bank account and leaving it. With all the dates of 800 for this period and 400 for that.....I realize it ain't rocket science but one could easily make a calendar error. I feel for those that were just able to meet previous requirements and now this does tie up more funds. Perhaps funds some don't have. Anyway it is what it is. BTW any suggestions for a bank offering OK fixed term. My light blue bank is rubbish bank.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, skatewash said:

I'm hoping this is meant to be obvious but it's one or the other right?  1 or 2?  Not both?

 

In other words, the embassy letter route remains for those who can obtain one, and for those who can't the monthly deposit route is acceptable without one?

Correct. Income letter from Embassy, OR, bank statements + letter from bank.

 

5 minutes ago, skatewash said:

Or am I misunderstanding and you are saying they regard Bahtnet as an international transfer code? 

Bahnet is the system used when deposits go through the Bank of Thailand before reaching your local account.

Yes they regarded that as proof of foreign income.

In fact the example they showed used the Bahtnet code, but had the full name of the payee, in this case a private pension provider.

 

9 minutes ago, skatewash said:

About the source of the transferred money.  From what you've written they don't seem to be interested in the source.  Is that right?  I'm talking about the monthly deposit route of the income method.  The money speaks for itself?  I understand that if you use the embassy letter route you might be expected to offer documentation to substantiate the income, but for the monthly deposit route is that also required?  If it's deposited in the account they aren't interested in seeing a statement from a pension?  Income derived from investments is OK?

If using bank statements, then the source of the deposit is paramount.

It must come from overseas (unless earned in Thailand, that would be proven by tax receipts).

 

The Embassy letters only certify your annual/monthly income with proof shown to the Embassy.

The Embassy letter isn't proof your transferring the funds. No proof requested so far by Immigration in that respect.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
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...