Gaybutton Posted October 4, 2006 Posted October 4, 2006 A good friend sent me the following in an E-mail today: __________ I just finished renewing my retirement visa this afternoon and I can report that this is even easier than before! As reported in Pattaya Today and Thaivisa.com, they are no longer requiring a medical certificate for renewal. I used the letter from the US embassy for proof of income and as before, they accepted a copy of the (three year old) letter, but they did want to see the original. A few changes: they now take a digital picture of you (in addition to the photo you provide) and the visa stamp in your passport has a block that says "RETIREMENT". All and all a piece of cake! Quote
Guest Boxer Posted October 4, 2006 Posted October 4, 2006 Good show. The new rule for others not on pension that you need 800000 baht in the bank AT LEAST 3 MTHS BEFORE APPLICATION seems to me to be a 25% increase in the amount needed. You need to deposit the amount 3 mths before application date then live say 80/100K per mth then still have 800000 baht showing on application day to qualify. So you need to deposit 1.1 million on these figures now to be sure and make a big diary note for yourselves to do it on time. It seems that you cannot top it up in the prior 3mths.if you have unexpected spending say. If your on pension proof the 3mths advance has no bearing, which seems a bit unfair? Quote
Gaybutton Posted October 4, 2006 Author Posted October 4, 2006 If your on pension proof the 3mths advance has no bearing, which seems a bit unfair? I don't know if I would agree that it is unfair. The point of the two methods is to ensure that the person applying for the retirement visa has enough money to be able to live in Thailand and contribute financially to the country. If one has a pension, that too has a minimum. I believe it is around a 70,000 baht per month minimum. I have forgotten. Perhaps someone knows the rule on that one. If someone does not have a pension, then 800,000 baht in the bank meets approximately the same minimum requirement for a year that the minimum pension would yield during the same time period. I do agree that the new three month rule about the 800,000 baht is unfair in comparison. They have made it clear that they want to put a stop to people who top off their bank account and then remove the money once they've secured their annual visa. That's the part that I don't get. What difference does it make whether someone withdraws it or not? What difference does it make whether the money is deposited 3 months in advance or on the very day the new visa is issued? Either way, the person obviously has 800,000 baht to live on, doesn't he? Perhaps they think people who do not have have the minimum pension and also not enough money borrow the 800,000 baht from someone, place it into their bank account, obtain the visa, and then return the money to the lender. If that's the case, that doesn't strike me as very realistic. How many people are going to trust someone else with 800,000 baht, whether it's one day or three months? Even if people do trust someone with that amount of money, when the borrower gives it back, then what's he living on? Would there be enough people pulling a stunt like that to justify forcing everyone else to maintain 800,000 baht in a Thai bank account for three months? Unless I'm missing something, I think this is yet another example of a rule that has not been properly thought through. Quote
Guest wowpow Posted October 4, 2006 Posted October 4, 2006 Retirement Visa The current rule is that you need 800,000 in the bank close to your application date OR proof of a pension of 65,000 baht a month OR a mix of the two say 400,000 in the bank and a pension of 32,500 a month. It seems reasonble to have to bring 800,000 in to show that you have enough money to live on. Why they now insist that you keep it here for three months prior I cannot imagine any logical reason. Both the money and the medical cetificate seem like a waste of time. If you are sick and penniless will the Thai Government take care of you? No! Quote
Guest kotter Posted October 4, 2006 Posted October 4, 2006 GB As I understand it, there were people who were advancing the money for the initial point of application.... all at an interest rate added on withdrawal. There has been a culling of some officers in that area!!! Quote
Gaybutton Posted October 4, 2006 Author Posted October 4, 2006 GB As I understand it, there were people who were advancing the money for the initial point of application.... all at an interest rate added on withdrawal. There has been a culling of some officers in that area!!! Ach sooooooo. (Sefton - Stalag 17) - That does seem logical. I still frown, though, at the idea of making things difficult for everyone else when the problems are caused by the actions of a few. Quote
PattayaMale Posted October 5, 2006 Posted October 5, 2006 I don't know the reasoning as to why they want the 800,000 in the bank for 3 months, but I have a theory. Anyone can have a mix of monthly income and savings as long as the mix is enough for a person to live on for a year. If a person gets a pension each month of 65,000 they are deemed to have enogh to live on...or a mix that equals approximately that amount if drawn down over a years time. What happens if some one "borrows" 800,000 for a few days, draws it out to repay as soon as they get the retirement visa? They may not really have enogh income unless they work illegally in Thailand. Also it seems reasonable for the authorities to question how a person who may have only 800,000 would replace the amount they draw down. It is just a theroy......where to I find the spell check for posts???? Quote
Guest gonefishing Posted October 5, 2006 Posted October 5, 2006 They have made it clear that they want to put a stop to people who top off their bank account and then remove the money once they've secured their annual visa. That's the part that I don't get. What difference does it make whether someone withdraws it or not? What difference does it make whether the money is deposited 3 months in advance or on the very day the new visa is issued? Either way, the person obviously has 800,000 baht to live on, doesn't he? Perhaps they think people who do not have have the minimum pension and also not enough money borrow the 800,000 baht from someone, place it into their bank account, obtain the visa, and then return the money to the lender. If that's the case, that doesn't strike me as very realistic. How many people are going to trust someone else with 800,000 baht, whether it's one day or three months? Even if people do trust someone with that amount of money, when the borrower gives it back, then what's he living on? Would there be enough people pulling a stunt like that to justify forcing everyone else to maintain 800,000 baht in a Thai bank account for three months? Unless I'm missing something, I think this is yet another example of a rule that has not been properly thought through. Sorry, GB, but you are definitely missing something! That is exactly what "they think", namely that those with insufficient funds / pension borrow the money for a couple of days then pay it back, and "they" are entirely correct, as I can tell you from personal experience!! I am in the fortunate / unfortunate position of being under 50 but with sufficient funds, with a number of friends with insufficient funds who either get by on less or work illegally; in the past it has not been a problem to lend them all or part of the money for a couple of days, but I would draw the line at doing so for three months. There is no way of knowing what sort of proportion of retirees this applies to, but I would hazard a guess that it is more than just "a few". I agree with topmanb that it actually represents an increase of 25% in real terms, which does seem unfair in comparison with the pension requirement; this would explain why the hard-working British Consul in Pattaya has been inundated with requests for letters from the Embassy showing proof of pension! The simplest solution may be for Immigration to check retirees' bank books for any "irregularities" at each 90 day registration point, but we can only wait and see how the rule is applied when things settle down, particularly as the requirement for funds in the bank is apparently due to be increased to 1,000,000 baht in two years' time, for those initially applying. Quote
Gaybutton Posted October 5, 2006 Author Posted October 5, 2006 Sorry, GB, but you are definitely missing something! That is exactly what "they think", namely that those with insufficient funds / pension borrow the money for a couple of days then pay it back, and "they" are entirely correct, as I can tell you from personal experience!! Wow! I had no idea there were so many circumventing the visa rules in that manner. If that is the case, then that makes a lot more sense out of the new regulations. Unfortunately, it makes things much more difficult for the people who abide by the rules. Have your friends told you what they're going to do now and how they are going to be able to stay in Thailand? Are any going to give it up and leave? Quote
Guest gonefishing Posted October 7, 2006 Posted October 7, 2006 It really is a case of "wait and see", as fortunately they all have a few months to go before their visa renewals are due; one couple also has "a friend" at immigration, whom they will check out the situation with. I was very surprised myself a few months ago when I did my regular (90 day) visa run and learnt from the owner of the mini-bus company (who should be in a position to know) that the vast majority of those doing visa runs to Cambodia were not, as I had supposed, doing an "in/out" on a 60 or 90 day visa but were getting another 30 day visa - as many of them had been doing for years. He also informed me that if I knew anyone who needed the requisite money in the bank for their retirement visa that he could arrange it with a"contact" at the Immigration office! I have some sympathy with the view that most of these people are not doing any harm and that, if working, they are not in jobs which could / would be done by Thais; also, although they are not contributing much individually to the Thai economy, the numbers are such that when taken overall it probably makes up quite a considerable amount. On the other hand it is rather hypocritical to complain about what are comparatively minor inconveniences when you consider the regulations and requirements imposed on those from here wanting to visit / work / live in our own countries! Quote
Gaybutton Posted October 8, 2006 Author Posted October 8, 2006 if working, they are not in jobs which could / would be done by Thais If that is the case, then they may be eligible for a work permit. If so, that could solve a lot of their problems. If they don't have a work permit perhaps they ought to try for one. Based on what you wrote, it seems to me that your friends are doing exactly the type of thing Thailand has imposed these regulations to prevent . . . a "contact" at immigration who can make "special arrangements" for them. Apparently corruption lives merrily on in Thailand and some of the very officials who are supposed to be fighting against it seem to intend to take full advantage instead. Quote
khaolakguy Posted October 8, 2006 Posted October 8, 2006 If that is the case, then they may be eligible for a work permit. If so, that could solve a lot of their problems. If they don't have a work permit perhaps they ought to try for one. Ah yes, but then they would have to pay tax on their earnings. A visa run is cheaper. Quote
Guest gonefishing Posted October 9, 2006 Posted October 9, 2006 If that is the case, then they may be eligible for a work permit. If so, that could solve a lot of their problems. If they don't have a work permit perhaps they ought to try for one. Based on what you wrote, it seems to me that your friends are doing exactly the type of thing Thailand has imposed these regulations to prevent . . . a "contact" at immigration who can make "special arrangements" for them. Apparently corruption lives merrily on in Thailand and some of the very officials who are supposed to be fighting against it seem to intend to take full advantage instead. In the case of my friends who are working, they are definitely not eligible - they are working by / for themselves, or with one unregistered Thai assistant; 7 registered are required for a work permit for your own business. I have to agree with you that they are doing exactly what the regulations are intended to prevent, and although I think that the Immigration policy is fully justified I hope that they can find some way around it as I (as well as some other users of this board living in Pattaya) would miss both them and the skilled service they provide - and yes I do realise this is hypocritical, and no I will not be giving any more details! As for corruption living merrily on - ??? Quote
Gaybutton Posted October 9, 2006 Author Posted October 9, 2006 As for corruption living merrily on - ??? Well, maybe I'm wrong about that one. I forgot. Thaksin got rid of all the corruption in Thailand. He did that the day after he ended all the poverty in Thailand. Quote
Smiles Posted October 9, 2006 Posted October 9, 2006 " ... In the case of my friends who are working, they are definitely not eligible - they are working by / for themselves, or with one unregistered Thai assistant; 7 registered are required for a work permit for your own business.... " If found out (however that may come about) they will probably be fined, thrown out of the country and blacklisted for any further entrance into the country. Bottom line is that is that they are simply taking a chance they will not be discovered or turned in. Not the kind of chance which would be acceptable to most reasonable adults. Good luck to 'em. I guess. Cheers ... Quote
Guest gonefishing Posted October 12, 2006 Posted October 12, 2006 Not the kind of chance which would be acceptable to most reasonable adults. Since you do not know any of the personal or financial circumstances of those mentioned, and I made it clear that I am not going to furnish them, to infer that they are not "reasonable adults" is pointless, unnecessary and unreasonable - sadly, a trait common to a minority of prolific posters on many forums. End of story. Quote
