What options qualify for the 65,000 / month requirement.

[SlowlyMan]

So, planning to get the Non-O for retirement with the extension. I would much prefer to not let $22,000usd sit in a Thai bank in perpetuity.

My Social security will be just short of the 65,000 required for the monthly option.  Will a fixed annuity payout qualify if the combination of the two is over 65,000?

The other option is combining the monthly ssa transfer with a bank balance. But I don't understand how that works.

[Gonetothedogs]

Just use an agent 

[BIGFREE1]

2 hours ago, SlowlyMan said:

So, planning to get the Non-O for retirement with the extension. I would much prefer to not let $22,000usd sit in a Thai bank in perpetuity.

My Social security will be just short of the 65,000 required for the monthly option.  Will a fixed annuity payout qualify if the combination of the two is over 65,000?

The other option is combining the monthly ssa transfer with a bank balance. But I don't understand how that works.

Would working and/or delaying SS a few months get you to the 65k requirement?

[jetdoc]

6 hours ago, SlowlyMan said:

So, planning to get the Non-O for retirement with the extension. I would much prefer to not let $22,000usd sit in a Thai bank in perpetuity.

Many do it as makes extensions simple.

[SlowlyMan]

So, back to the original question. 555.

Will a fixed annuity payout qualify if the combination of the annuity and SS is over 65,000?

[Edge]

1 hour ago, SlowlyMan said:

So, back to the original question. 555.

Will a fixed annuity payout qualify if the combination of the annuity and SS is over 65,000?

As long as you can show proof of source I believe no problem.
You do the monthly international t/f  of 65+ Baht at about the same time each month and then when you make an Application you provide proof of the source.
At that time you also have to provide a bank letter showing that the account is active on the day, plus a copy of the bank book, plus the bank's list of international t/fs during the past year.
Those were the guidelines when it first became an option and I've done it that way since.

Re' the agent method (money in overnight) it is no doubt easier, though you still have to go to Immigration, but some of us prefer to stay legit'.  

[SlowlyMan]

Thanks Edge. That's helpful.  Like you I would prefer to be legit.

[Ocraled]

I've done a lot of research on this.

The "Combined income" - method, whether it's clearly stated as a valid option in Thai immigration website, I've learned that in the end of the day, it's completely in local immigration officers decision.

There are plenty of people who say (why would they bs?) they have used combined income.

Naturally there are more, that haven't or been denied using it.

I personally asked about this from Khon Kaen immigration a while ago.

The reply was thai style: "Depends. Case by case".

When I asked, how can it be case by case, when the rules are clearly stated so it should be simple yes or no, they stopped responding. 😄

 

[SlowlyMan]

Alright. Thanks

[Pumpuynarak]

5 hours ago, Ocraled said:

I've done a lot of research on this.

The "Combined income" - method, whether it's clearly stated as a valid option in Thai immigration website, I've learned that in the end of the day, it's completely in local immigration officers decision.

There are plenty of people who say (why would they bs?) they have used combined income.

Naturally there are more, that haven't or been denied using it.

I personally asked about this from Khon Kaen immigration a while ago.

The reply was thai style: "Depends. Case by case".

When I asked, how can it be case by case, when the rules are clearly stated so it should be simple yes or no, they stopped responding. 😄

 

Well i for one would challenge it up to the highest level possible. HTF can you have an official clearly advertised national method of complying with the requirements to then be told by certain IO's thats its not available to you ? Total wankers.

Now i know lots will say its not worth the effort just use an agent but WTF should anyone have to pay a not insignificant amount of money to obtain their extension when they comply with the rules. All the time we accept this shit don't be surprised if it continues, i for one would'nt accept it.

Beggars belief imo, just sayin like lol

[davidge]

On 21/09/2023 at 00:37, SlowlyMan said:

So, back to the original question. 555.

Will a fixed annuity payout qualify if the combination of the annuity and SS is over 65,000?

You’ll still need to show the 800k in the bank for the initial visa and first extension. At least 2 months before and for 3 months after. No lower than 400k for the rest of the year.

Then you can use the income method for future extensions. Just remember it’s at least 65k every single month without fail. If one month is 64k then you’re buggered.

There’s always the chance that the Immigration Officer will say the source of funds isn’t adequate, but plenty of people use the method without a problem.

 

(I don’t want to start a discussion on this really, but we’ll have to keep an eye on the clarification of the new tax rules as well to see if it complicates things)

[SlowlyMan]

7 hours ago, davidge said:

You’ll still need to show the 800k in the bank for the initial visa and first extension. At least 2 months before and for 3 months after. No lower than 400k for the rest of the year.

Then you can use the income method for future extensions. Just remember it’s at least 65k every single month without fail. If one month is 64k then you’re buggered.

There’s always the chance that the Immigration Officer will say the source of funds isn’t adequate, but plenty of people use the method without a problem.

 

(I don’t want to start a discussion on this really, but we’ll have to keep an eye on the clarification of the new tax rules as well to see if it complicates things)

Is it actually a new rule, or is it just someone talking about a possible new rule?

[davidge]

1 minute ago, SlowlyMan said:

Is it actually a new rule, or is it just someone talking about a possible new rule?

The tax bit has caused a lot of consternation amongst expats but there’s no details yet. The new government has simply announced they are going to change the rules so all residents pay tax on all income brought into the country. Until full details are announced it’s not really possible to judge it (which is why I said I didn’t really want to discuss it now as it’s too speculative ) and it will obviously also depend on the various double tax arrangements in place with different countries. It sounds as if it will definitely happen in some way or other though. 

It could theoretically make bringing cash into the country each month less attractive which is why I mentioned it.

[davidge]

I always forget to mention in threads like these that the monthly income methods being discussed by all of us only applies to those countries whose embassies have stopped verifying income.

For those lucky BMs with more helpful embassies (a lot of our European cousins) it’s just a matter of getting the verification letter as has always been the case.

[Pumpuynarak]

18 hours ago, davidge said:

You’ll still need to show the 800k in the bank for the initial visa and first extension. At least 2 months before and for 3 months after. No lower than 400k for the rest of the year.

Then you can use the income method for future extensions. Just remember it’s at least 65k every single month without fail. If one month is 64k then you’re buggered.

There’s always the chance that the Immigration Officer will say the source of funds isn’t adequate, but plenty of people use the method without a problem.

 

(I don’t want to start a discussion on this really, but we’ll have to keep an eye on the clarification of the new tax rules as well to see if it complicates things)

This is the original official view on initially commencing a retirement extension using the income method, don't know if the info is any good to the OP or if in fact the rules have changed. Apologies for the poor quality of the screenshot.

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by Pumpuynarak

[geezerrb]

Still sounds to me that keeping my money in the UK earning far more interest than my Thai bank can offer is a better deal using an agent to get the visa especially if I get taxed on income to Thailand.

[Pumpuynarak]

1 hour ago, geezerrb said:

Still sounds to me that keeping my money in the UK earning far more interest than my Thai bank can offer is a better deal using an agent to get the visa especially if I get taxed on income to Thailand.

You make a very valid point but i just don't like the thought of using an agent especially if corners are being cut to get my extension, you just never know when the shit might hit the fan and you get found out, then what ?

[davidge]

Just saw this on one of the FB groups and it’s relevant here.

‘I was in my local immigration sorting out my marriage visa using the 400k method. I asked about the requirements for using the monthly money transferedmethod for next year.  I was told the following. I need to get an official  letter from my pension department and uk bank as proof that my pension is legitimate.  I was also told that only my pension would be considered for the money and not earnings from property rental that I also have. Has anyone else been told these requirements and that only my pension will be considered when bringing monies across.’

Just be aware that some Immigration Offices have been requiring this ie clear evidence that it is income from Pension for some time. A number of people have reported a similar thing, and it is becoming more common. It’s definitely worth checking with the Immigration Office you are using as to what they will accept.

[talung66]

On 20/09/2023 at 11:24, SlowlyMan said:

 I would much prefer to not let $22,000usd sit in a Thai bank in perpetuity.

Apply for a O-A visa and keep money in your own country