Thai Immigration to Monitor Foreigner’s Bank Accounts

[Jun]

Firstly, thank you for posting that Dodger. If you see anything about implementation, please post.


1 THB 50,000 is quite a low hurdle for having to declare the source of the funds.

2 I suppose the effect of this kind of depends on whether proof is required. As an example, when I was making contributions to a self managed pension (SIPP), I had to select an option as to where the funds came from (income from employment, savings etc). Since money is fungible, I was working at the time and most importantly of all, the main reason for contributing was to get income tax relief, of course I selected "income from employment".
I also had to declare annual income, which was always more than the contributions, so the declaration was plausible and truthful.
I was never aware of any further checks on this.

So if banks, Transferwise etc just add a field for us to declare the source of the income, it's no big deal. Probably not particularly effective either.


Finally, I'm not sure which "unprofessional alarmist statement" by PattayaOne you are referring to. Yet again, what is written in the headline of this thread is not supported by what is in the article. We cannot blame PattayaOne for that.

[werner99]

How does a foreigner go about getting a Swiss bank account?

Here is a link that provides useful information about Swiss bank accounts and how to open them.
https://www.supermoney.com/swiss-bankaccounts/

A Canadian friend found the information useful. The website offers some information about specific Swiss banks.

Note: Swiss banks differ in their requirements to open an account.
--Some banks might require Swiss residency to open an account.
--Some banks cater to the wealthy and will not deal with anyone that has less than the equivalent of about 100,000 US dollars to deposit.
--Some banks do not want to deal with Americans or other nationalities that they suspect might be attempting to launder money or avoid taxes.

[Dodger]

Firstly, thank you for posting that Dodger. If you see anything about implementation, please post.


1 THB 50,000 is quite a low hurdle for having to declare the source of the funds.

2 I suppose the effect of this kind of depends on whether proof is required. As an example, when I was making contributions to a self managed pension (SIPP), I had to select an option as to where the funds came from (income from employment, savings etc). Since money is fungible, I was working at the time and most importantly of all, the main reason for contributing was to get income tax relief, of course I selected "income from employment".
I also had to declare annual income, which was always more than the contributions, so the declaration was plausible and truthful.
I was never aware of any further checks on this.

So if banks, Transferwise etc just add a field for us to declare the source of the income, it's no big deal. Probably not particularly effective either.


Finally, I'm not sure which "unprofessional alarmist statement" by PattayaOne you are referring to. Yet again, what is written in the headline of this thread is not supported by what is in the article. We cannot blame PattayaOne for that.

This is the statement in the article I felt was "unfounded and alarmist":

"Is anybody really comfortable with Thai immigration officers having free and easy access to their bank accounts, especially at a time when it is being demanded that a minimum of Bt800,000 must be held in foreign-owned accounts at all times? What could possibly go wrong – and were is this leading?"

It appears as if the focus of the Financial Account Monitoring is directed at "Money laundering", not for any dubious reason simply to spy on farang as insinuated in the article. I felt that drawing a parallel between this objective (Money Laundering) and the fact that some foreigners are now required to maintain 800k in the bank, is completely off target, and alarmist.

I also think the title of this thread falls in the same category, and can be misleading.

Most, if not all, financial institutions around the world already have computer apps, which are specifically designed to monitor domestic and international financial transactions for the purpose of spotting indications of money laundering. According to the article published in the Bangkok Post, this regulation was proposed after Thailand failed to meet International Standard for Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT), with seventeen areas listed as needing further improvements. It's only logical (to me anyway) that the training that's being provided to immigration officers is addressing one of the weaknesses found during the assessment of Thailand's AML/FFT, and has absolutely nothing to do with a farang's 800k bank account.

[Jun]

This is the statement in the article I felt was "unfounded and alarmist":

"Is anybody really comfortable with Thai immigration officers having free and easy access to their bank accounts, especially at a time when it is being demanded that a minimum of Bt800,000 must be held in foreign-owned accounts at all times? What could possibly go wrong – and were is this leading?"

With all due respect, that is NOT a statement. It's a question.

Quite speculative at that, since nowhere in the article does it say they do have free and easy access to bank accounts. Then Undaunted has created "Fake News" with the headline to this thread. [Again].

As an example, we could say "Is anyone really comfortable with public flogging of bar boys in Pattaya in 2019 ?". As a hypothetical question, it's OK. However to conclude that it's fact and report it as such would be creating fake news.

[Undaunted]

Quite speculative at that, since nowhere in the article does it say they do have free and easy access to bank accounts.

Hmmm, your writing style is very familiar

[Jun]

Hmmm, your writing style is very familiar

Well someone needs to call out your misleading reporting.

If someone starts a new thread titled "Public Flogging of Bar Boys in 2019" and includes a link to my post (2 before), it's pretty much the same thing that you did when starting this thread.
Trying to pass a question off as a fact and therefore creating fake news.

[Gaybutton]

Hmmm, your writing style is very familiar

Is it really too much for you to just admit you were mistaken and believed this guy's article? That's a perfectly legitimate mistake. I have no reason to believe there was any malicious intent on your part.

I get things wrong frequently. When I do, I admit it.

[Undaunted]

Yes indeed, thanks “Jun” for your diligence