News Forum - Government officials meet to discuss long-term visa options for foreigners

[BIGGLES]

25 minutes ago, Soidog said:

I hate to say this as someone who has enjoyed travelling and living in Thailand for over 25 years, but I feel you are right. The only thing that keeps me going back to Thailand is the emotional connection I have and the many friends my wife and I made over the years. If I was back in my 20’s or 30’s I certainly wouldn’t even visit Thailand with the current arrangements for a basic tourist visa, let alone the Thailand Pass. If I was an older guy looking to retire and had no connection with Thailand I would feel moving there would lead to nothing but anguish and problems in later life. I hope it can change as it never use to be like this until around 2012 and certainly after the last coup.  

Thanks, it saddens me to say what I have said. I, like you, have been coming here two  or three times a year for many years, 36 in my case, and a stint living here.

That changed after the 2004 Tsunami, in which I lost my long term Thai lady of 14 years. I had intended to see my days out here, that my still be an option, but not with the current government's attitude to foreigners,  that might all change who knows? At the moment its wait and see even for a holiday. If I were to come back to live, I would only ever rent!

[Bob20]

7 minutes ago, Soidog said:

I agree with that @Bob20 especially the issue of naturalising and being a part of the community. When I started living for long periods in Thailand, I made it my business to learn to speak and read Thai. I’m by no means fluent and when I am away for a while my language skills fade. However, I think many more people would “make the effort” to speak Thai and fit in if they could see more reason to do so. Right now, apart from being able to ask for things and have some banter with the cops when they stop you or even have a little fun with Thais who you can catch out when they talk behind your back, there is very little advantage. If by learning the language you could get a better job,  or a job at all other than teaching, then I think more people would take it on. If you could be made to feel like there is a route to being accepted and naturalisation that leads to full integration then again I think more would do so.
 

After being in Thailand many years, I’ve come to the conclusion that no matter how good my Thai, how much effort I put in to fitting in, no matter how much money I am prepared to bring to Thailand, I would never ever be made to feel like I’m even close to being accepted. Discrimination would remain rife, jobs would be blocked, you would still be treated as a tourist and referred to collectively as Farang . You would remain the outsider simply because you are not Thai. They discriminate against each other enough just because you are from Issan, from the far North or from the Deep South and hence likely a Muslim. 
 

You have so much more experience with Thailand than I have @Soidog. And I certainly am learning a lot from the forum. But my day to day experience living here, is not as negative as most of what I read on the forum.

I hold a very simple view. You can move from London to Manchester and may not like it. You can setup a business there and it can fail.

Same with taking the risk to move abroad. You accept what comes your way, as the Thais are not responsible for your choice and you immerse yourself in their way of life. And it doesn't matter whether you like it or not (although you hope they will be fair) as until you fully naturalise you're a guest in their country. 

[Soidog]

5 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

You have so much more experience with Thailand than I have @Soidog. And I certainly am learning a lot from the forum. But my day to day experience living here, is not as negative as most of what I read on the forum.

I hold a very simple view. You can move from London to Manchester and may not like it. You can setup a business there and it can fail.

Same with taking the risk to move abroad. You accept what comes your way, as the Thais are not responsible for your choice and you immerse yourself in their way of life. And it doesn't matter whether you like it or not (although you hope they will be fair) as until you fully naturalise you're a guest in their country. 

Yes I can’t disagree with that @Bob20  we are all responsible for our actions. I think for many people who can recall the attitudes in Thailand (by the government I mean) prior to around 2012 it has become increasingly frustrating. It’s clear to me that the government has exploited the pandemic to introduce a raft of changes they justified on the basis of protecting the health of the nation and now will remain in place in perpetuity.

One example is the new e-visa system. You would think, wouldn’t you, that the aim was to replicate what was previously done on paper, manually checked and now automate it. Same documentation and requirements. Not so and now simply more added that was never previously requires. There are too many to list, but the ones that hurt are prepaid flights and hotels before you even get a visa approved. The ones that make you shake your head, having uploaded your passport picture page and a passport style picture of yourself. You then have to upload a picture of you holding the passport picture page. Funny if it wasn’t ridiculous. 
And let’s not forget. The stated aim is to make it easy for tourists to return to The Land of Smiles. It’s the classic Thai government behaviour of talking out of both sides of their mouth. 

[Bob20]

4 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Yes I can’t disagree with that @Bob20  we are all responsible for our actions. I think for many people who can recall the attitudes in Thailand (by the government I mean) prior to around 2012 it has become increasingly frustrating. It’s clear to me that the government has exploited the pandemic to introduce a raft of changes they justified on the basis of protecting the health of the nation and now will remain in place in perpetuity.

One example is the new e-visa system. You would think, wouldn’t you, that the aim was to replicate what was previously done on paper, manually checked and now automate it. Same documentation and requirements. Not so and now simply more added that was never previously requires. There are too many to list, but the ones that hurt are prepaid flights and hotels before you even get a visa approved. The ones that make you shake your head, having uploaded your passport picture page and a passport style picture of yourself. You then have to upload a picture of you holding the passport picture page. Funny if it wasn’t ridiculous. 
And let’s not forget. The stated aim is to make it easy for tourists to return to The Land of Smiles. It’s the classic Thai government behaviour of talking out of both sides of their mouth. 

I haven't yet needed to jump through those hoops as I'm in Thailand and wasn't planning on traveling to Europe until summer next year, but if that's how they're going to keep it, I suggest TAT gets a calculator with a 6-digit display limit. They likely won't need more than that.

[Soidog]

44 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

I haven't yet needed to jump through those hoops as I'm in Thailand and wasn't planning on traveling to Europe until summer next year, but if that's how they're going to keep it, I suggest TAT gets a calculator with a 6-digit display limit. They likely won't need more than that.

It depends what visa you are on of course @Bob20.  If you have a NonO/O-A extended for retirement then you won’t need to worry. However, a normal 60 day tourist visa is the crazy one. I think they must have got the software courtesy of a discarded one used for CIA security clearance.
 

Did I mention they want to know how much you earn, proof of funds and proof of residency. Apparently your passport isn’t sufficient to prove you are British and hence can live anywhere in the U.K.

Its not so much what they ask for as such. They could ask me to make a short video singing the Thai National Anthem stood on one leg if they wanted. It’s what they are asking for given the objective which is to attract tourists. 

[Bob20]

3 minutes ago, Soidog said:

It depends what visa you are on of course @Bob20.  If you have a NonO/O-A extended for retirement then you won’t need to worry. However, a normal 60 day tourist visa is the crazy one. I think they must have got the software courtesy of a discarded one used for CIA security clearance.
 

Did I mention they want to know how much you earn, proof of funds and proof of residency. Apparently your passport isn’t sufficient to prove you are British and hence can live anywhere in the U.K.

Its not so much what they ask for as such. They could ask me to make a short video singing the Thai National Anthem stood on one leg if they wanted. It’s what they are asking for given the objective which is to attract tourists. 

Then we're back to square one. Maybe for now it's intentionally done to limit the numbers, as they must know it would be disastrous to have mass tourism at the moment, while still claiming an opened-up country.

In that case you wouldn't expect these obstructions to stay once the worst risks are out of the way with higher rates of (effective) vaccination.

[Soidog]

2 hours ago, Bob20 said:

Then we're back to square one. Maybe for now it's intentionally done to limit the numbers, as they must know it would be disastrous to have mass tourism at the moment, while still claiming an opened-up country.

In that case you wouldn't expect these obstructions to stay once the worst risks are out of the way with higher rates of (effective) vaccination.

I feel that’s the only explanation for the current arrangement. Let’s hope they do remove these obstructions are they are heading for about 1million tourists a year. 

[EdwardV]

4 hours ago, Bob20 said:

But ultimately we live in another country where we are guests and have to behave as such. Without making the effort to naturalise, they will set the rules and we will have to comply. Everyone will consciously or unconsciously balance the pros and cons on a personal level. It's as simple as that. 

Granted and a good point. However at the same time this is about Thailand wanting more long stay foreigners. In order to get more of something it’s generally accepted you need to give more in return. I’m not seeing Thailand giving a little while at the same time asking for a lot more. There seems to be a disconnect there. 

[gummy]

3 hours ago, EdwardV said:

In order to get more of something it’s generally accepted you need to give more in return.

That's accepted logic but Thailand's regimes have never followed logic because even with the majority of its own people it has been take , rather than give back as monetary considerations are all that matters. Now these people currently in charge have taken that to a whole new level so no way on earth will they even consider that normal long term stayers, or those that wish too, are of any importance. What is important to them is convincing enough uber rich to spend billions of baht in Thailand so that it may be re-appropriated into their own personal accounts. Of cause only retards would think that would happen.

[Bob20]

7 hours ago, EdwardV said:

Granted and a good point. However at the same time this is about Thailand wanting more long stay foreigners. In order to get more of something it’s generally accepted you need to give more in return. I’m not seeing Thailand giving a little while at the same time asking for a lot more. There seems to be a disconnect there. 

Absolutely, there is a disconnect. Like with opening the country, but making it difficult to get here. Saying something different from what the actions show.

Perhaps they don't really want many long-stayers, but don't say it. Just make it more difficult.

[Jerry]

If it was not for the fact that my Thai wife of 33 years would find it hard to move away from her family I would definitely move us away to a more falang tolerant country.

People like us, working class, not rich have as usual had the rug pulled from under our feet.

[TorquayFan]

I see Liz Truss the UK Foreign Secretary is having talks today with the Thailand PM - I will be very surprised if she addresses the question of Thailand not allowing Foreigners to own Freehold in the Kingdom.

 

Why is that ? It is a long term anomaly and injustice that should be tackled. I believe it is possible for Thai people to own Freehold in the UK ! This critical topic never seems to be mentioned, except in complaints - why is there not an ongoing camapaign from all Countries around the World to correct this ? If the Thai Government really want to attract more Foreigners, rich or not so rich, this would make a major difference to morale in the Country - Thaiger where are you ?

[NidNoi]

10 hours ago, EdwardV said:

Granted and a good point. However at the same time this is about Thailand wanting more long stay foreigners. In order to get more of something it’s generally accepted you need to give more in return. I’m not seeing Thailand giving a little while at the same time asking for a lot more. There seems to be a disconnect there. 

Being a guest means that you are welcome by your host(s). The hosts make all the necessary efforts to please you and make you fell at home; I don’t know other definition for a host (unless he is part of a special relationship with a parasite).

Regarding the non-immigrant visas for long stay over 6 months, how do you handle your residency requirements of 182 days in your country of origine? The non-immigrant visa does not give you residency in Thailand but may remove the rights as a resident in your own country. There are tax implications and other benefits you may loose like healthcare and a few seniors’ benefits.

We have been questioned by the Canadian Border Agency when we came back from Thailand after being out of the country for 10 months due to Covid. As it was a case of force majeure they did not report our absence to Revenue Canada. Otherwise we would have lost our healthcare coverage for the next 182 days, until we recovered our residency. 

 

[Bob20]

19 minutes ago, NidNoi said:

Being a guest means that you are welcome by your host(s). The hosts make all the necessary efforts to please you and make you fell at home; I don’t know other definition for a host (unless he is part of a special relationship with a parasite).

Regarding the non-immigrant visas for long stay over 6 months, how do you handle your residency requirements of 182 days in your country of origine? The non-immigrant visa does not give you residency in Thailand but may remove the rights as a resident in your own country. There are tax implications and other benefits you may loose like healthcare and a few seniors’ benefits.

We have been questioned by the Canadian Border Agency when we came back from Thailand after being out of the country for 10 months due to Covid. As it was a case of force majeure they did not report our absence to Revenue Canada. Otherwise we would have lost our healthcare coverage for the next 182 days, until we recovered our residency. 

I think maybe you mistake non-immigrant status with non-resident status.

You can have non-immigrant status while having resident status and you can obtain a certificate of residence from your local immigration office.

Whilst you may not wish to lose certain benefits in Canada and remain a resident, others may intentionally wish to end residency in their home country for tax-status and not paying compulsory premiums for health benefits that aren't valid abroad anyway. Especially when here (semi-) permanently.

[Stonker]

18 hours ago, Soidog said:

One backpacker becomes three or four returning in later years ...

Three or four more backpackers ... great .

[Stonker]

4 hours ago, NidNoi said:

Being a guest means that you are welcome by your host(s). The hosts make all the necessary efforts to please you and make you fell at home; 

Why do you think you're a "guest", entitled to be looked after by your "host"?  Who invited you?

You paid to come here, just as you pay to go to a concert, a cinema or a restaurant.

If you enjoyed the experience then you'll pay to do so again, in the same way, and probably recommend it.

If you didn't you'll pay to go elsewhere, and you probably won't recommend it, but it's not normal to fixate about somewhere you don't like as some here do.

Unless it's a bad case of the fox and the grapes, I can't understand why so many here spend so much time complaining about things they don't like to others who already feel the same way. 

I just don't get it !

[Stonker]

4 hours ago, Bob20 said:

You can have non-immigrant status while having resident status and you can obtain a certificate of residence from your local immigration office.

I don't want to nit-pick but given previous lengthy comments elsewhere about retirement and marriage extensions vs retirement and marriage visas, it may be worth pointing out that a "certificate of residence from your local immigration office" is only proof of your address, for a driving licence, passport renewal, bank account, etc, and has nothing to do with residency or any real or imagined status as a resident which is a very different issue.

[Stonker]

7 hours ago, Jerry said:

If it was not for the fact that my Thai wife of 33 years would find it hard to move away from her family I would definitely move us away to a more falang tolerant country.

People like us, working class, not rich have as usual had the rug pulled from under our feet.

I've been here nearly 30 years so not quite so long, and for half that I was swopping passports and visas as I was neither working,  married, nor old enough for retirement extensions, but I genuinely can't see what's changed for you and, apparently, others.

The only tangible difference I can put my finger on is keeping 400k in the bank for a retirement extension, but I genuinely can't see or feel any other difference that makes me feel any less 'tolerated' either here or when I go anywhere where there's a 'farang population', whether Pattaya before or more recently Khon Kaen or Udon.

Apart from the scare-mongering, which really is something new that I've never come across before, what's changed?

I don't want to be argumentative, but I honestly can't see what's changed so much ...

 

[Stonker]

16 hours ago, EdwardV said:

However at the same time this is about Thailand wanting more long stay foreigners. In order to get more of something it’s generally accepted you need to give more in return. I’m not seeing Thailand giving a little while at the same time asking for a lot more. There seems to be a disconnect there. 

Agreed 100% there, @EdwardV.

I know people here on retirement extensions, marriage extensions, and on Elite visas, as well as some on tourist or other assorted visas and I just can't see why any of them would change to this or why this would attract anyone who wasn't already attracted anyway.

Where's the big bonus in return for being "expected" to pay a million baht a year in tax and / or invest in something they wouldn't otherwise want?