qualtrough

I believe I saw that earlier. Was that the one where the person was repeatedly warned not to do that, not just a one time thing? Any other cases that come to mind to anyone?

From my very brief perusal, the loss of nationality document appears to list people who have requested giving up their Thai citizenship. Their names and their new country of citizenship are then listed. It looks like those of countries that do not allow dual citizenship, like Singapore. I would be interest in seeing information about people whose citizenship was taken away from them and the reasons for that.

I just saw this on Google. It was a link description that shows up when you google citizenship. The thing is, these are listed as the myths of citizenship, but somehow the myth part gets left off! How many foreigners get Thai citizenship? Only 100 people per year are granted Thai citizenship. You have to live in Thailand for two decades before you can apply; Only people who have 'connections' in high places get citizenship; They only want millionaires to apply; or.

I am mystified at the people who apparently live here long term and for whatever reason can't find any benefit to obtaining citizenship. I suspect it is due to either lack of imagination, sour grapes, or a combination of the two.

For me it was a pretty simple process. Once I qualified and passed the points test it was simply a document gathering and submission exercise and attending a few interviews. And waiting. Painless really. All the officials I dealt with were very friendly and accommodating. I was lucky as mine too just 3 years start to finish.

Cannot see one practical benefit?? No need to deal with immigration ever again. Immigrations fees/laws/requirements can change. You could wake up one day to find out that your retirement or marriage visa costs twice what it did the other day. You can own or co-own your home or other property. No need to own through a spouse or third party. No need to obtain a work permit. Can own your own company/business. Thai prices for entry to national parks. Free entry if you are over 60. Coverage under Thai 30 baht health scheme or whatever name it is known by now. Visa free travel to ASEAN countries No need to sell your house if your wife pre-deceases you, or to have to engage is some kind of legal legerdemain to stay there. No hassles signing up for bank accounts and other programs because you don't have a Thai ID. You can use the Thai line at immigration, potentially savings hours during busy periods. Substantial rail travel discounts for retired people for several months of the year. Too many more to list. And all that cost less than 10,000 baht in fees, submitting documents, going in for a few interviews. Quite a bargain.

I obtained citizen through marriage and was not required to sing.

You sound bitter, so I am not even sure why you would be hanging around this sub. But to answer your question, and assuming that a farang wants to live in Thailand, the benefits of being a citizen are almost uncountable: 1. No need to give up your other citizenship unless you are citizen of a relatively small number of countries who require that. 2. No more need to waste time or money on visas, keep a large deposit of money in the bank, or purchase an expensive long term visa under one of the several schemes. 3. No need for 90 day reporting. 4. Free to start and run a business, or do any job you want. 5. Free to own land and or a home without engaging in risky workarounds. 6. Qualify for various universal health care schemes. 7. Visa free entry to ASEAN countries. 8. No hassles opening up bank accounts, applying for 7/11 cards, etc. and etc. 9. Thai pricing at national parks, which can be up to 10 times cheaper than farang prices. And much, much more. If that's doesn't seem worthwhile for you I don't know what more to say.

She has nice mangoes!

You can divide your life into pre and post citizenship periods, and the latter is so much more convenient. Well worth any wait.

Sorry for beating this horse to death, but my decision is to go for the usufruct now, and if I am around in five years and feel like it I can always pay the reduced price and get added to the chanotes. If anyone can see any flaws with this reasoning please speak up now or forever hold your peace 🙂

Same situation, bit of an age difference. But we have a will that stipulates that everything goes to the surviving spouse, and then to the children when both of us have shuffled off this mortal coil. That was drawn up by Tilleke & Gibbin, so I am assuming they knew what they were doing.

Thanks for your reply. I definitely will ask for a calculation, e.g. how are they basing the valuation. Regarding the usufruct, I believe they wanted 75 baht for the fee, and the rest to pad their own nest. Hard to challenge decision-making officials on things like this, because if I tell them "No, we will only pay the fee" they can come back with something along the lines of "We are not going to give you a usufruct because you are obviously using it to avoid paying the transfer fee". Or any number of reasons. Conversations like that can go back and forth until the end of time. Sadly that is the way it works here much of the time. To recap, it looks like the choices are to either pay what they ask for the usufruct, or pay the transfer fee after agreeing on how that assessment is determined. I keep vacillating between choice 1 and 2, but will probably go for paying the transfer fee as long as it is within reason of the legit rate due.

Makes sense, thanks.

Very helpful, thanks. I think this explains what is going on, and your explanation of why 10,000 was being asked makes perfect sense. Pretty sure I will just bite the bullet and tell them to proceed with the expensive option 🙂