BritTim

The biggest risk is with visa exempt entry (or visa on arrival if not eligible for visa exemptions). With a visa, there should not be a problem, but Immigration at both Bangkok airports has historically (albeit infrequently) been known to deny entry to long stay tourists with tourist visas.

Your explanation is incorrect in several respects. Firstly, the Immigration official is not the one who decides where you go when you are denied entry. Responsibility for removing you from Thailand if you are denied entry in every case rests with the airline that brought you to Thailand. Where you are sent is the decision of the airline representative. The IATA guidelines suggest returning you to the last embarkation point if possible. (Sometimes, for visa reasons, that cannot be done.) Your advice on not signing the form in Thai is good. Apart from the lack of a stamp in your passport, it is actually unclear if you are officially denied entry in the Immigration computer. Another point worth noting is that, although the airline will expect to get paid, they must remove you from Thailand whether they are paid or not. This gives you some leverage in discussing with the airline representative where you are sent. You can state that you are happy to pay to be taken to the destination or your choice (somewhere the airline flies, of course) but will dispute liability for the fare if forced to go where you do not want to go. You do not have this card to play if you have paid up tickets on the same airline that they can grab to defray the cost.

I can confirm that this is a longstanding rule for a Non Ed visa and extensions for studying at an informal school like a language school. Note that it does not apply to language courses run by universities, and you may be able to study there with relaxed immigration rules if a genuine student.

You cannot apply directly for a 12-month extension from a visa exempt entry. As outlined by DrJack above, you must first apply for a Non O visa at Immigration using form TM87 which gives you an initial 90-day permission to stay.

I believe this is possible when you hold a multiple entry visa. If wanting to return visa exempt, a same day return is only possible on payment of bribes.

I have looked into this subject fairly thoroughly in the past. I cover below the rules for a denied entry at an airport. The rules are rather different (though similar in intent) if denied at a land border. First, do not confuse "denied entry" which occurs before you are admitted to the country, with "deportation" which occurs after. When you are an INAD (inadmissible person) regardless of the reason for the denied entry, the airline that brought you to Thailand is responsible for your removal. That is true whether or not the airline is paid to do so and even if the airline is totally blameless. Generally speaking, there is a strong recommendation that the airline return you to the last embarkation point on your journey to Thailand. If you will not be granted re-entry at the last embarkation point, most often, the airline will arrange your return to your home country. Although most INADs do not realise this, and the ultimate decision is with the airline representative, you have some leverage. The airline is allowed to take you take you to any destination where you will be allowed entry. If you do not want to be returned to home country, you should tell the airline representative where you are willing to go (a destination that airline flies to) telling them that you will happily pay to be taken there, but will resist attempts to get you to pay to be taken somewhere you do not want to go. Although, in theory, the airline could be forced to carry you for free, in almost all cases this will not happen. If you have unused paid up tickets on the same airline, these will be grabbed to defray the cost. That aside, if you are refusing to pay, the authorities at many destinations will (generally illegally) threaten to lock you up until you agree to pay. There are also rules for who is responsible to pay for your food and lodging at the airport while awaiting removal (sometimes the airline, sometimes the Thai authorities). Again, pressure will usually be brought for reimbursement. Outside formal denial of entry, Thai Immigration may occasionally allow you to leave voluntarily. In that situation, they will facilitate you buying a ticket to go wherever you wish, and it will appear that you only transited (airside) in Thailand. There will be no evidence in your passport or Thailand's system of a denied entry. If denied entry seems inevitable, it may be worth discussing this option with the immigration official.

If this does happen, which is possible but unlikely, the consequences for the farangs will be similar to that faced by those who received the dubious volunteer visas and extensions. They will not face prosecution for what were, at the end of the day, valid extensions. However, their future interactions with Immigration will become more difficult.

Your plan of using the METV should be fine, Arguably, you could instead use a visa exempt entry for your first trip of under 30 days, applying for a single entry tourist visa just after your return from the first trip to use for the second.

I hope you do not plan on entering through the Poipet/Aranyaprathet crossing. It is the only crossing where you might encounter a problem entering with an actual tourist visa.

When there is a rogue office, it helps if you name it. That helps others using the same office to appreciate that they cannot rely on the official rules. I gather that, at least, you were not fined.

Your thread title suggests you intend to apply for an e-visa. That is officially not allowed unless you are in home country. The application might still succeed. If applying for a tourist visa, instead, at the Thai embassy in Phnom Penh, it is hard to assess your chances. It appears that you have no prior tourist visas issued in the region (which counts in your favour) but a lot of time recently in Thailand as a tourist (which counts against you). You may or may not be issued with your visa. Applying in Vientiane (where you need an appointment) would give a much higher chance of success.

In Thailand, take legal advice before accusing someone, even with incontrovertible evidence of the truth of your allegations. The defamation laws in Thailand are draconian, and the fact that you are telling the truth does not change the fact that the other person suffers reputational damage.

The rules on TM30 are clear about not needing a new report if using a re-entry permit. They do not clarify fresh entries on a multiple entry visa. My own (possibly erroneous) assumption is that a fresh entry on a multiple entry visa needs a new TM30 notification, the logic being that this is a new permission to stay after a break (even if that break was only a few minutes).

Am I 100% sure? No. However, the prevailing regulations, as I understand them, is that all transfers into your account (whether from overseas or domestic) are supposed to be easily traceable back to their source. It is the responsibility of intermediate banks to ensure that is possible. Untraceable transfers make money laundering way too easy.

This thread simply degenerated into a rehashing of deeply held opinions by different members that are of no practical value. I have chosen not to moderate posts that are off topic and borderline abusive. Instead, this thread is CLOSED

In deciding to rely on an METV, just recognise that this will involve regular trips outside Thailand. Each entry on the METV gives you a 60-day (59 night) permission to stay. It is possible to acquire a 30-day extension at the local immigration office on payment of 1,900 baht, but then you must leave and re-enter Thailand. Depending on where you are in Thailand (and your desire to travel anyway) this can be a hassle. Obviously, there are associated costs as well. The Non Ed visa and extensions have received a bad rap because of visa mill schools that do not really teach you Thai and have been used as a means of staying without studying. If you use a reputable school with the intention of really learning the language, there should be no problem. It obviates the need for border bounces to extend your stay. On the other hand, it would not be the best choice if you do want to spend some of your time travelling outside Thailand.

If you are not eligible for a visa exemption on entry (which may well mean a re-entry permit for your existing tourist entry makes sense) then it is a good solution to get your re-entry permit at the airport on the day of your departure. Make sure you do understand that it just prevents your permission to stay from being cancelled and does not add any days to your existing permission to stay.

The only Non O visa based on retirement is the multiple entry Non O valid for one year that provides a 90-day permission to stay on each entry into Thailand. Based on your later posts, I do not think that is what you mean. The next nearest is the Non O-A (long stay) visa which is also not what you mean. I know you think we should be able to figure out that you are referring to extensions of your permission to stay (which are not visas) but it eases communication if we start with a basic understanding of what a visa is.

Your recollection on this differs from mine. I can recall a single raid on a co-working space up in Chiang Mai that, in the end, resulted in no prosecutions, and which was widely regarded to have been a mistake. Over the last decade, there have been raids on online workers in some very specific situations, but none on co-working spaces involving digital nomads with no Thai employer or Thai customers. That is in spite of the fact that the authorities are well aware of what is going on. The authorities are well aware that the presence of digital nomads in Thailand benefits the economy. They have no desire to deter them. That said, they are not going to make a public announcement that the labour laws can freely be broken. When laws are not enforced, they are just quietly ignored. In the same way, Thailand is not going to announce that breaking the laws against prostitution is OK, but you will not find your hotel room being raided because you are in bed with a 25-yesr-old bar girl.

The usual confusion between visas and permissions to stay, sigh! It is pointless to expect people to generally use the correct terminology, but posts like the above are especially irritating. You cannot renew a "visa", only apply for a new one. A single entry Non O visa provides a 90-day permission to stay. A multiple entry Non O visa allows unlimited 90-day permissions to stay on each entry up until the expiry date of the visa (one year after the date of issue). Extensions of your permission to stay (which are not visas) are available for many purposes. Those for marriage and for retirement are for one year each time.

Wise allows you to send the money as a Swift transfer (though their transaction fees are higher that way). I believe, as usual with Wise, that allows you to specify the exact amount in Thai baht.

In the past (and I think still now) you typically needed to do a border bounce by air if currently on a Non Immigrant permission to stay to kill it off. The Elite visa is then affixed at the airport.

The timing was not perfect. Those for whom the tax changes would affect their decision will simply bail and fail to pay the membership fee. Few prodded into action by the announced price increases will have paid before the September 18 announcement. The tax changes should have been announced in November if the plan was to boost Elite memberships.

Those who cannot enter Thailand visa exempt may have trouble traveling without a tourist visa. If you have an appointment to get the Elite visa affixed to your passport on entry at Suvarnabhumi, I would imagine this would suffice with most airlines. However, airlines unfamiliar with the Thailand Elite process might deny you boarding without a visa.

I think you are both supposed to sign the copy of the marriage certificate. Maybe, your wife can email you a signed copy (you email her a copy, she signs it and sends it back). I think the consulate would accept that.