BritTim

I think the agents are mostly gone. You must queue yourself outside the consulate well before they open. They only accept a limited number of applications per day. You cannot just waltz up at 9:30 am and expect to be able to apply that day, unless you are extremely lucky.

How on earth can an agent offer you a one-year stay as a 40-year-old for 15,000 baht? Even when agent assisted volunteer visas and extensions were available, they cost way more than that. Today, the cheapest is a Non Ed visa and extensions which (including immigration fees and fees to the school) cannot be less than 40k baht a year, and hard to arrange at that price.

Staying long term on visa exemptions and border bounces is no longer viable. All a good agent can offer you (now fraudulent volunteer visas have been comprehensively squashed) is education visas. These involve cost and some hassle, usually necessitating annual border bounces alongside 60 or 90-day extensions. It might be possible to accomplish this more cheaply than a 20-yesr Elite (at current prices) but it will be hard.

Yes, you can. You do not have a 'retirement visa'. You have an extension of your temporary permission to be in Thailand based on retirement, which you can subsequently change to further extensions for reasons other than retirement (often marriage). You can read an English translation of the Police Order giving all the allowable reasons for extensions at https://aseannow.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=436487. Note that superseding Police Orders have subsequently changed some of the rules for extensions by reason of retirement.

@DrJack54's explanation was accurate, though the visa application for the Non O at Jomtien often differs from the standard practice at other offices. If you look back in your passport(s) you will be able to find the Non O visa stamp which you received to change from the visa exempt entry. It was immediately stamped 'used', and you had a fresh 90-day permission to stay placed in your passport at the same time as the visa.

Thank you. That seems definitive (and I would never presume to doubt you). What do you think this meant?

Others are mostly in disagreement with my opinion on this, and Immigration may not applying the rules as I think they were intended. My view is that, for any retirement extension after the first, you should be able to qualify for the next extension based on money in the bank or income. You qualify based on income, by having 12 monthly transfers from abroad or by using an income letter. To qualify based on money in the bank, you must have complied with minimum balances in your account since the previous extension. The popular opinion is that when you previously qualified for an extension based on money in the bank, you must also qualify based on money in the bank at the time of the next extension. You cannot qualify based on income alone, but must meet the same requirements as if you could not qualify based on income. However, having qualified based on both money in the bank and income for one extension, you can then choose which (money in the bank or income) you want to use for the subsequent extension. The written Police Order does not make sufficiently clear whether my logic or the common consensus is what was intended.

Thank you for your input. I was influenced by the poster indicating that no visa stickers or entry/exit stamps were placed in his passport, with him leaving his passport at immigration for his short visit. I cannot see how this could be compatible with a visa on arrival, entering and exiting Laos with the visa (which would surely also require exit and entry stamps on the Thai end). I wonder if he actually used a different crossing.

If the only resident of the property is a foreigner, the blue book will be empty. The chanote in your name, plus the explanation that you not yet have a yellow book should be sufficient for things like TM30 notification. However, if you are a foreign owner, the yellow book will simplify matters in some cases.

I kind of feel the same. However, people can have good reasons for wanting to avoid time away. Someone needing to be back at work in 10 days might not want to spend several days away from the girlfriend and kids, for instance. Also, Vietnam is cheap, but still costs more than a border bounce. Those who are really hard up might need to factor that into their decision making.

That's great. I thought I needed to go back to the consulate for that. Does it still allow me to stay for 90 days on each entry?

A dismissive and demeaning post and replies to it have been removed.

Just do not maker a bank transfer until you are ready. I assume they do not have the ability to remove money from your bank account without your consent.

Understood. It is very difficult for people who have never encountered Thailand's immigration system to understand that the "visa" is not what allows them to be in Thailand. You are right. Just saying "yes, you can extend it at Immigration" is probably the least confusing answer in isolation. Helping him to learn that the visa is not his permission to stay might stand him in good stead in the future. It is a trade off.

I do not see where in the Police Order for extensions where it says money in the bank is both retrospective and prospective, but income is based only on retrospective payments. I believe both are retrospective only. If this is not true, then a failure to maintain deposits later means that your current permission to stay becomes invalid, and you are on overstay. You should be fined when this is discovered, and blacklisted from Thailand if the overstay is more than 90 days. Of course, it is not true. The deposits in the bank are only used to qualify for your next extension (if you do not qualify instead based on income). As you say, we are going to have to agree to disagree. We have had a polite discussion, and I think I understand your position, even though I disagree with it.

Do not have rose tinted glasses about the situation in the UK a lot more recently than the Middle Ages. The class hierarchy was still very powerful at least as late as the 1950s. You are correct that these attitudes remain very strong in Thailand. If we want to live here, we need to acknowledge it and not fight it.

That can be validly argued if your last extension was based on money in the bank. They want to be sure that the 800k baht was your money, and not from some kind of short-term loan. it is certainly more valid than saying you must qualify based on money in the bank for the entire year while simultaneously qualifying based on income That said, I would still say that qualifying by 12 consecutive monthly deposits from abroad meets the cumulative 800k requirement for an extension based on income. In the past, when income letters from the embassy were accepted, I do not recall them ever saying that they would not accept the income letter because you did not met the requirement for 800k baht in the bank. So, do you believe that would now also be true if using an income letter from your embassy? I think you may be correct on actual practice, but I think it is completely illogical. The intent of the current rules, I believe, is that you must qualify for an extension by showing you have met the requirements for your last extension, either by keeping the requisite bank balances, or by depositing a minimum level of income into your account from abroad every month during the term of the last extension. I do not think using money in the bank for one extension should prevent you from using income to qualify for the next one (though you must be able to show proof of retrospective income, not just a promise to do it going forward). Interesting enough, when monthly deposits were first introduced, you were allowed to qualify the first time based on only two or three monthly deposits as it was felt unreasonable to require 12 deposits when this was not previously necessary. Now, apparently, 24 months of transfers are required. Similarly, I think if you have previously been using income, you should be able to switch to money in the bank by simply having 800k baht in the bank during the previous year. I do not think a failure to continue 65k+ deposits should disqualify you for the next extension as long as you qualify based on money in the bank.

I am sure hammering on about the difference between visas and permissions to be in Thailand is tiresome for many who do not understand the horrendous misfortunes that have befallen some who fail to understand this almost unique feature of Thailand's immigration system. I do tend to let it slide when there is no ambiguity, but pointing it out at every opportunity does help reduce the number of people whose lives are ruined by not understanding that "visas" usually give you no right to be in Thailand.

So, you would need to submit the bank statement to show you qualified for the last extension, thus (in spite of the fact that you could have qualified based on income if able to use that to qualify) you would again need to use money in the bank the next time. Or, do you annotate the application in some way to state that, although forced to show proof of money in the bank this time, yo will be using income next time? Do you need to show the 12-month statement of 65k baht transfers along with the 800k deposit but, perhaps, stamp the 800k deposit statement "not for this extension"? If so, make sure you keep a copy of all this, as I doubt Immigration can easily lay their hands on it at the time of your next extension. They will usually just look at your extension stamp and want to see if you qualify for the next one based on income or money in the bank.

The question I have is: if you qualify using both money in the bank and income, how does Immigration decide which qualification has been used for the last extension? How does your extension stamp differ depending on whether you previously qualified on income or money in the bank? I fully accept that, in practice, the officials may not approach this objectively, but compliance with the previous extension is achieved by either 65k+ baht transfer for every month during the term of the last extension; or maintaining the necessary balances in the bank. You do not need to do both. I would even argue that you ought logically to be able to change in the middle between two extensions, reducing the amount in the bank as soon you begin depositing 65k+ baht per month (though I would not expect any office to accept this in practice).

While I understand that travel is difficult for him, he seems well enough to be outside hospital. It is possible (for a price) to arrange a land border bounce using an ambulance. This is a one-time process, and may be worth the cost.

I 100% agree with your analysis. Also, in the highly hypothetical case where you no longer qualify for the continuation of your LTR at the end of five years, I am pretty sure your existing permission to stay would be considered as originating from a Non Immigrant visa. You would be able to apply for a one-year extension of your permission to stay based on retirement. Exactly what immigration would require in terms of money in the bank, monthly transfers and insurance is very murky, and I will not go there.

The use of an agent certainly may complicate matters. However, ignoring that, the use of income via monthly transfers is supposed to be an allowable means of qualifying for an extension. Let us say you applied for a Non O visa at Immigration using form TM87 (where I agree 800k baht in the bank will often be the only qualification that Immigration will accept). Will you ever be able to qualify for extensions based on income transfers? I would argue that this should be allowed, and you show you qualify by a bank statement with 12 monthly transfers of 65k baht from abroad. Once you are making these monthly transfers, maintaining the minimum balance in the bank should no longer be a requirement. Let us say you did in fact keep the money in the bank, so yet another year later you now have 24 months of monthly transfers. Must you show a statement with 24 months of monthly transfers to demonstrate that you qualified the previous year based on both income and money in the bank? Can Immigration again deny you based on the fact that you qualified the previous year via money in the bank?

For Thailand Elite memberships, there is no requalification at the end of each five year period. Under Thai Immigration law, the maximum possible length of a visa is five years. Placing the new five year visa in your passport is an automatic procedure for Thailand Elite, unlike with the LTR process.

A hint if you really want to pursue this: the fastest way is to charter a taxi to Pakse (a little under four hours) followed by a direct flight. This sort of travel in Laos is very costly. Really, better is probably to arrange a separate trip to Luang Prabang for the future.