BritTim

With every other kind of permission to stay, leaving and returning with a re-entry permit is 100% fine. With a permission to stay based on studying, an absence for a significant period of time is a big red flag as far as immigration is concerned. They question how a genuine student can miss classes for that length of time without it seriously affecting the ability to complete the course of study. If you have something from the school to show that your education will not be impacted by the absence, you should be fine. Without that, you would be at severe risk. If wanting to risk it anyway, rather than entering through an airport, use a land crossing such as the Friendship Bridge at Vientiane/Nong Khai for the return.

There are occasions where a conference with a good lawyer is prudent. This is one of them. Your friend should write down in advance everything that has happened between him and his wife, and then talk to a lawyer about his options. This is not just a visa issue. In talking to the lawyer, do not rant. Just clearly and unemotionally outline the facts.

The ramifications are: (i) waste of 1,000 baht; and (ii) waste of space in your passport. Nothing further.

Note that, if you have a return ticket on the same airline greater than 45 days after your arrival, most (probably all) airlines will not worry about an onward ticket within 45 days. As others intimated, the airline is mainly concerned about the potential for having to return you to your origin if you are denied entry. If you already have a flight ticket they can easily grab, they cease to be worried. Those who are never asked about an onward ticket may, in some cases, fall into that category.

I must say that it seems very strange that a visa to visit a Thai spouse would not be issued if the spouse does not have a passport. In all likelihood, the intended meaning is Thai id card or Thai passport copy. That said, it would not be the first time that a consulate had bizarre requirements for a visa.

Before Covid, a Thai tourist visa in Jakarta was possible under some circumstances, but was one of the toughest embassies. If you have an extensive prior history of tourism in Thailand, visible in your current passport, I doubt you will be successful.

Correct me if I am wrong but, if you are not regularly travelling in and out of Thailand, this membership type requires extensions every 90 days, right?

Half right, according to my understanding. A fairly senior official has the power to waive funds seasoning. Only an official of an extremely high rank is allowed to ignore finances altogether.

His options are: (1) an agent assisted stay; and (2) as a UK national in receipt of a UK state pension, I believe he is eligible for a multiple entry Non O visa acquired through the e-visa system. This should necessitate border bounces every 90 days.

It requires an unusually high rank official to endorse the confirmation.

Are you sure the 1,600 baht fee is needed if you have a Bangkok Bank account at a Pattaya branch? My suspicion is that the 1,600 baht is an extra fee required if you have a Bangkok Bank account but the account is out of province.

That is a very good question. There is no single 100% reliable source. This forum is one of the best, although you need to figure out, from experience, which posters are predominantly accurate and which (the majority) sprinkle their posts with a lot of misinformation. I think the most important advice I can give is which sources to not trust. Any official Thai website (including, notably, those of Thai embassies/consulates) should only be trusted, at most, on the services they provide themselves. The same goes for Thai officials. Most people assume that official websites and Thai officials must be the ultimate reliable source, but they are horribly unreliable on any matter that does not directly relate to the services they provide themselves. You should also be sceptical of what you read on commercial websites where the information is often grossly out of date or influenced by their own self interest. When possible, ask the officials directly responsible for whatever you are looking for. For instance, if looking for a marriage extension at Nakhon Nowhere, visit the immigration office in advance, and try to get their list of requirements in writing, which may differ from that in other offices. (The requirements in Thai will be OK: just get them translated.)

When an agent returns a passport with an extension stamp without an under consideration period, that indicates that the extension is most likely based on retirement (with or without financial proof). Some other kinds of extensions, rarely handled by agents, are also allowed without an under consideration step. The under consideration period is required for marriage extensions, and also extensions based on Thai child. (Most agents avoid assisting with those kinds of extensions unless you meet all of the official requirements.) It is also needed when you are on a tourist entry (including visa exempt entry) and require a "conversion" to a 90-day Non Immigrant entry at Immigration before qualifying for a one-year extension.

For most extensions, you can still rely on the 2014 Immigration Order. However, for retirement extensions, it is important to be aware that Amendments to 2.22 have been issued since. Most of the current provisions are well captured in RTP-Order-No.654-2564-1 Revising Clause from 2021. Carefully read what is stated as Criteria (4) and (5)

That is a pretty good reason. However, I am prepared to bet that the low number of foreigners crossing is because they are unaware that it is open, and there are not yet organised visa runs going there.

Maneerat is a good, reliable agent. Apart from the cash and a Bangkok Bank bank book (which I think needs to be from a Pattaya branch) as I recall, they want a photo. Give them your passport on the morning of one day, receive the passport back with the extension two working days later in the afternoon.

Unless you know for a fact that this is correct (bearing in mind that it is highly uncertain whether Thailand allows dual citizenship) then be careful about being so definite in your advice. I do agree that no employer is likely to question whether there could be an issue when someone has a Thai id card, but I believe the legal situation is not as clear as you suggest.

Until recently, that was true. Now, some crossings (including Mae Sai/Tachilek) are open for border bounces. There was a recent credible thread on the subject. If you have proof on Covid vaccination (as far as I can see, all the major vaccines) in English, no test is needed for a border bounce.

Although using an agent will, I feel, make sense, I would suggest planning to increase the money in the bank to 800k and using the much simpler retirement extension in the future. This will reduce agent fees. Bear in mind that the conditions for both marriage extensions and retirement extensions can, and will, change over time. That is the most difficult factor to consider when planning for the future. The most likely changes are increased financial proof and required health insurance. I understand that it is desirable to avoid shady practices by agents to get extensions, but would advise you to be prepared to resort to this as a last resort if onerous changes in requirements come into force down the road.

I am confused. How do you propose that someone should legally do freelance work without a work permit (assuming the work is for Thai companies)? On what basis would you apply for permission to stay in Thailand if not for work with a work permit?

As far as being able to stay is concerned, it is possible to get a one-year extension of stay as a Thai who entered with a foreign passport. I believe she would still be subject to limitations of being on a tourist entry (no right to work). The "obvious" solution once she has a Thai id card is to get a Thai passport, leave by air to somewhere like Phnom Penh and return on the Thai passport. However, that has proved problematic in the past. Immigration might claim that dual nationality is not allowed, and there have even been cases of airport immigration destroying the Thai passport of someone entering with that kind of history. Carefully consider the advice that others give you on this. There must be a good way forward, but I am not sure what it is.

I am not an expert on the Treaty of Amity, but this is what I understand. First, it most certainly does, on paper, provide special treatment for US nationals wanting to establish small businesses in Thailand. One of the most important is being able to have a sole proprietorship with no Thai employees and a fixed annual tax. Whether the Labour Department will (as the law seems to imply they should) issue you a work permit, and whether you can get an extension based on working if you cannot prove a high salary is murky. Certainly, you will need to use a good lawyer to be able to take full advantage of the Treaty's provisions. I could well believe that officials might be induced by financial favours to interpret the Treaty's conditions favourably. However, I think it can all be legal.

It is known that, if you meet their conditions, HCMC will issue you a multiple entry Non O visa valid for one year. When you use the visa to enter Thailand, they correctly state that you receive a 90-day permission to stay, and must then leave unless you get an extension. Maybe, you interpret what is written as implying that they cancel the visa in spite of the fact that it is multiple entry, but I do not think that is explicitly stated, and certainly do not consider it logical.

That is stating the rules for each entry slightly incorrectly explained. (Consulates regularly incorrectly explain extensions.) If you have a multiple entry visa then, up until the expiry date of the visa, you can leave and return to Thailand for a new 90-day permission to stay.

Which airport (or land crossing) did you have that experience, and when? That seems more like something that would happen at Suvarnabhumi or Aranyaprathet than Chiang Mai.