JackThompson

5 hours ago, rani said:

Thanks again everyone ????

I went to immigration, and they've said I can't do a 1 year extension unless I put 400k in my bank for 2 months. I questioned the 40k over 2/12months and they said that was only for pensions.

Thank you for reporting this.  This happened to myself and a few others - but still some deny Immigration will deny proven incomes which are "not a pension" - but they do.  Bank-book coding, etc - irrelevant. 

The only "workaround" if your income "doesn't count," is their agent/lawyer partners - 35K Baht+ if at Chiang Wattana, Bangkok.  Those payoffs are the REASON for this "rule" - doesn't matter that money is money, and supports your Thai family all the same.

4 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

So basically it's all the same, only the price is different.

No - only multi-millionaires and up can get into the "special treatment" category - and there are special "legal" visas, just for this.  See the one the Chinese elites buy through one of the Kushner-family businesses.

Unlike here, in the USA, "regular folks" just have to fill out the forms - and are treated exactly like everyone else who fills them out.  Trying a "bribe" would be suicide - no way some "agent" will risk their cushy job and benefit package for an "envelope" of cash.

8 minutes ago, Longchop said:

It has never happened before so it never will?

Covid never happened before but it's here.

Borders were never totally closed before but they are.

Government never had the time or opportunity before but they have.

"Government" (think about that in Thailand-context) "never had the time or opportunity" to remove MOST of their own income streams?   They didn't pay good money for those jobs for the salary. 
Don't hold your breath.

58 minutes ago, thailand49 said:

Not sure where poster is located but here in Pattaya, pre-covid Retirement extension I know a few guys first hand that pay between 12-15,000 to get the stamp and passport back in 2 days been doing it for years and they are still here. Don't need any money in bank now if being legal playing by the rules etc... that is another subject I don't really want to hear it.

That works if you have a Non-O entry or existing non-o permitted stay.  25K+ if on a TR Entry. 

But extra for "insurance" if your visa-entry (even years ago) was from the "Non-OA" visa-type.  And, yes, the agent "fixes" insurance too - like the financials - but for an "additional fee" (the real reason for the insurance-requirement).

Sad this is how the "system" works here.  Wish it would change, but not holding my breath.

2 minutes ago, from the home of CC said:

 in the 10 plus extensions I've done (by the ethical and legal 'preferred method') I've never been grilled nor filled out forms for hours lol (and yes, I am married to a Thai national) - lets be honest here, this is the 'preferred method' of those working illegally in the country or never had enough in the bank to try to immigrate here in the first place (but deceived themselves and now are deceiving government officials) - the lie has to end somewhere and imo it will be in tears..

No - you are just lucky.  I've been through all this personally - same as others report.  I always had far in excess of the required proven-income, and living with my wife full-time - which made no difference.   Those who use agents get the best treatment by far - no "new requirements" or 'home visits', either.

1 hour ago, Longchop said:

You would need to think carefully, heard a wimper that as soon as this government has cleared out all the amnesty tourists on 26th they are intending to take a trawl through all recently approved visas double checking bank accounts etc and calling in anyone whose paperwork dos'nt add up.

Are they going to call in the Singapore Police for the investigation - or will they be "busting themselves" for running the rackets?    You know where most of the "agent-fee" money goes - right?  Do you really think they are going to chop themselves down to living on their salaries, alone? 

17 minutes ago, Longchop said:

Waived = overlooked the legal requirement so the visa is illegal. Will the other government department (not IO) tasked with double checking the visas overlook this requirement also ??

The "other department" will reach an "arrangement" with Immigration, or ... see what happens in Mexico.  It's the same dynamic - just that they tend not to let things get out of hand, and spill out into the streets.

Remember the "price increase" for agents in some areas, when the military "looked into" immigration just after the change in govt?  Then the prices went back down - go figure.

I say this as someone who has, thus far, managed to NOT pay them off - and have no plans to play that game.  I also like to be able to show I 100% qualified for EVERY extension I ever received.  At the same time, I am not blind as to how things "work" here - having had many bad-experiences that validate what others have also reported. 

1 hour ago, from the home of CC said:

it's real strange that some folks don't consider that there is anything wrong with these actions, would they be so sure it's totally ethical/legal if it was routinely done in their own country by visitors from other nations? We're instructed not to post regarding illegal acts but visa fraud is okay? TVF is hypocritical exemplified... 

In our home-countries, the IOs and Agents/Lawyers doing it would go to prison.  Here, it is the "preferred" method - complete with "all smiles" 30-second extensions, vs hours of forms and grilling (especially if you have Thai family).

Remember that case a couple weeks ago, where they 'busted' the agent complete with a rubber-stamp collection?   Someone evidently didn't check who was on the "authorized crook" list - because it all "went away" like magic, and the company is still in business doing extensions. 

1 hour ago, warcy said:

It's amazing how people are getting their visa illegally and not getting blacklisted from entering Thailand.

 

Big Jok did a good job last time on stamping out corruption but alas, he's no more there.

By a "good job" - you mean, making up "new requirements" to push more honest-applicants into the arms of Immigration's agent-partners?  

The same "no financials" retirement extensions are available.  They added longer seasoning to hurt honest-applicants, but is still "overlooked" if you use an agent. 

Similar for ED - same old game - just more payola to do it.

And if using "income" for retirement or marriage - will disqualify many types of valid, proven income - pushing those folks to agents as well. 

15 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

It really boggles my mind that anybody that is aware of other options to stay long-term in Thailand, could be interested in the O-X Visa.

...

I guess the only difference would be the treatment you get as an O-X holder when making the annual visit to your IO to prove your financials and insurance.  Someone that can afford 3 million THB on a thai bank-account will inspire awe and respect from Immigration officers that have never seen such an amount of money.

I think they just see such folks as "having money" like them.  They make a fortune on the agent-applications they coerce with artificial-hurdes - many IOs are likely very, very wealthy from this revenue-stream.

2 hours ago, ukrules said:

It sounds to me like you've been given the run around and made to jump through a ridiculous number of hoops and now they're going to think about it for a couple of weeks.

 

Their motto over at immigration should be "Discourage and Deter"

The ~2 week delay on a "change of visa type" from TR to Non-Imm is normal.

The "can't do it on a covid-extension" part, before, was the pure bull runaround - wanted an agent-fee - but someone upstairs must have changed the "agent only" rules in the past week or two.

Those wanting to follow the USA letter success-rate should probably follow this thread - jump to the last page and then stay updated as reports come in:

5 hours ago, Almudena said:

 We submitted the documents to immigration at the beginning of the month and had a "visa under consideration" stapled to my passport and told the real visa will be issued at the end of the month.

 

The total price I was charged was 2000baht.  

This is VERY good news.  Was this at Chiang Wattana, or a smaller office in the sticks?

Many times, it ends like this - agent + pile of cash:

45 minutes ago, CrunchWrapSupreme said:

Many can't stand the waiting and are worried about being illegal or busted, and thus they bail. Many others however, know this simply comes with the territory.

While they did drop the jail-time for illegal working, "Banned from Thailand for Life" is still on the books.  If that isn't a problem for someone - no family here, ok with never coming again, and can handle a couple weeks in the IDC - then maybe "risking it" is an acceptable choice.

2 minutes ago, Why Me said:

Smart visa. Or, if you are doing well enough a non-B.

Both only available if you work for a Thai-based company.

21 minutes ago, Why Me said:

No it hasn't. It's been great. It's kept out those without the finances to afford a proper visa.

It's been terrible for all the Thais I know who lost their incomes.  Do they matter?  This is about them.  Anyone who paid off immigration via agents got to stay, in any case - so it solved nothing but to make good people put money in immigration's pockets, instead of Thai businesses and families.

Quote

These people, by definition, contribute little to the economy and often were up to no good. The less of this sort the better for Thailand and people like me who don't appreciate being tainted by the same brush.

They were "up to no good"?  Really?  Evidence?  The "bad guys" can get easy-extensions via Immigration's agent-partners.

So, the financial-hardships of Thais caused by the "crackdowns" is ok, as long as you don't get "tarred with the same brush" as those who are self-supporting, but with a little less income than you?

Quote

I have zero problem with someone on a marriage visa supporting their Thai family. But no, living on 10k b. a month with your Thai bride doesn't qualify you for a long-stay visa. And rightly so because Thailand (or any country for that matter) has no need for foreigners to add to their subsistence level demographic. If you insist on being an indigent married couple, take her back to your home country. At least as citizen you'll have access to all the support systems.

I suggested 30K/mo for those not married to a Thai - just having that income to spend here. 

Anyone not supporting a wife doesn't stay married long (in any country), so that problem takes care of itself, w/o immigration's involvement.  No recent "Kor Ror 2" (proves you are still married), and no marriage-based extension.

There is no 'welfare' support system for him here.  Ask the Thai-wife if she wants to move to his country for these 'benefits'.  What that really comes down to, is break up the family, because "Dad" doesn't meet your standards - as if she should not be the one to be the judge of that. 

Quote

Check out any non-shirthole country, east or west, for their retirement or marriage or long-stay tourist programs. The requirements are always multiples of the min cost of living. Heck, 400k b. lumpsum for a marriage visa here is generous.

We are discussing how to maximize foreign-spending into Thailand for the benefit of the Thai people.  I suggested 30K/mo - which is over 3x a lower-income Thai's salary - far more than many in the sticks, who used to earn more providing services for people with that income-range. 

But, if we are making comparisons, the PI is much easier for Tourists (can stay years on an initial entry).  In Cambodia, Vietnam - not nearly as difficult as here, in many/most cases.   Malaysia is more difficult, but a smaller portion of their citizens rely on foreigners' spent income. 

12 minutes ago, Why Me said:

Jeez, are you stupid or just ill-informed? Expats here working for overseas companies (1000s of them, mainly from Japan/Korea) have perfectly legal visas and work permits to apply for. And, if I may add, typically with a very handsome pay packet.

How does a person w/o Thai family, not retirement-age, obtain a permitted-stay based on a foreign-sourced income?  Even if with Thai family, I couldn't get it - with an embassy-letter AND proven foreign-xfers, because it wasn't from a 'state pension'.

If you mean those whose companies have subsidiaries here - and they work for those Thai subsidiaries - that is something else entirely.  We are discussing ways to INCREASE the foreign-sourced spending into Thailand.

12 minutes ago, Why Me said:

What the fork are you saying? That the loss of 40 mil tourists per year spending several $100s per day as has happened now might be offset by bums and self-supporting foreigners?

No one said anything about "bums" - just YOUR (and others) straw-man - an insult to many.  People with the 30K/mo income I suggested, are not "bums." 

Pre-covid, the "crackdown" on Tourists shuttered entire sois of businesses, and emptied thousands of condos.  I benefitted, because condo-rental rates dropped by half - but the Thais who lost their jobs did not.

Allowing those with moderate incomes to have legally permitted-stays in Thailand would HELP offset the damage done by both Covid, and the idiotic "crackdowns" that harmed many Thais/businesses, pre-covid.

12 minutes ago, Why Me said:

Look, if you can't afford the minimal finances for a proper visa in order to base yourself here, be it for work, marriage or retirement, then you don't belong. Of course, you can scramble for loopholes to hang in here but arguing that I am a richer poor guy than your own poor guy so let me stay is silly. Thailand has no obligation to anyone but its own citizens. 

As usual, the "You Can't" comes into it.  I have had multiples of the min-income to qualify for an extension of stay every time I have been denied on made-up bull - because corrupt-immigration wanted a thick brown envelope - did not care a whit if I "really qualified" under the rules.   But in this thread, we are discussing those who COULD come here, if the rules were changed.

This topic is precisely about what is most helpful to Thais.  If Thailand-Immigration cared about "its own citizens," it would not block the Vast Majority of Foreign-Spending which could be provided by those who don't "qualify" under their existing stay-classes. 

Most of those would not have Thai family, so would need to have 6x+ a Thai-salary AND be over 50, to qualify, as-is.  That eliminates the vast majority of potential foreign-spending.

3 minutes ago, johnray said:

No one in their right mind would ditch their family, quit their job and go for a year long holiday.  Most people have a week two.  Maximum three weeks.

An increasing number of people do not need to go to a "brick and mortar" location to do their job.  This recently jumped higher, due to covid - and many of those jobs are staying remote.  Many of those folks would like to live somewhere with lower-overhead while doing those jobs.

Their family could certainly come with them - are international private schools here at affordable rates - much better than many home-country school-options for the Western middle-class.

10 minutes ago, ICELANDMAN said:

. So abolishing the whole bureaucratic system is simply impossible because at least part of the population is the middle caste that is the bureaucrats who have no interest in losing their jobs if you remove the Visa system. And the government needs the middle class to survive.

I agree best not to remove the visa-system / immigration entirely - just offer sane visa/extension options to get a wider market-share spending their incomes in Thailand.

36 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Great idea...then make Thailand again the hub of boiler rooms, money laundering, paedophelia and drug trafficking....has to be some rules/restrictions in place.

They already let in masses of penniless-poor with L-Visas for the "boiler rooms."  We are talking about people with their own money to spend. 

Not sure why you would think folks with MORE money would not be involved in drug-trafficking, etc.

31 minutes ago, ravip said:

They tend to Have Money to spend, is why.

 

Tell us from where THEY got THAT money.

In the most disgusting manner - or not?  Tel us please

I had a business in my passport-country (yes, even paid taxes there), which immigration said "did not count" to support my Thai wife.  Many work for overseas businesses.

The folks with dirty-money already get their visas by paying off immigration through their agent-partners - so those "bad guys" already get the VIP treatment - "30-seconds for a picture" extensions, and no waiting in the queue.  They don't even have to leave their own money in a Thai bank - the agent "handles" that, too.

16 minutes ago, Why Me said:

There're visas exactly for these kinds of folks. Smart visa if you don't want to incorporate here, non-b visa if you do and Elite somewhere in the middle. Perfectly legal and you and your funds are most welcome.

No - those only reach maybe 0.5% of the potential market.  And if you work for an overseas company, or own one, none of those apply.

16 minutes ago, Why Me said:

Long-stay wannabe bums wouldn't qualify for or couldn't afford these visas. Which is the whole point. Thailand has zero need for foreigners shacked up in a hole in a wall in Samut Prakan eating out of 7/11 freezers.

There is a difference between "bums" and self-supporting foreigners, who kept thosands of businesses afloat, which collapsed when Immigration 'cracked down' on Tourists - de-employing tens of thousands of Thais by so doing.

16 minutes ago, Why Me said:

Jeez, you aren't here to compete with the Thai poor. Foreigners are expected to do better or why on earth should Thais let them in? Methinks the 800k lumpsum or 65k/mth mins for retirement are perfectly fair. They indicate an ample safety net plus spending power.

The Thai poor earn 8K Baht/mo or less.  I suggested 30K/mo - a dream-income, to the vast majority of Thais. 

An income of 65K/mo is enough to live comfortably in most of the USA and much of Europe.  Most Americans on Social-Security live on half of that or less - but have a lower quality-of-life there, than they could in Thailand.

Thailand has the Selling-Point of being more affordable.  They should aim for the share of the market they can serve best - and DID serve - keeping many Thais employed - until just a few years ago.  High-Rollers and the 65K/mo folks in-between should be welcome too, of course - but there is no sense limiting to a small-fraction of the potential-market.

1 hour ago, tomazbodner said:

Problem is how does this compare with legitimate jobs. Right now people have to have significant income and pay significant taxes to be able to stay in the country. How would they feel in case above was done? Thailand may wish to attract very highly paid people in smaller numbers and fleece... erm, tax them, rather than many people with very low added value. Look, one bloke in 1 day at a golf club spends more than a 30k/month "digital nomad" in 6 months.

There is no "one or the other" logic in this.  The golf-club guy won't be living, eathing, partying, etc near the 30K folks.  Thailand should continue to bring in as many "high rollers" as possible - but not foolishly throw-out the much greater total-income available from those who are not in that category.

There is no housing shortage - were tons of empty codos and boarded-up sois of closed-businesses, due to immigration "crackdowns" pre-covid.  Many lower-cost restaurants, etc with Thai-staff who would like the 30K guys - low-overhead being a primary reason Thailand was popular in the first place.

1 hour ago, tomazbodner said:

I surely agree with that, but even for people who stay in their home countries, these are rapidly running out of cash as money these people paid in is already used up. That's why you hear about the pension reforms all over the place, with most popular option being increasing retirement age... as that just delays the problem fix to the next government...

Increasing the retirement-age is breaking the contract with those who paid-in.  The "what remains of my life," when I finally qualify to get-back the money taken from me by force, is non-negotiable.  Govts which have assets should sell them to make us whole. 

3 hours ago, Vajra Kilaya said:

HI Jack, 

 

I was following this topic initially but based on your comment, "Per the cabinet's ruling, whatever permitted-stay you had when the covid-auto-extension began, was "automatically extended" until Sept 26."...

I must have missed something new... I could really use a copy of your source for this info... could you tell me where I mind find the specifics of this auto-extension of the visa we were on at the time covid amnesty began development? 

 

I was under the impression the amnesty was a separate thing and have been told by some officials (not recently) that my Non had expired and I was no longer on it. Your news indicates otherwise...  

 

If you have some info on where I could find this cabinet decision, that would be a huge assist.

 

Thanks a lot Jack

The auto-extension is in the rule passed by the cabinet, and published in the Gazette.  Immigration were not happy about this - even had a spokesman deny the latest extension would happen, just a few days before it was announced.  The extension of the extension cut into the huge agent-money they were raking-in on volunteer, ed, and other extensions from desperate foreigners. 

Many were told they were "on overstay under amnesty," and could not extend - as you apparently were.  Other offices never played this silly game, and allowed folks to apply for extensions. 

More recently, the 30-day extension was announced, and the USA began issuing letters for this.  Those showing these letters, at some offices, received stamps through Sept 26 - essentially "formalizing" their cabinet-ordered extensions.  This policy varies by office. 

This embassy-letter requirement would appear to be a face-saving measure, as some IOs/offices did not want to admit they had been lying before.

Not sure of your embassy, but you could apply for an embassy letter from them.  Some are handing them out easily (USA), while others are wanting "reasons" - one of which (Australia) is "to facilitate changing to a long-term stay."  I would try to get an embassy letter.  At worst, you can get 30-days with it - but better if it can "formalize" your existing permitted-stay at a difficult-office, and allow a longer-term extension from there.

1 hour ago, rimpsstar said:

... and the fact there have been plenty of flights they could have gotten on since the Amnesty was approved.

Given the flight-options are often scams (take your money, cancel the flight, won't return the money for months), Immigration should just stamp folks out when they enter the airport, and provide cots and showers.  Then, when a flight actually arrives (not cancelled), those at the front of the que, heading to that destination, can get on. 

Fortunately, the 30-day extensions would seem to allow many/most to avoid this situation.  Hopefully, all embassies will provide these letters automatically upon-request (without begging), as the USA is.

10 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Don't the US military make their oath of allegiance to the Constitution of The United States, rather than to The President of The United States?

Yes, and who is the commander-in-chief, under the Constitution?  Not that it matters, because Jared's orders stand - no protection for Americans from the mobs.

On 9/6/2020 at 4:31 PM, wwest5829 said:

He tested that idea earlier, .remember? The Donald was told he cannot have active military serving in law enforcement capacity ... well, not unless martial law is declared.

Is that what Eisenhower did, when he federalized the national-guard, to integrate a school? 

It seems to me, having your life threatened by mobs, and/or your life's-work business burned down, would qualify as a civil-rights violation. 

Trump tweeting "Law and Order," while doing nothing to protection Americans lives and property for months, was a disgrace.