Thailand Outcast

4 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

If I wanted to live near a beach in PI I would choose Coron (Palawan), Bohol (Visayas, just across from Cebu) or Cebu Island itself somewhere on the coast between CarCar & Oslob or around Moalboal on the other side of the Island.

 

But my favourite place in Philippines is Davao, Beaches aren't great but I like the place though it seems to be rapidly being spoiled by the influx of foreigners so maybe somewhere 1-2 hours outside of Davao City.

  

Thanks for the suggestions.  I have pretty much settled on Vietnam, but I am happy to explore other options.  I have been to The Philippine, but not for some years.  I think I will plan a trip this year to check it out again. 

7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

The factor preventing a country-wide monopoly/standardization on the price of corruption-purchased extensions, is each office being its own fiefdom, allowed to invent and enforce it's own separate rules.  The new rules operating on "seasoning" preserved the agent-system (seasoning is ignored for agent-applications).  Without a specified enforcement system, each office can maximize agent-money revenues to suit their market (see Jomtien creating "show your bank-book" mandatory return-visits). 

The variation in agent-prices within an immigration office jurisdiction zone (corruption-market-zone) can depend on whether an agent has a direct-contact (or uses a 2nd agent), and the agent's cut ("lawyers" seem to ask for more).  The variation from one office "zone" to another may vary due to the local-office loot-demand.  The higher levels - in exchange for "overlooking" it all - may offer a consistent price - or they may reward "high volume corruption money" offices with a discounted-rate per agent-application.

 

Eventually, like all addicts, those pocketing the shared agent-money and elite-revenue will exceed their corruption-income with their lifestyle spending, and have to come back for more to keep their expensive homes, cars, and women on the side paid for.  At that point, look for more "secondary documentation" requirements on income, and the "landlord doc hell" done to "married to a Thai" folks spreading increasingly to those on retirement-based extensions.  And, yes, they could begin buying-off more entry-points, to spread their law-breaking practices carried out at those, as is already the case at several airports and the Poipet/Aranya entry point.

I agree with your analysis, JT.  It doesn't paint a pretty picture for the future for many here, and new one coming through. 

It's unfortunate that the greed of some Thai officials impact such a large demographic of the expat community, for their own financial gain. It could back fire, though.  I have decided to leave, but many other may be forced to leave. 

Precisely why I started this thread. 

I expect a huge increase in the denial of entry in the future, and then, certain land boarders to be overwhelmed, until they deny entry also.   

16 hours ago, donnacha said:

Very interesting, I had not realized it was considered a residence visa. So, that might mean that, for those 50 and over, the retirement visa can be used, in the same way, to establish domicile for tax purposes. Handy.

Regarding the Thai tax number, I have had to supply mine for various purposes back in Europe, including bank accounts. 

You may wish to research the "tax equalization scheme" before you decide to be a "resident" of a foreign country, and a "non resident for taxation purposes" of your home country.  

31 minutes ago, leogerritsen said:

Just my 2 cents. Government officials have the power to decide things differently. You can check that. 

I have many encounters with good and bad endings. I found on closer observations my own attitude on these occasions to have led the officer to decide against me.  I can group my attitude in different classes.

1. ignorant of a specific rule, but completely convinced i was right.

2. knowingly bending a rule, but hitting the 'wrong' person.

3. having an attitude, being angry at something. Thai have a keen nose on disturbances of the emotion.

4. tell me another option ????

Can you see how clear policy and procedure would take "the attitude" out of you, and the immigration officer, because both know what they can, and can't do, within the law?

Currently, it's just a big grey area and up to the interpretation of individual immigration officers at various boarders. 

20 hours ago, BritTim said:

One option that is easy to forgot is Maesot. It has become less attractive over the last year or so as airfares to and from Bangkok have greatly increased in price. However, the airport is close to the border, flights to and from Bangkok are frequent, and I consider it the very best border crossing. As long as you have clean US$ bills, the total cost for using this crossing is US$10, and it has been hassle free for over two years.

It will be interesting what impact the new visa requirements eventually have on airlines, and certain routes.  

I suspect we will probably see some routes gain in popularity, with airlines increasing frequency, with other routes decreasing in frequency. 

The increase in frequency will be to neighboring countries, so I guess Thailand loses some airport tax out of these visa changes, as people opt to enter by land.   

21 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

The major decline in the pound's value in the past 15 years happened after the 2008 financial crisis, where it dropped to low-mid 40's and then slowly climbed back to low 50's before the Brexit vote in June 2016 caused a second crash, it's dropped around 20% since then. 

 

The world economy went pear shaped during the GFC.  Many economies have still not recovered. 

Brexit has caused a decline on a currency that was trying to rebuild. 

I think there is more pain ahead for the GBP. 

It may be the case that older retired Brit's have to move countries for quality of lifestyle, rather than the new visa requirements here.  

If only there was a 1 year Elite Card for around $500USD.  It would make life so much easier here.  ????

On 3/22/2019 at 11:26 PM, marcusarelus said:

By keeping your 20,000 in a UK bank since 2004 instead of a Thai bank you have lost, 800,000 baht.

How much of those losses are recent, due to Brexit?

7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

At this point, all land-entry points except Poipet/Aranyaprathet stick to the rules, so plenty to choose from.  If on some type of Multiple-Entry Visa, and in need of a border-bounce, all but Poipet are fine.

 

What narrows the choices are where it is convenient to fly to from afar, then cross by land - at which point you end up with Vientiane and KL/Penang, unless willing to put up with a fairly long bus-ride to get to the Thai border.

 

The crossing from Vientiane has been a busy crossing for a long time, but they are not reported to exceed the rules - usually not even asking for all the published requirements to enter. 

 

Pedang Besar and Sadao from Penang are a bit more trouble, but only in that they may ask for some/all of the published requirements.   For those entering with Tourist Visas, they may ask to "see the cash" (20K Baht).  For Visa-Exempt they may require the cash (10K Baht), a flight-out, a hotel-booking, and spending at least one night-out before returning. 

I agree with your assessment. 

I think we will see a "snowball effect" at land boarders over the the next 12 months, as many without 800k or 65k per month move to tourist visas. 

Maybe there will be some competition among the "agents" to make it financially beneficial to use their "services" but the Thai way is to all get together to create a high price, like a monopoly, and force people to pay.

Time will tell, but for sure some consulates and land boarders are going to become very busy in the near future.  Will have to wait and see if this causes another announcement of change to the rules.     

On 3/28/2019 at 10:46 PM, JackThompson said:

They do.  And, they must even pay your detention-fee.  But the airlines may also have a clause in your ticket-purchase that you are ultimately responsible for those costs.  The question is, how can they get it out of you? 

One report indicated immigration threatened to make him miss the flight he paid for with the airlines if not paying the detention fee.  Another report the fellow refused to pay anyone or sign anything, but was threatened with detention by the airlines on his return (perhaps a deal with local immigration there). 

I suppose if willing to put up with whatever they dole out, you could sit on your hands and refuse to pay anyone anything - then let the airlines try to sue you to get it.
 

This is why I never fly into Thailand any more - it's just too unpredictable - there is no "rule of law" to count on at the bad entry points.

 

They are just filling up empty-seats.  If no seat is available, you sit in detention until one is available.
 

As long as they are able to collect these last-minute prices to fill otherwise-empty seats, I don't see why they would care.  My concern is they could actually be a factor in encouraging this activity.

 

As absurd as it is, they are laughing all the way to the bank.

If you will never fly to Thailand again, what is your land boarder of choice, and if that land boarder is your choice, it's fair to say it will be the choice of many others, for the same reasons. 

This is why I think something is going to have to "give" in the future.  Certain Consulates and land boarders are just going to be overwhelmed. 

22 hours ago, JackThompson said:

500K earned from 800K in 5 years?  Sounds a tad risky.  
1M earned from 800K in 20 years is much easier to pull off.

 

But even easier to earn ~20K in one year from your 800K, by using agent-service.  A 5 year series of that is only 100K, and "pay as you go."  Even 20 yrs is just 400K in total.   The end-result is the same as the elite - no dealing w/immigration for anything, they handle 90-day reports, etc.

 

The 800K doesn't have to be all, or even most, of one's life-savings to make it a no-deal situation.  How much of one's life-savings is one willing to risk?  10%?  15%? 
The percentage one would be willing to risk gets smaller and smaller, the more difficult immigration becomes. 

Yes, it would have to be an aggressive investment, indeed.  I put the example forward more to show the mentality of many expats, rather than a possible financial benefit.  It was more to make a point. 

Immigration laws are certainly one aspect of how Thailand has lost its "user friendly" status for expats.  

They just keep changing the goal posts and making it harder, and more time consuming and bureaucratic to remain here.  

31 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Not for me, but it is for many in the west, and almost everyone in Asia.

Well, for whatever reason, as a foreigner, if 800k IS your life savings, then one should look very very seriously at not moving their 800k to Thailand.  

In this circumstance, in my opinion, it would represent a huge risk, not to mention the loss of use of your savings.

19 hours ago, JackThompson said:

For me, the "money in the bank" risk is just that immigration is too unpredictable - not that I think the banks will fail, or that a coup or financial-crisis will result in accounts being frozen and/or a "bail-in" (could happen, but unlikely). 

 

The fact the military can "take over" at a moments notice and keep the infrastructure functioning is actually a stabilizing effect when compared to a partisan battle for power with strikes, roadblocks, endless protests, etc. 

 

OTOH, if immigration decides you don't get in, getting your money could be a challenge.  They follow the laws/rules only when/if they feel like it.  That is the primary source of uncertainty for foreigners in the context of any investments here - not only bank-money, but a business, condo, leased-land, etc.

I don't actually see Thai banks as a huge risk.  Yes, Thailand is an unstable country, but 800k is not one's life savings. 

I just see it a "bad deal" and refuse to be manipulated by the Thai government in this way.

Many on a retirement visa would never buy an Elite Card, because they do not see the value in it, yet, 800k for 5 months, untouched, and 400k, never touched, at 1.5% interest, is viewed as "ok" by the same people. 

Over 5 years, it's probably the same cost as a Elite Card in lost earnings from the loss of use of your 800k, should it have been put to work in a fund.   ????

20 hours ago, JackThompson said:

They do.  And, they must even pay your detention-fee.  But the airlines may also have a clause in your ticket-purchase that you are ultimately responsible for those costs.  The question is, how can they get it out of you? 

One report indicated immigration threatened to make him miss the flight he paid for with the airlines if not paying the detention fee.  Another report the fellow refused to pay anyone or sign anything, but was threatened with detention by the airlines on his return (perhaps a deal with local immigration there). 

I suppose if willing to put up with whatever they dole out, you could sit on your hands and refuse to pay anyone anything - then let the airlines try to sue you to get it.
 

This is why I never fly into Thailand any more - it's just too unpredictable - there is no "rule of law" to count on at the bad entry points.

 

They are just filling up empty-seats.  If no seat is available, you sit in detention until one is available.
 

As long as they are able to collect these last-minute prices to fill otherwise-empty seats, I don't see why they would care.  My concern is they could actually be a factor in encouraging this activity.

 

As absurd as it is, they are laughing all the way to the bank.

Yes, I also see a conflict of interests with the airlines on this issue.

It will be interesting if detainees start to refuse to pay the inflated last minute flight prices.  I have read here that you can keep possession of your phone, so some calls to the media in your home country may throw a spotlight on the airline. 

I am wondering if the airlines will start to refuse check in / boarding if your passport is full of Thailand visas and exemption stamps. 

17 hours ago, JackThompson said:

I don't see how, since it is ultimately the airlines problem to pay your airport-detention fees plus ticket your flight-back.  I suppose if you broke a law (drug-possession, violence, etc), you could end up in jail first, then IDC.  But for a rejected-entry alone, you haven't broken any laws, so that would not occur.

Well, what you say is also my understanding of it, but I thought I would ask anyway.

One thing I don't completely understand is the exposure of the airlines. 

There is a theory that it's the airlines responsibility to take you back to where you came from, yet, you obviously have to pay a premium price for the next fight out.  This is why I will try to enter in the morning, so in case I am denied entry, I can get an afternoon or evening flight back, and not stay in detention over night.

Anyway, back to the airlines.  So, I can see how they can make some money out of detainees, selling them expensive last minute flights, but at some point this could become problematic for the airlines, and what are they to do? 

A passenger checks in with a passport that is visa exempt for Thailand, so the check in staff process the passenger, and they board and fly, only to be sent back on the same airline from Thailand after being denied entry.  

Thailand can't use airline check in staff as pseudo immigration staff, so potentially, people fly in from everywhere, on different airlines, and are detained, and the various airlines have to shoulder some responsibility.

How long before airline companies  put a policy in place to minimize their responsibility?

You would have to laugh if a passenger on Thai Airways, Thailand's national airline, was denied entry, and it was Thai Airway's responsibility to take that passenger back to the country they transported them from. So, even Thailand's national carrier is bringing people that to Thailand that can't get in.   

1 hour ago, bigginhill said:

This is something I'd like to know...

Do governments know where you are buy the use of the passport? Thailand keeps track of your use of the passport in and out. Does it know to which country you went?

Uk (or others) I doubt it keeps track like thailand. The schengan neither.

And I've always wondered why the stolen pasports could ever be used, is there no worldwide data base cancelling them?

 

Ever heard of Interpol?

29 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

They may take your house too...

Do you mean the house that sits on land you can't own?  ????

On 3/18/2019 at 1:08 PM, PoorSucker said:

They will be transferred to IDC in Bangkok. 

They will be detained until they can pay for the overstay and have tickets home. 

No time limit. 

IDC is a hellhole. 

Would there be any circumstances in which you could be transferred from airport detention to IDC?  

On 3/17/2019 at 10:46 PM, lamyai3 said:

Worst case scenario in this case would be denied entry and returned to Vietnam, from where you'll have departed. If you were living in Vietnam with a multiple entry visa there should be no problem being allowed back in there. This also ought to reduce the risks of being rejected at this end too. If you run up against a limit on the number of tourist visas you can get from Vietnam, either Laos, Cambodia or Malaysia are alternatives, all with land border entry points. 

Vietnam is very visa friendly.

Vietnam basically has a "pay as you go" visa system.  No other hoops to jump through.  Pay your money, get your visa.  That's it. 

I think what I will have in my favor is a 1 year multi entry Vietnam visa, so if Thai immigration question me, I will say I live in Vietnam, which will be true, but holiday a lot in Thailand.  If they deny me entry, it will not be a big problem for me, just a short flight back to Vietnam.

Once again, there is that line in the sand that nobody knows where it is about when is a "tourist" deemed not to be a tourist, but living in Thailand. 

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Yeah, I'd have similar concerns.

Things obviously have a much greater chance of going south in 20 years than 5 though.

There would probably be 3 military coups in that 20 years.  ????