Rob Browder

Yes, but they don't follow the rules - is the problem. They did at first, but then changed to demanding you had must have been transferring money every month for a year before you got here. There were more detailed examples in published paperwork at the time, allowing a few months of xfer for a 1st extension. Nothing was said about that being temporary. You could arrrive, open a bank-account, start xfers, border bounce to get a few xfers under your belt, then apply for the Non-O. But, with those SANE transfer rules for the 1st application, not enough people were being pushed to their "no financials required" envelope-agents, which defeated the reason for blocking embassy-letters in the first place - and for changing the 'in the bank" seasoning requirements to the byzantine system in-place now.

I have heard such stories from friendly offices. My experience with marriage-based was all day in the sticks - where, at least, they were polite. Submit and review - 2nd person reviews and questions you. This includes review of "how you met" questions every time, even when married for many years. Wait over lunch, return - then the top-ranking person reviews it all over again. Because not using an agent, the District office is furious that no envelope is included, and they seem terrified there might be a mistake. Required documents and pictures changed every year (district-office demand), so need an extra trip in-advance to see what is needed. At some offices like Pattaya, the IOs may be extremely rude, especially to your wife - may add "another document" multiple times / visits - having nothing to do with if you are "really married and living together." If going this route, bring all old passports, past applications, etc in a bag, as they always ask for something else not on the "official" list. My wife, especially, was delighted when I could finally apply for retirement.

Yes - one can get a work-permit with a Non-Imm-O permitted-stay based on a Thai wife or child.

I assume the return for the year prior would be used, if before the filing-deadline for that year. If after the tax-deadline, but before a confirmation by the tax-guys, proof that a filing had been made could be accepted. But, even better (for all concerned), would be that immigration can log into a portal and check there is no "red tax-flag" on an applicant, and that they are "in the system." Once "in the system," one is open to audit, and the tax-guys have their own enforcement mechanisms. Related: Note the proposal for a "negative income tax" for lower-earning Thais (currently do not have to file), which would trick every Thai who wanted to get the "free" money "into the system," where they can be audited. Eventually, they would simply declare everyone must file.

Correct - I was speaking hypothetically regarding the new tax scheme's possible enforcement mechanisms in the future.

How long you were in Thailand the previous year is easily visible in your passport. Less than 180 days = no income-taxes due on foreign income - remitted or otherwise. As to those required to pay tax, proof of submitting your Thai return should be sufficient for Immigration purposes - if/when Immigration require such. But, another scenario, is - if the tax-authorities have a problem with you, then they would flag you in a system which immigration checks before issuing extensions or stamping you out of the country.

I thought I read a quote from a UK citizen, quoting your double-tax treaty with that info. I am sorry to hear if you aren't protected from being taxed on pension-income by your treaty.

No fingerprints until the Pink-Card process - took them then. Every amphoe has different rules for the first-application process. Glad to hear you got a replacement book + ID ok.

If his GF hadn't answered the phone, he would have been booted. And they would have stamped "didn't have the money" - after telling him it was for "coming too much/often" - to spite flying to/from England (which isn't cheap, these days).

I read one report where someone with a Non-Imm visa did not have to spend the one-night-out at one of the borders. YMMV. I would have a change of clothes, just in case. Could also ask the local visa-run vans if they know.

Yes - two reported here recently. One was refused and returned from a Bangkok airport to where he started. He then flew to CM and got in OK (no "agent entry" program there to incentivize denied-entries): Another was almost refused, but managed to get his GF to talk to the IO, who then grudgingly let him in. If she hadn't been available to talk right then, he would have been gone: if you use known safe entry points - no problem. Otherwise, be sure to pay whatever agent-service the entry point is using. One here for Bangkok airports: ... so just add that figure to your budget, if you need to fly in to Bangkok. May be easier to just deal with annual extensions.

Glad it worked out, eventually. And, yes, that special queuing was the case at my original "first time for yellow book" Amphoe (rural) also. I was only seen after every Thai was served - even though was with my Thai wife, Poo Yai Baan, and 2 witnesses who had to wait all that time to sign-off on me. It took literally all day - open to close (I was seen last) - then had to wait ~6 months before they let me have the yellow-book - "waiting for signature of big guy." No agent-service was available there, alas - would have likely been less expensive than what I paid to waste 3 Thai's day.

The Nong Khai border is very popular, and no reports of any problems there at all. It's a bit of a trip from CM, but good for not having to worry about re-entry issues. Even if they start requiring 1-night out in the future, Vientiane isn't a bad place to spend an evening.

No "Visa on Arrival" to Laos at that crossing, correct? It might be a good place to return, after entering elsewhere - or just get one's visa at the Laos consulate before crossing there.

Isn't your UK pension protected by the double-tax treaty? I know the USA Social-Security is by our treaty, and thought I read a Brit say they had the same. The only people this would affect are those with significant income beyond retirement payments, or without a good dual-tax treaty - but, sadly for Thailand, that includes those who spend the most here. Now, at least 1/2 of their spending-money will be spent elsewhere - and many will leave permanently to where they are not taxed. And for what - to pay for the "digital wallet" CCP-money spy-and-control scheme's Billions is debt-spending? But, just look at Immigration at Bangkok Airports - refusing entry to repeat-customers who spend their money here - even falsifying the reason for denying entry to do it - all to get them to pay through their agent-partners. And it isn't just us foreigners. Ask any Thai what happens when they have to deal with a govt-agency - some form of extortion is highly-likely. All the little sub-fiefdoms here are so caught up in their own little greedy schemes - none give a dang about Thai people or the good of the country. Thais deserve better than this. We at least have multiple other options - but they don't.

USA laws apply to Americans who break USA laws, where ever they are in the world. Additionally, a USA consulate/embassy is USA soil, by law. Immigration could have referred cases to the FBI if they had any evidence. Thailand is very cooperative with extradition requests, so no problem there, either. That would have scared away any fools even thinking of lying on sworn affidavits to get Thai extensions of stay. Why would more than 3 months of xfers be required, if one is starting fresh from a 90-day visa - whether obtained here or abroad? It's absurd ... unless one wakes up from their "all on the up and up" dream, recognizes the real purpose of these often nonsensical "rules." You should read here more. I have seen reports of people being rejected because of the transfers-timing, even if their total transfers far exceeded the minimum. Yes, one can have their pensions deposited in their home-country, and then manually transfer every month - just don't miss the timing by even a minute, no matter what events in your life might happen at that moment. The "new rules" had only one effect - more agent-use, as designed - as with all the other "crackdown" policies. Immigration have set up a "Got-cha" mine-field, for this purpose.

Yes. You only pay more if you want to do annual "extensions" instead of border-runs. "Extensions" are 1900 Baht, possible once per-DTV-entry, are valid for 6 months additional permitted-stay - then one must border-bounce. Additional scrutiny / paperwork may happen when/if applying for an extension. Some have reported the reason for their DTV was listed. If one is over 50, I do not see the advantage of the DTV. Even if one is paying an agent for their retirement-extensions, by the time the border-bounces are factored in, little if any money is saved. One would also be wise to assume that agent-payments for "no hassle" entry on this visa's border-bounces could be necessary - likely varying by entry-point. As you say - so far, there are not any hassles reported when entering on a retirement-extension w/ re-entry permit.

Yes, but that needs to be combined with making ballot-access much easier - preferably mandated by federal law - but those in-office have no incentive to help us fix things by replacing them.

As long as "none of the above" is available for every office, and if those reach a certain threshold, the listed candidates are barred, and a new election for that office(s) is held. I wish that were possible for president this November.

RFK-Jr proposed the fix for this, and eVerify, which is to allow those who cannot get a DL/ID from their state - for whatever reason - to get a Passport-Card at their local post-office without cost. Not having a form of photo-ID has many downsides, so this improves the lives of those who do not have one, beyond ability to prove who they are when voting or applying for a job. Whether one believes that vote-fraud is a real-issue or not, this would remove all doubt, so we don't have ~1/2 the country not trusting our elections. What is the downside? Of course, that fix is not in this legislation, because it is being "used as an issue" - by both "sides" - neither actually wanting to solve the problem. Instead, they use this as a circus-event, to distract from the many "bi-partisan" positions they hold, which are in opposition to the views of the majority of the electorate.

You won't get "kicked out" with valid permitted-stay a valid multi-entry visa - but, on your 180-day border-trip, you may need to pay an agent to come back w/o issue. We will not know until next year how that will work - either at the the historically honest (no agent-service needed) entry-points like Nong Khai, or the historically corrupt entry points. The ED visa is generally limited to a year of Thai-language (do some still do 2 years?), or Muay Thai, or Self-Defense (available in Chaing Mai). But, similar agent-business is involved to make the extensions trouble-free - even if you attend classes. Be sure to inquire at the school on how THEY process your 3-mo extensions for you, any added cost for this, and find another school if they don't.

In such cases, a trip to Laos - to a Thai consulate there - may be a more enjoyable use of one's money. Similar if in Pattaya. In Bangkok (CW) one can apply there using "by the book" rules w/o issue / agent-payment.

There were no reports of such ever made, which I saw. Offenders could have been referred to the FBI for prosecution, and is a USA Felony to lie on those affidavits. Immigration knew (or shortly discovered) it was against USA law for our State Dept to do more than provide the attestation; they were/are legally forbidden from "verifying" anything. If immigration really cared about foreigners living here w/o income (sleeping outdoors and eating nothing but air?), the first thing they would have done is shut down all the agent services. Everything Big Joke did - from Edu-extension hassles to retirement-rules changes - only had the effect of increasing agent-business, which bypassed ALL his "new rules." The "No Tips" policy only amounted to IOs not taking money "on the side," which did not go into the distribution-scheme. When first rolled out, the guidelines allowed showing a few months income-transfers for new cases - then, they pulled that back. The same reason as the rest of their changes - too many honest applicants, who had the income, were "getting away" with not using agents, for at least their first year. And if you get 2 payments one month, and none the next, due to how your country allocates pensions? Sure, it's the same income, but - back to the agent you go!

Yes, at CNX it is generally unnecessary. They seem to run an honest entry-point, and no recent bad-reports indicating that has changed. Personally, I would not fly in with a "longer staying" record though - even there. Worst case being denied-entry at a land-border - if something changes just before you get there, which has not yet reported here yet - at least you don't get locked-up.

File a police report for both, then. Going to your new amphoe (serving your new residence) with the police-reports in-hand, and seeing what they require, is the only way to know. It is far less work for them than putting you "in the system," so hopefully they are friendly about it. I would assume the new owner has to attend, when you have what they need - hopefully not additional witnesses - but please do update here with your experience.