Rob Browder

The type of visa is irrelevant for taxes - only how many days you spend in the country per calendar-year - either under/over 180 days.

When they first started doing the money-check at Savannakhet, they seemed not to enforce the 2-mo seasoning. I have not seen a recent report where "no seasoning" policy was clarified by someone without it getting the visa, or being rejected - but it is "officially" needed. When you say "extend it after 3 mo to 12 months" - at Immigration in Thailand? Yes - and with all the required documents / rigamorole associated. Having that visa-entry as a starting point would allow you to go directly to a 12-month extension. A 12-mo "ME-Visa," however, would require going back to Savannakhet with a bank-statement showing the seasoned funds.

The problem many have at CW, is their time in-Thailand does not exceed 90-days before border-bouncing, due to their Visa-type. One would be legally required to do 90-day reporting if staying 6-mo on the DTV. Then, at CW, one could also get a Certificate of Residence. One could use an agent to do the 90-day report, if desired - and to get the CoR.

No. Even snowbirds do this, and they spend most of the year in another country. As to "legitimate" - is a made up word when used like this. There is no stated "how long can one be a tourist" in Thai law. If the foreigners are not working here, and spending foreign-earned capital into the Thai economy, they are quite "legitimately beneficial" to Thailand, and should be welcomed. Ideally, instead of this silly border-game, based around Thai rules, they could just go to immigration and pay maybe 5K for 90-days at a time = "win win" for everyone.

No - it has been confirmed repeatedly by multiple posters here, over years.

I've never seen a report of the Non-O-ME from Vientiane. Funds not in the bank for 2 months could be a problem. You might want to do a single at Vientiane, if easier to visit there - then, return for the ME at Savannakhet, after the funds are seasoned 2 months.

One would need to be in the room where they take people for "additional questioning" to see the cash-demand - and in many cases, they don't ask, and deny for "lack of funds," regardless. And, if they want to deny someone entry, they would waive-away the offer of a bank-book (reported here before), and stamp "lack of funds" as the reason for denial in the victim's passport, and there is nothing one can do about it. If one is coming in frequently / staying awhile as a tourist, they are in the "Permitted to extract tribute," category - and will use immigration's agent, or suffer the above experience. Usually, there is a warning first, in hopes the "mark" gets the message.

An agent can generally get extensions done early. Whether an agent can get that particular type of extension done is an open question, however. Is this is the old 10M Baht in condos and/or govt-bonds extension? If so, I would not want to let that lapse, or you might not be able to get it again, using the existing investments.

If you are from a country whose consulates provide those statements, Immigration may demand you get it, even if you have the 12-mo of statements. They could also turn around and demand the bank-docs in addition to the letter, of course. In general, some IOs / offices don't like the "income method."

There are - but not for all offices / districts - the district-level sign-off being key. It used to be reported for about 10K Baht extra vs retirement for that signature (a nice little earner for a signature), but a recent poster cited a much higher figure. I suspect, in the OP's case, the stamp might be from a far-away province vs Hua Hin - though would have to ask the agent to know for sure.

An international-flight out of Chiang Mai and back would be better vs immigration-control in Bangkok (either airport) - if that is possible. If doing this by-air, i would bring proof of your parentage of a Thai - so, if any issue, can explain there was a delay obtaining your next visa to care for them, but be clear you will definitely get a new visa/extension based on this. Note that, per the MFA spokesman, the new 60-day entry DOES cover coming to visit family now - unlike before the recent change, so this is not violating any rule. Immigration are not the MFA, but, they did expand the reasons-for-use list.

Hopefully, they won't even care about the branch-name for a retirement-based extension, as the district-office isn't involved. If they make an issue, can ask them to write a note to the bank, so the bank knows what to type/sign, to make them happy.

The web-form is in error not showing the required "star," and not blocking submission w/o that date. Fill it in, and it should (hopefully) be accepted. As far as why they ask for redundant information and/or why these different systems are connected poorly - passport-change not updated everywhere, breaking when you make a new entry to the country, breaking if a hotel logs a TM-30 on you somewhere you visited for a day, etc - that is another can of worms.

It will show the current branch. But your bank-book has the old branch-name in it - is what caused the problem in my case - "not the same." I thought it was silly, since same bank and account-number, but ... TIT.

That depends on how long/often you are in Thailand. If you have only been here 60-90 days continuously, with months out before your current entry, then you will probably be OK A very long-stay prior could still be a problem. Otherwise, you should contact one of the Bangkok "visa run" companies and ask about the "guaranteed entry" program for entering by air. I am not sure which companies have that connection. The last report I read, it cost about $100 USD (from memory). If foregoing the agent-service, be sure to have 20K Baht worth of cash, a hotel-booking, and a flight-out within 60-days to show. This will not guarantee entry, but helps with the odds of not being denied-entry. Or, just use a different land-border.

It doesn't matter how many years. If you have been on a continuous extensions-of-stay since you got that 60-day extension, they don't allow a 2nd one. If you left w/o a re-entry permit, and came back on a new visa or visa-exempt - "started over" - then you can do it. Ironically, if using a Non-O-ME Visa, you can get one on every entry, as they are "new entries to Thailand." But on extensions of stay, exit/enter with re-entry permit doesn't "count" as a new-entry. OTOH, you could try, and hope they don't look back that far in the database - assuming your current passport doesn't show that 60-day extension, and they don't ask to see your old passport.

You might need a letter from the bank stating it is the same account (was the same acct#), with only the branch-name changed. I had to do this when they closed my local-branch and "moved me" to another one. But, that was for a marriage-based application, which goes to the district-office for approval, so the local-IOs are really paranoid of being punished (since I wasn't filing with agent-money). As retirement don't go to the district-office, they might not worry about it at all.

Immigration prefer you just show the 2-mo seasoned 400K (3 months seasoning required at some offices in the sticks). They didn't even ask to see my work-permit, when I was working here and on a Non-O / Marriage, if I used the bank-money. The first time, I tried to apply using my job / income, and they gave me a list which was basically a Non-B extension-list involving a pile of company documents, with the Marriage-based docs added to it - a nightmare you don't want to try.

I have not heard of rejection-stamps except at Poi Pet or the airports. At all others, reports indicate they just say "no," and you go back and get your exit stamp canceled. I had this happen once at Sadao (years ago), when I didn't know I needed to "pad" my passport with cash, to enter there - even with a visa, and a week after I had last left Thailand. Per the above - no - they just cancel your exit-stamp, thus re-instating your permitted-stay in Laos. No extra charge. The block was on the Thai side - not Laos. Thai Immigration there seem to want the same sort of "deal" the van-companies have made at their Cambodian checkpoints - where a payoff is made per-person, and varies by type, such that those with Non-O or similar must pay MORE to exit and return.

Oh, yes, just forget about the incentives - welfare programs, working-illegally for many times more money than they can earn where they come from. Contrast to coming to Thailand from a Western country - NO welfare to leech from, and NO incentive to compete with the illegal-workers from the neighboring countries. We don't come here to work 6 10-hour days for less than we would earn in one. Every one of us spending our money in Thailand creates Thai jobs.

Most of those in IT departments of BOI businesses, in my experience. Thais are welcome and have the skills, but seem to prefer not to have to communicate in English on a regular basis, so they move on to Thai companies. Most of the foreigners in those departments did not have English as their native language either, but is the common-language used.

You are a callous xenophobe who doesn't care that multiple Thais lose their jobs, for each of us driven out. It is clear their lives don't matter to you at all. No one is "abusing" anything - unless you mean those from neighboring countries who work here illegally - driving down wages and opportunities for Thais. Oh, that's right, you don't care about actual Thai lives - just some zoomed-out version of "economy" which doesn't include many of them. I'm glad at least some in govt do care about creating more jobs for Thais via foreign-spending, which is why they are reversing their counter-productive "crackdown" policies. Let's see if the Immigration dept will continue to cooperate in this.

The proceeds from such sales do not go to the USA-taxpayer. Corruption in what Eisenhower termed the "Military Industrial Complex" is a problem - as with other Federal agencies.

I agree, but I see the "Orange Man Bad" people as equally simple-minded and moronic, vs Trump's "fans." Look at what this thread dissolved into - a bunch of issues which don't affect any one's standard of living, safety, etc. Just labeling the other "front-person" as "ebil" / bad. Talk about policy-points and documented history, and both "sides" freak out with cognitive-dissonance, and attack personally.

Keep in mind, the policies from PRIOR years causes inflation in LATER years. IOW, be sure to factor in Nixon pulling the gold-peg from the USD, and the Johnson/Nixon war spending, with regard to what happened under Jimmy Carter. Also see Paul Volker's sky-high interest rate policy, to try to bring the inflation back down, after that - taking effect part-way through Reagan's years. it is a mistake - often made - to look at where we were in an economic-cycle WHEN a president was in office, and give them "credit" or "blame" for what transpired. Their policies may have some short-term effect, of course, but it's not that simple. Do not misconstrue this as a defense of the policies of any of them, however.