Rob Browder

I haven't seen a passport with "not entering for tourist purposes" stamped in it as the reason for denial of entry. They have also done this routine to those with Tourist-Visas. Also, "tourist" is not defined. If they set some solid criteria for "tourist," then fine - so everyone can plan accordingly - X time in Y months, or whatever. Instead, there is no consistency, which creates fear, which just "coincidentally" markets agent-services which benefit them - and they ONLY do this where the agent-services are needed to bypass it.

They don't say "not allowed" - just that they aren't condoning / guaranteeing their services. I'm sure it's a nice little earner for them.

The best reason is if you are working here (for over a year, while paying Thai-SS), and want to keep your Thai-SS health-insurance going after your job ends - saving a huge pile of money vs private-insurance. Without your Pink-ID + Yellow-Book, you will not be able to do this. Due to the sometimes-long delay-time between application to receipt, this should be done well before one's job ends. A yellow-book also precludes needing to get CORs, in many/most cases - though probably not worth it for this reason alone, unless your Amphoe isn't a PITA about it (like mine was).

Thailand's immigration law was written with this in mind - limiting IOs to very specific reasons for denial. There is no "been here too much" legal-reason for denial. But, as there is no oversight ("agent fees" pay into a pyramid-scheme, of sorts - so bought-out to the top), they just pretend you "didn't have money," and there is no one to stop them doing this.

Yes, I was responding to the oft-repeated statement that Tourist Visas were now useless due to Visa-Exempt being 60-days now.

My life has been fairly "enjoyable and stable" in Thailand, for many years - but I don't pretend to know the future. I use the same permitted-stay as you do, and I hope the rules do not change. The point is to be sure you can take "enjoyable and stable" with you, if things change unexpectedly. I would not be "gloomy" even if things were spoiled here, because I am prepared for such an occurrence - though I would be disappointed. Those unprepared could become quite "gloomy," I reckon. I have no fixed-assets in Thailand I could not afford to lose - is Rule #1. I have the wherewithal to move to another country if something goes wrong here. I keep-tabs on the immigration rules in a few other "2nd Choice" countries, just in case.

It is 100% legal to get a new passport, they can see your full immigration history to Thailand, and the only reason they would care is "Where ELSE have you been." Unless they suspect one of being a terrorist, it's irrelevant.

This is the reality of living as a foreigner in Thailand, unless one has Permanent Residence or becomes a Thai citizen. The only difference between types of entry/stay, is the "odds" of problems. I stick with my Non-O "based on retirement" extensions, because history indicates I am unlikely to have a problem in the future. That said, they have changed the rules for these before - and could again, without warning - and with or without without "grandfathering" the current qualifications.

I saw one 2nd hand report here of Russians given a hard time, but were let in after showing the receipt for payment from the Thai-Consulate at Phnom Penh and possibly other supporting paperwork.

Two public offers of airport "guaranteed entry" service: https://aseannow.com/topic/1336926-setv-metv-still-around-now-that-visa-exempts-are-now-60-days/?do=findComment&comment=19217493 www.onestopservicepattaya.com (per YT video with the agency owner)

In almost all reported cases, the person is sent to the last place they flew from. Better if you were stamped in/out there, also. Immigration can opt to send you to your passport-country, but usually an airline rep meets you in detention, and arranges a flight back where your last flight began. I had faster entry with new passports, as they seem to read every stamp on every page in a passport - presumably to see where you have been, other than Thailand. But, they can see all your Thai entries/exits on their computer.

Not completely useless. If one is flying into Thailand's BKK airports, and staying in Thailand most of the time, one is less-likely to be denied-entry with a Tourist-Visa than Visa-Exempt. The visa costs less than paying the "guaranteed entry" agent ~3K per entry. That said, if staying in Thailand "too much" (undefined), one probably needs to pay the airport-agent service, regardless. See what they did to this guy with a METV - and he wasn't even doing same/next-day bounces out and back: https://aseannow.com/topic/1318940-metv-effectively-rescinded-at-don-mueang/

The "odds" say it is unlikely you would be denied entry. That said, I would never fly into Thailand with a long-stay tourist-type-entry history. Having a Tourist Visa would improve your odds considerably, though I personally would still not risk it. Coming from Hong Kong would not change this - other than a shorter-flight back there, vs Finland, if denied-entry. There is no way to know what daily "marching orders" will be given to the IOs on-duty when you arrive. If flying to a neighboring-country and entering by-land is too inconvenient, there is a way to enter by-air without worry - a process which is apparently what airport-immigrant are after with all this hassling: https://aseannow.com/topic/1336926-setv-metv-still-around-now-that-visa-exempts-are-now-60-days/?do=findComment&comment=19217493

This is what they did in my case, when I was on a Non-O-ME Visa based on marriage to a Thai. Practices can vary from one labor-office to another, and over time, however.

It is really sad they give you any grief at all when entering, if you only stay 5 days each visit, given they can can see that in their system. As well, the Visa-Exempt rules now state that visiting Thai family is a VALID use of VE entry. I doubt a supervisor would deny-entry in the future, in your case, but up to you if you want to continue dealing with their hassling. If your wife can get away, you could take a trip with her to Savannakhet, and get a 1-Year Multiple-Entry based on marriage to a Thai. To qualify, you would need to show 400K in a Thai bank in your name for 2 months. Much better than only 3 months with a TR Visa. Note that one needs to schedule an appointment at Savannakhet.

When/if a limit is imposed, the agents running the vans will know first, and it will be reported here. Predicting the future with immigration - and the variations between offices and entry-points - is a guessing-game. We only know what "has happened" / "is happening now," in most cases.

They do this for both retirement and marriage-based Non-O Visas in the Jomtien office. Many have experienced the person in that little side-office showing a piece of paper with 15.000 Baht on it, then tearing it up. Perhaps they only take money via the agents, now. They have been allowed to break the rules on this since before I arrived over a decade ago. I went to Laos for my Non-O, instead. I was then punished / blocked on my 1-year extension by the "family-extension" crew asking for "additional documents" repeatedly at every application - so I went back to Laos and got a Non-O-ME Visa (only available for marriage-based). Jomtien is a good office for retirement extensions (not the initial visa) and tourist extensions - but horrible for Non-O Visas and Thai-marriage extensions.

That is incorrect information, unless you have a source I have not seen for Trump using Ivermectin - preferably from the White House or his treating-doctor. Trump used HCQ for 2 weeks, as a prophylactic, then announced he quit using it - that being long before he later caught covid. Trump was treated for covid with "monoclonal antibodies", which was a very effective treatment (but hard to scale-up), until the Omicron variant, when it ceased being helpful. Rather than citing a single study, see a full and complete list of ALL the studies done on HCQ, Ivermectin, and everything else, here: https://c19early.org/ Note that many treatments were only shown to work if given early in the illness - in the first days of symptoms or as a prophylactic, yet many studies ONLY tested them on people who were very sick when treatment started - after being hospitalized. The data for each study must be examined for context.

I doubt he can read beyond a 4th grade level, yet he actively-meddled in the FDA's approval process (and bragged about it). We need to shame-force presidential-candidates to take the GRE or similar.

Thank you for the detailed reply. I am aware of when Russia entered the ongoing conflict, which began with the Coup in 2014. Ukraine was (again) violating Minsk, by shelling Donbass - as they had over and over - but, this time, clearly preparing for another offensive. The Minsk agreement was binding on Ukraine and the "breakaway" areas, which had refused to accept the anti-ethnic-Russian Coup'd government installed. It was only "in pieces" because Ukraine refused to honor it. And, again, Merkel ADMITTED it was just a ruse from the start, after she left her PM position. As to the "EU" trade-block - the issue was that they wanted Ukraine to join, but Russia said this would invalidate their free-trade agreement with Ukraine by allowing European products to flow through. The then-president of Ukraine was aware that wrecking their huge and beneficial trade-relationship with Russia was not a good option, and began to look for a middle-ground. The coup was launched at this point. NATO expansion was something else entirely, and Ukraine's stated intent to join NATO - plus saying they wanted nukes - was a huge escalation. As to the INF treaty - those so-called "defensive" missiles can easily become both offensive and nuclear. From your linked-article: Russia denied the accusation and President Putin said it was a pretext for the US to leave the pact. Forgive me if I do not trust "We Lied, We Cheated, We Stole" Pompeo's word on this - from the same "intelligence" which put non-existent WMDs in Iraq to start that war. Russia claimed the maximum firing range is 480 kilometers and, as the fuel cannot be changed in the field, the produced missiles could not be modified to a higher range. They even offered the USA to come inspect, which was rebuffed. The USA had no business meddling in the Nord-Stream-II pipeline - was primarily between Germany and Russia, and other EU states could deal with Germany on it. You could point out, "Well, at least Trump didn't blow it up" - which is true. As to the lethal aid - it was much more than just the Javelins: https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2019/09/25/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-us-aid-package-to-ukraine-that-trump-delayed/ ... and Javelins are not necessarily "defensive," any more than their tank / APC targets are - though both can be used for defense. My primary point, is that Trump ran on a peace platform, and delivered exactly nothing of the sort. There was some hope with N-Korea, but he blew that up by hiring infamous arch-neocon Bolton, who wrecked that hope by saying we would handle them "Like Libya" (see how that worked out for Gadaffi).

You are welcome. The accountant handling this may or may not know you can get a work-permit on a Non-0 marriage-based permitted-stay. I say this is preferable, because your permitted-stay is not invalidated by losing your work permit / job in the future. With a Non-B, it is. The Dept-of-Labor will be fine with it - only care you are being paid the minimum-required salary - not what your bank-balance is.

100K locked-up is not ideal. It seems to me, the regular Non-O retirement - no insurance required - has far less hassle and total-cost. One could pay an agent to file one's extension every year, if that once-a-year trip to the bank and immigration is a problem. OTOH, it could be worth it, if you save more on not paying taxes on remitted-income - assuming the income being remitted is not already protected by a double-taxation treaty, or earned / saved before Jan, 1, 2024.

The work-permit comes from the Dept-of-Labor, not immigration. You can get a work-permit on a Non-O ME-Visa, provided it is based on marriage to a Thai (not retirement). The first time they give you the WP valid for 3 months only - then you go back and extend it for 1-year. If you switch to a 1-year extension-of-stay (based on marriage to a Thai) from Immigration, you would need to show you had 400K in your account for 2 months prior to applying for it. Some remote provinces require you to show the 400K for 3 months before application. You would not need to show the 400K again until the next year. In either case, provided your permitted-stay is based on marriage to a Thai, you qualify for a work-permit. A change to a Non-B would not be needed or desirable.

Some recent reports indicate they are not any more lenient at the airports with longer-stay visitors on tourist-type entries than before. Those with longer-stay histories would be wise to use their "service" for this: ... or stick to entering by-land - unless/until it goes beyond a "one night out" rule.

Can you be specific on what you think I got wrong?