JimGant

So first thing I'll do is check with them about what my 90 day check-in options are.

Without getting an extension of stay based on marriage and having Embassy/Consulate paperwork indicating 40k/mo cash infusion, you have no 90 day check-in options. Your only option is a border out and back every 90 days, plus having to obtain a new Non Imm O every 15 months.

You obtain a non immigrant O visa to visit family in Thailand - the wife lives in Thailand, or so it seems, so the husband can obtain a visa to visit her. The family does not have to be Thai.

Ok. But not a whole lot of ground plowed here, so I wouldn't bet the farm that a visa clerk, used to seeing a marriage certificate plus Thai ID card, wouldn't hiccup at seeing a marriage certificate with two farang names, plus in lieu of a Thai ID, an extension of stay stamp....

Interesting soap opera. Another recent thread by sbathon has her asking advice about converting a tourist visa to a Non Imm O. Planning ahead, maybe. Which, in their situation, is prudent.

Lop, what's your take on Hull's "Application for an O-A Visa?" http://www.thaiconsul-uk.com/visas1.asp

Definitely they're not issuing actual O-A visas, which would stamp you in for one year, but are greasing the skids to enable extending the Non Imm O in Thailand. Not very helpful in the definition department by now equating O-A visas with in-country extensions. Also, wonder what they do with those in-triplicate O-A application forms? Who knows, maybe they're ahead of the pack with an MFA-sanctioned new justification of Non-Imm O issue.

A trip to Vientiane should not be that expensive; or you could probably find cheap flights to Malaysia or Singapore (although that can be expensive for hotels).

Rationale for obtaining a Non Imm O in adjacent countries might not work, as being "married to a farang" (even one with a valid extension) is not quite the same as "being married to a Thai," which seems to be the only criteria that is getting Non Imm O's these days. Certainly a grey area, which seems to have Immigration perplexed -- I can only imagine how MFA might look at this.....

We are a US retired couple who had retirement visas. My husband's retirement visa expired while we were out of the country,

Hmmm. By "retirement visa," do you mean you both had Non Imm 'O-A' visas -- the only kind that fit that definition -- with one based on O-A dependency criteria? If not, then you must have had Non Imm O's, which were extended based on retirement and dependency, hence your so-called "retirement visas" (a misnomer). In any case, you're caught in a real Catch-22 situation, worst case is a return to the States to begin again where you once began.

(Also, if the first situation above applies, i.e., you both had O-A's, then Hull's website's stating both need to meet the financial requirement is out-of-sorts with at least one other consulate/embassy -- which, of course is business as usual.

Boths our posts are to take issue with those who pick up on the wrong terminology

Huh? You're taking issue with yourselves by using the wrong terminology?

I go to Birmingham every year for my multi non imm O visa. they're always helpful and I've never had any problems.

Are you maried to a Thai? If not, what criteria do you use to secure your Non Imm O?

Kelvinj is not intentionally being misleading. It's the Hull webpage he refers to that is very curious. (Here it is again: http://www.thaiconsul-uk.com/visas1.asp )

Hull, always creative, has now redefined what a Non Imm O-A visa is. Heretofore, an O-A retirement visa could only be obtained outside Thailand. This is still the case, but Hull now advertises its requirements for obtaining an "O-A" visa -- when the reality is, it is only stipulating what requirements are needed to obtain a Non Imm O visa that will pass the extension for retirement requirements at Thai Immigration.

This is not too shabby. Why shouldn't you be granted a Non Imm O visa if you intend to retire in Thailand -- and meet all the requirements as put forth by Thai Immigration. However, many Embassies/Consulates won't grant Non Imm O's for 'intend to retire' purposes. So, hail Hull.

But they (Hull) also fold in O-A requirements that Thai Immigration won't ask for when you apply for extension:

2.5 Criminal Record – you need to contact your UK Area Police Force and request a

“Subject Access Report”. Please be aware that it can take up to 40 days for it to be

issued. Furthermore, please note it must be submitted to the Thai authorities within

three months of date of issue.

Thai Immigration won't ask for a criminal record. This is an MFA requirement for an O-A visa, which Thai Immigration doesn't ascribe to 'retirement extension of stay.' Pity two branches of government can't have the same sheet of music, but, hey, rice bowls are different. And Hull, projecting MFA requirements into Immigration requirements, creates confusion over actual requirements.

And it's not quite clear from Hull's website whether or not they even want to see your supporting documentation, including police report -- or just want you to attest that you have all the documentation set forth as required to obtain an "O-A visa" in Thailand (again, a misnomer).

Anyway, what does seem clear -- if that is possible -- is that an actual "O-A" obtained at a Thai Embassy is NOT the way to go for a two-farang married couple planning to retire in Thailand.

they always tell everyone they're Thai, and I've never heard one of them say in differentiation, "I'm Thai-Chinese."

In an interview awhile back, Tiger Woods' mom refered to herself as "Thai-Chinese." Interesting, but not nearly as much as how she would describe her new granddaughter.........

I got my non-imm-O Multi at Denver in April. I had to supply them with paperwork showing I SHOULD get one .. and have an appointment.

On what grounds did you argue that you "should" get a Non Imm O?

By needing an "appointment," does this mean they would not accept a mail application?

thanx.

Works for me.

And, of course, that's the important thing.

But, what do you do when you make a relatively large purchase? I know in my case, a really large purchase, like a car, involved a cashier's check. But, purchases in the 25-35k area, like a treadmill, only a credit card made sense (debit cards I dislike for the instant bank tap, and I don't like carrying around a lot of cash).

Glad to hear inconsistency is still consistent with Thai Immigration. Becoming too predictable in Thailand might prove boring.

With ATM machines on every corner, I see absolutely no reason to use a credit card here in Thailand. In all the years I have lived here, I used a credit card one time and worried for the next several months if it would come back to bite me

Gary, why would you worry? You'd only be liable for a token amount ($50 in US) for fraudelent use, and most times this is waived. And today, with most credit card companies on-line, monitoring your account for suspicious activity is a snap (with the credit card company most likely picking up any fraud before you do).

I'd be much more hesitant to have to frequently use my ATM card or carry around a lot of cash. The pitalls of carrying a lot of cash are self-evident. And the frequent use of an ATM card, most of which now double as debit cards, means frequent exposure of the card's particulars. I'd much rather argue a bogus credit charge than face fighting to have my empty bank account reloaded. A recent post here on TV showed how ATM fraud is *not* easily rectified, at least in this one case involving Bangkok Bank.

And using a corner ATM machine? No thanks. I'll use the one stuck into the bank's wall, whose security is superior to that at the mall, not to mention I'd have a door to bang on should my ATM card get eaten by the machine. But such usage will be for petty cash, not regular purchases, where convenience and additional warranties are afforded by credit card usage.

Interesting that the post right before Gary's was about......ATM scams:

A SOPHISTICATED bid to skim the cash card details of potentially thousands of people from a teller machine has been foiled in Adelaide, police say.

I am an American, and I got my retirement visa two months ago. .

Waitasec. Are you saying that two months ago you went to a Thai Immigrations office in Thailand for a retirement extension and were required to submit a medical certificate?

I thought that the medical certificate was eliminated last October?

I think there is some confusion between people talking about getting the visa for the first time and people renewing it. Not the same process.

What's the straight skinny to wpcoe's question? Are medical certificates still required for first-time extension applicants?

Lopburi? Maestro?

I have enough to live on but am not able to meet the B40,000 p/m income requirement. Therefore, what my research seems to tell me is that my best option for a long stay is a multiple-entry non-immigrant 'O' visa, of the type which requires me to leave and re-enter Thailand every 90 days.

Bzalt, glad you finally contacted an honorary consulate. Oregon has a good track record, as do the three in Texas, especially Houston (which I can vouch for personally). Anyway, getting your Nom Imm O from Oregon should be a piece of cake, as having a Thai wife greases those skids -- even at MFA consulates.

If you live near a Thai border immigration site, 90 day runs should not be a hassle, nor a problem, since having a Non Imm O multiple entry, you'll not be treated as a 30-day border runner. And, if closer to the border than an Immigration Office, a 90-day run would seemingly be easier than a mandatory 90-day report-of-existence to an Immigration Office (exiting and reentering obviates the need for 90-day reporting). (But, yes, you can 90-day report by mail, which can be convenient.)

But, if border runs will be inconvenient, I'd suggest re-looking into your financial bonafides. Even tho' you and the wife don't have a joint "income" of 40k baht per month,will you have access to 40k/mo from all sources (wages,savings, return-of-capital, loans, gross rents, etc)? If so, you'll meet the spirit of the Thai requirement -- tho' maybe not the literal legal definition, whatever that might be -- for "income." So, having met the 'spirit' requirement, you next attest to the American Embassy that you "receive an amount" (i.e., you don't attest to an "income") of at least 40k equivalent in baht. No documentation required, just your word. Then, you can apply at Immigration for a one-year extension of stay, which, if granted, will do away with the burdensome 90-day border runs, plus the requirement to eventually renew your Non Imm O multiple entry visa 15 months hence at some foreign location -- with certainty not guaranteed.

Some Immigration Offices (but apparently not many) are apparently looking for 'proof' of the monthly 40k cash flow -- notwithstanding Embassy attestation. So, assuming you have the assets, wiring at least 40k baht equivalent per month to a Thai bank account for, say, three months, should do the trick. If you can't do this every month until renewal time the next year, well, set up a new account three months prior to renewal time each year, wiring money accordingly.

I know the above sounds 'slicky.' But, again, the 'spirit' of the Thai requirement, at least as makes sense to me, is that they want to be assured that you have access to 40k/mo, which could be wages, drawing down an inheritance, a loan from Aunt Martha, whatever. Yeah, if push came to shove, this might not stand the sniff test. But, it's no further afield of what's currently kosher, namely allowing 'gross' wages, rents, etc as acceptable "income." Heck, after taxes, rent expenses, whatever, net income -- what Thailand most certainly really wants to see -- could be well south of the 40k baht requirement.

Anyway, point is, nothing to lose in trying to get a one year extension. Worst case: your stuck with 90-day border runs -- and maybe a trip back to the US every 15 months for a new Non Imm O multiple entry visa. But, if you can stretch into the 40k requirement, well, it would be well worth the try -- even without the three month lead-up of wiring 40k.

Believe it or not, I did it more than two months before expiry last year, I just said I would be traveling out of country - no problem.

chintee, which Immigration Office?

The wife left last Dec on her US passport, but also carrying a brand new Thai passport issued in Bangkok, which was not shown to Immigration upon exit. In January, we flew back to Thailand from the States, and she went to the "Thai only" immigration line with her virgin Thai passport. They did ask if she had her old Thai passport with her, which she did not, then, without further discussion, they stamped her in. She didn't even have to explain why there was no exit stamp. The only curiosity shown was in the passport itself, which was the new biometric kind and which had not been seen before by the Immigration Officer.

Just in case they had demanded to see her US passport -- then stamped her in on that -- I had it with me so that she could truthfully say she *didn't* have it with her. But they never even asked for it -- or about it.

What could be the worst case scenario? That the Immigration Officer got befuddled about the stampless Thai passport and had to call over a supervisor. I'd be close at hand to produce the US passport, if warranted. But by this time someone in the know about dual citizenship would be on top of the situation -- and having to enter Thailand on her US passport shouldn't have to happen. (But, of course, we are talking about Thai Immigration...........)

SENIOR LOVE STORY

Mrs. Murphy and Mrs. Cohen had been longtime close friends. But being

old-fashioned, each went to a retirement home of her own respective

religion.

It was not long before Mrs. Murphy felt very lonesome for Mrs. Cohen,

so one day she asked to be driven to the Jewish Home to visit her old

friend. When she arrived she was greeted with open arms, hugs, and kisses.

Mrs. Murphy said, "Don't be holdin' back, Mrs. Cohen, how do you like

it here?"

Mrs. Cohen went on and on about the wonderful food, the facility and

the care takers. Then, with a twinkle in her eye, she said, "But the best

thing is that I now have a boyfriend."

Mrs. Murphy said, "Now isn't that wonderful! Tell me all about it."

Mrs. Cohen said, "After lunch we go up to my room and sit on the edge

of the bed. I let him touch me on the top, and then on the bottom, and

then we sing Jewish songs."

Mrs. Murphy said, "For sure it's a blessing. I'm so glad for you Mrs.

Cohen.

Mrs. Cohen said, "And how is it with you, Mrs. Murphy?"

Mrs. Murphy said it was also wonderful at her new facility, and that

she also had a boyfriend.

Mrs. Cohen said, "Good for you! So what do you do?"

Mrs. Murphy says, "We also go up to my room after lunch and sit on the

edge of the bed. I let him touch me on top, and then I let him touch me

down below."

Mrs. Cohen said, "Yes? And then....?"

Mrs. Murphy said.."Well, since we don't know any Jewish songs, we

<deleted>."

If you sent baht (i.e., did the currency conversion Stateside) and not dollars, this could account for most of the discrepancy. Most wire forms have a block you check to indicate foreign or local currency.

i have used my Uk issued credit card in Thailand and upon checking the statement i was given slightly better than the thai ( onshore ) published TT rate of the day.

This usually is the case, at least with Visa and/or the Plus network, as they give the onshore Interbank Exchange Rate, which is several satang better than the T/T rate. Click this link for the Visa exchange rate of the day.

However, most credit card issuers pass on the 1% foreign transaction fee charged by the Plus and Cirrus networks -- and many others add an additional 2-3% to that. Thus, only with a few banks, like Capital One and Nationwide, will you escape fees and realize the Interbank Exchange Rate. (highchol, you must have one of these........?)

The above used to apply to MasterCard/Cirrus. But of late, with the onshore/offshore spread, they've apparently been using the odious offshore rates, although some have reported they've now come "onshore.' (And issuing banks have exchange rate latitude, so crummy exchange rates may lie with your bank).

When I asked the issuing bank of my MasterCard what the Cirrus exchange rate for a particular day was, their reply showed it being in the offshore category. But when I actually saw my statement, the exchange rate used for that day was just 1.5% less than the onshore Interbank Exchange Rate -- and 1% of that was my bank passing on the foreign exchange fee.

Go figure.

The two managers that I had to call over to "educate" the cashiers sure knew what was going on. This was in Home Pro and the Rimping on the middle ring road in Chiang Mai. Since then, the cashiers have known exactly what I wanted when I insisted "Thai baht only."

For the unaware, this scam will continue to ensnare. Pointing out on this forum who the scammers are might save some readers a few baht if buying potato chips -- or a bundle, should they be buying a kitchen ensemble.

their rate today for $1 is 32.64 (which is clearly the OFFSHORE rate).

Very interesting. I just called my bank (USAA Federal Savings) and asked for today's exchange rate: 32.8 for $1!! So, yes, Mastercard is back to where they were a couple months ago, i.e., gouging us with the offshore rate. (I noticed my last few charges, the last being 4/19, were about 20 satang short of the onshore Interbank Exchange Rate, even after figuring in the 1% foreign transaction fee. Close enough, I figured, but maybe this was the beginning of the backsliding.)

As my only Visa Credit card is Bank of America, and they charge another 2% on top of the 1% Visa foreign transaction fee, I guess it's back to using my Bangkok Bank Debit card, wiring enough money to amortize the fees to a satisfactory exchange rate, then monitoring the account on the Internet to insure some fraudster hasn't cleaned it out.

Oh, I asked the nice lady at USAA whether or not the exchange rate was the one received from Mastercard, or one rewickered by USAA. She assured me it was Mastercard's rate. This question was prompted by the following:

And, although Visa and Mastercard notify the card-issuing bank of the exchange rate to be applied, the bank is not obliged to adhere to it, and may use a more advantageous rate if it feels like doing so.

So, if anyone reading this is still getting onshore rates with Mastercard/Cirrus, please stand up. The nice lady at USAA will then get another phone call..........

A few months ago, Mastercard/Cirrus was using the less favorable 'offshore' rates. Now -- at least with my experience -- they're using the 'onshore' rates, as Visa/Plus has been doing all along.

if I state in THB, and they confirm "yes", it will be done at the exchange rate that has been fixed by the local bank through whom the merchant clears.

Actually, you've got this reversed. If the transaction is in Thai baht (and the absence of any home currency numbers on your slip verifies this), you'll get the exchange rate available to your credit card sponsor and its related network (Visa/Plus and Mastercard/Cirrus being the two largest). Usually, this exchange rate is favorable, being a few satang better than the telex rate (before fees).

If your credit slip has any mention of your home currency, you're a victim of Dynamic Currency Conversion, and you'll pay through the nose for this "convenience" of instant exchange rate, which is established by the merchant's servicing bank, and is often several baht less than you'd get with the credit card networks. Plus, you'll still pay (with few exceptions) the 1% foreign transaction fee charged by the credit card networks, even tho' they're not doing the conversion (this fee was once called the foreign conversion fee, but was re-titled when Dynamic Currency Conversion arrived). And if your issuing bank tacks on 1-3%, as many do, you'll, of course, still pay this.

Several threads on this are here on TV. Bottom line: Say "Thai baht only" when you hand your card to the merchant/clerk. If they don't understand, or the subsequent slip shows your home currency, call the manager. There's a button on the POS machine they can push to override the Dynamic Currency Conversion position, which more and more seems to be the default position.

I now see "oral condoms" added to the

list. Anybody any idea what these are. My interest is , of course , strictly prurient.

It's like a shower cap that you pull down and hook under your chin.

Any comments on the ethics/risks of making this claim to the embassy (claiming the entire gross amount of stock sales as INCOME)? Is there something about the wording of the embassy document that would make this a lie?

Look at what the US Embassy/Consulate is asking you:

"He/She also affirms that he/she receives an amount of US$ ______every month from the United States Govt. and/or other sources.....

Nothing about income, just cash flow. And I'm sure your heart would be found pure if your stock sales were only annually, and then pro-rated to cover the "every month" proviso.

Your covered.

Would STOCK SALES work as well?

Sure. But if documentation is asked for, show the 1099-B, not the Schedule D. This would be kosher, since Immigration is really looking for your positive cash flow*, which is reflected in the 1099. A Schedule D, with "net income" shown, would not help your case -- and I'm sure the Immigration officer would not be interested in your concepts of 'cash flow,' 'basis' and 'accounting entities.'

* I say 'positive cash flow' vice 'income' because Immigration is only interested that you can support yourself while in Thailand. Thus, either showing 800k in the bank or 65k/mo "income." But do they really mean "income" strictly speaking? I don't think so, since drawing down an investment or estate, which isn't necessarily 'income,' seems akin to drawing down an 800k Thai bank account.

But, I wouldn't want to have this discussion with Immigration. So, I hope they don't become too 'support documentation' oriented.