JimGant

Oh, yawn. Five star tourists will only look at the price of their five star hotel room, compared to a comparable room in, say, Bali. They won't care, or even know, that a local can get the room at a discount. And, of course, if money is not a problem, they won't even care if hotels in Bali are cheaper -- if the over all ambience in Thailand is superior. No, five star hotel owners know their favorite customers -- and what the market can charge. If somehow this price is too high for the unwashed farang backpacker, ah, too bad. Their kind would not be appreciated in the pristine hallways of these well-appointed hotels, so thwarting their business is a plus in their business plan. Ok, a little harsh. But the bottom line is: Hotels can, and should, charge what the market will bear (at least those hotels in which I own stock). The tourist researching vacation spots doesn't care, or know, that his price may be higher due to citizenship -- he only looks at, is the price reasonable and competitive. And this is not just for five star tourists -- the lesser starred tourists can also assess the competitiveness of where they can stay. And Thailand, even with local discounts, will remain competitive -- very much so, especially with the US$ at 36.2. No, the apparent whiners on this thread are retirees here, many, apparently, not overly affluent. But, the one thing about being retired is being flexible with vacation plans. And hotels defninitely will have great deals, if they know the periods of less occupancy. So, wheel and deal. Meanwhile, get over the fact that the government is sending a bone to its citizens. Unusual, I know -- ' cause most of the folks on this forum only complain about how the coup government scr...s. its citizens.

One of them. Another is having FICA taxes on all income, not just wages. Thus, cap gains, rents, dividends etc would get a FICA hit. But since these elements of income aren't large with the poor, but with the rich, the poor will be little affected. But, their FICA rate can be reduced due to the added revenue from the rich. And, better yet, just get rid of the separate FICA line item and fund SS payments strictly from the general revenue pot. Right now the FICA fund, funded for years with over collection of FICA taxes (and being issued IOU's), is finally being drawn down as outlays exceed FICA tax collections. Thus, all those years of the Treasury borrowing the excess collections from the FICA fund, to help pay for aircraft carriers and such, has finally reversed and SS benefit payments are now having to use some of those IOU's to make full payment to beneficiaries. Come 2032, or whenever, when the IOU's run out, the Treasury and its general tax collections will have to pay in full to beneficiaries -- assuming politics doesn't make the FICA fund into something of value, and not just a holder of Treasury IOU's and thus an accounting gimmick, not something of value (like if it held gold or foreign government notes). So another necessary change is means testing. Yes, this will make SS moreso a welfare system, not a paid-into pension entitlement of sorts. But already the least well off SS beneificaries have a much higher return on those FICA taxes they've paid, than do the richer folks. So, already it's a welfare system. So why not make it moreso....? My Australian neighbor is comfortable, but I wouldn't say rich. However, he gets no Australian equivalent of our SS, as his income and assets are means tested -- and he's deemed not needy. And, as I understand it, there is no separate line item in Australia for taxes collected toward eventual SS equivalents. Thus, he can't scream, "But I paid into this fund!" So, maybe the US not having a separate FICA line would mute the right wing screams of "entitlement." Anyway, we got close in 2013, with Simpson-Bowles -- back when bipartisanship existed -- to implementing both raised tax caps on FICA taxes and means testing. But of course, Congress being self serving, ignored it. Certainly don't see any similar bipartisanship re SS reforms in any near, or far, future.

What I'll miss is all those sparkling dark Asian eyes of Thai ladies, highlighted by wearing a mask. Just hope I'm not dissappointed when those masks come off....and the full face beauty is revealed -- or NOT!

Yeah, but the TGIA mafia would be salivating ... unless they realize such a large influx would bring considerable unwanted attention on their "Thai only" insurance scam.

Just another serendipidy for having moved to Thailand. That the papists are now in charge of the Supreme Court, now abortion abolished, next, birth control. Is America returning to those Middle Ages it cut loose in 1776? Really sad. But, no longer my problem. I spent 20 years in the US military to defend a way of life I once believed in. The last 5 years in America have made a mockery of a once proud nation.

Ah, semantics. If the visa has not expired when you enter Thailand, you get stamped in with a "permission of stay" at your entry point. If your visa has expired, and you're reaching the end of your last permission/extension of stay, then subsequent applications for stay are presented to your local Immigration office, where they'll issue an "extension of stay." Which, in some circles, including embassies and Immigration, such an extension is euphemistically called a "visa extension." Clear?

And what did that get him? Exemption from the 800k in the bank? And/or exemption from the TGIA insurance requirement?

A week or so ago there was a post on this forum by one of our veteran and sharp posters, NancyL. She mentioned that her husband was going to do a border bounce to come back, without a reentry permit, and get stamped in with a visa exempt entry. Then get an in-country Non Imm O visa, and then get his retirement extension without having the onerous insurance requirement due to his historical OA visa. But, he was told that Chiang Mai Immigration would see through this scheme and thus still require insurance. WOW. Don't know who told him this info (NancyL's postings indicate she and her husband use a facilitating agent), but I'm surprised I have not heard any follow on banter from this posting. Anyway, maybe just a quirk -- or maybe the insurance mafia is seeing revenues dry up with conversions from OA to O visas..... Obviously, this would be big news if true, and if not just in Chiang Mai. Keep your eyes peeled.

When does your current policy expire -- presumably on the date your current extension of stay expires. If this is BEFORE Sept 1st, then my understanding is you should still be under the old rules, namely, the 40/400k policy requirement. But maybe, since your new policy, and your new extension of stay, will exend well past Sept 1, 2022 -- maybe LMG is of the understanding that Immigration requires the new 3.5 million coverage rules. And you're saying, I believe, that LMG issued you the new 3.5M policy, even tho' your current policy, and your current extension of stay, don't exceed Sept 1, 2022. I recently contacted LMG about my renewal of OA policy, which expires Sept 12, 2022, when also does my current extension of stay. I went over all the above concerns, but they just said I can renew my policy 60 days prior to expiration, meaning July13th, well before the Sept 1st new rules. No definitive word on, would my renewal be under the old rules (since it takes place before Sept 1st), or the new, 3.5M rules, since the policy and extension renewal occur past Sept 1st. Lee4Life's response should give me clarity.

LMG OA policies are supposedly entered into a data base available to Immigration. This data base is limited to those 12 (or is it 13?) companies belonging to the TGIA. Thus, there shouldn't be any question about authenticity. Never heard of Sri Racha -- have computers been introduced yet into this neck of the woods?

I used the term "visa extension" because this is a term, even used by the US Embassy, to denote that Immigration has extended your permission of stay. Yes, the term is technically not correct -- you can't extend a visa, as it has an expiration date certain, with no renewals allowed. But its wording does denote what's going on, namely, you're being allowed to remain in country longer than your original entry permission. Anyway, my point is that the airline will see that you've got a permission of stay, possibly as much as 11+ months into the future, stamped into your passport. This will interpreted as a visa extension, even tho' your visa has expired. My other point -- possibly a reach -- is that the airline clerk will not be aware that you need a reentry permit to maintain the validity of this "visa extension." Airlines have guidance from ICAO; don't know what they say about reentry permits and trips to Thailand.....

Unless you're flying Thai International, it's doubtful the airline understands that your "visa extension" (i.e., your current extension of stay) will lose its one year validity upon re-entering Thailand without a re-entry permit. But, if Thai immigration wants to see an onward ticket, this observation about airline scrutiny is just a curiosity, but moot.

Yeah, they now allow you to pay your passport renewal fee by establishing an account with Pay.Gov, then directing a direct debit from your US bank account, debit or credit card, PayPal, Amazon -- maybe some others. I assume this works with no problems -- you just have to wait for the email receipt, which you include in your renewal application package. This would be a positive step forward if it precluded having to go to your bank for a bank draft...... ..... but it doesn't. You still have to go to your bank and get a 100 baht bank draft to pay for the return postage of your new passport. Fortunately, you can still get the second bank draft to pay for your new passport (currently, 4550 baht) while you're there -- i.e, take an additional minute to get this second bank draft. Pay. gov may be easy peasy. But why go a second payment avenue when a single one still works just fine. Anyway, minor point, but one I stumbled on when I recently renewed my wife's US passport by mail. Oh, this renew by mail (took me 17 days, over a long weekend a year ago) is about as efficient a government program as you can find. They even ensure you've crossed all the t's and dotted the i's-- by having you include in your renewal package a signed and dated checklist to, hopefully, preclude any stupid mistakes. And, reading another thread, where the Brits are having to wait three or more months for renewed passports, makes you proud that the US, in the 1700's, kicked b--- in having redcoat authority removed back overseas. ????

My five year license will expire next year, the year I turn 80. My driving skills have deteriorated, so I no longer drive at night. And my day time drives are one or two a week, most just in the local moo baan. And when I have doctor or dental appointment, I hire a neighbor to drive me, or drive the wife, (who no longer drives). And in my 20 years here, I've never had to show my drivers' license to anyone (what are other's experiences?). So, why renew a license that seemingly has no utility? The car's insurance, which is 15000 baht for a three year old car (top of the line insurance), is in the wife's name (as is the car). Would I (actually, the wife) be denied a claim with an expired license? And, since I can easily self insure my driving, since liabilities in Thailand aren't the horror stories in the States, why continue paying 15000 baht/yr for protection I can easily cover myself? Anyway, I'm leaning on not renewing my drivers' license. Good idea or bad? Thanx.