thaibreaker

.

No it can't. A visa based on retirement has specific requirements, the 800k in bank or the 65k income method. No other visas refer to retirement visa, by the definition of Thai Immigration. Other visas have different names. Of course you can retire on a LTR visa, on a privilege visa or such, but those are not by definition a retirement visa. Sorry, DrJack, didn't see your post before posting mine..

Wouldn't be surprised if he did. But not for assaulting me.

I had my balls and the whole chaluba grabbed by a ladyboy once, just walking along the street in Pattaya. It caught me completely off guard. It obviously happens.

"Police can do nothing to me".. Lol. I'll guess you choked on that one.

Exactly! Even the Immigration officers use this term themselves. The 90 days Non O visa based on retirement is certainly a visa, that is undeniable.

So what do you call a 90 days Non Imm. O visa, based on retirement? That is certainly a visa, which is based on retirement. The normal and logical term for that is a retirement visa. Everyone uses that term, even visa agents and immigration. The extensions are not a visa (those are permissions to stay), but your first 90 days Non O, definitely is.

To the OPs original question, as far as I know, one can apply for an extension, which subsequently will be denied. But that will give 7 days to leave the country (costs 1900 baht). I know one can do this from a visa exemption, from which one already have extended once, and from a tourist visa, with the same procedure. I can't see why doing it from a 12 months extension based on retirement, would be any different. Thoughts? Of course, 7 days is not what the OP had in mind, but just saying there might be a possibility if anyone needs 7 more days to leave.

That goes for Revolut as well. They also have a savings account you can transfer money to, done in a second, and you can't withdraw that with any card before you transfer it back to your main account. Without any limits. In addition to putting a temporary lock on any card of course, another option both Wise and Revolut have.

You won't be "put in one or any bracket". You will have to pay tax from several brackets if you exceed a certain threshold. Thai tax system is progressive in the way that if you end up paying tax from 1 million baht, you will only pay 20% tax of the amount between 750k to a million. Between 500k to 750k, you will still pay 15%, 300k to 500k you will pay 10%, and so on. You'll probably end up paying less than 10% of the total sum, after deductions. Been there, done that.

Chonburi Immigration stated 2 days ago at Pattaya Mail that there are no plans to link any visa or visa extension to any tax IDs, or TINs. So just forget that. Won't happen.

They'll send it for free (several cards) with DHL if you sign up on one of their plans. I use Metal Plan, 12 pounds a month, which includes travel insurance and a few other insurances as well, free NordVPN, higher limits and much more. The NordVPN alone is worth it for me.

I see some people say they won't, but I very much doubt that. Revolut has sent 3 cards the last 2 years to my temporary address in Indonesia, as a Norwegian, with DHL (took 3 days). So I don't understand sending them to Thailand would be any different. I'm pretty sure you can. The fee depends on your level of program (I use Metal Plan, the shipment is totally free), and with DHL it takes 3 days from ordering, until it's at your doorstep. That's pretty darn fast.

Why wouldn't they? Is that in their FAQ? I signed up with Revolut from Indonesia years ago. Got my three total cards sent to my temporary address there by DHL, free of any charge (Metal Plan, which includes travel insurance, free NordVPN etc.). All as a Norwegian citizen. Have anyone tried to open an account while in Thailand? Maybe trying VPN?

In principle I agree. It's not the club's responsibility to be the judge before he is even charged. But you are spot on when you suggest he should have been sold, at least last summer when they had the chance. I've been a huge fan of this club since '71, and that will never change. Most of his alleged actions took place abroad as well, but those can't be brought up in a UK court as far as I know. Had it been a one time thing, I wouldn't be judging, but we have so much evidence here only in the UK, multiple cases, the recording evidence and more, so its hard to see that he would have a strong case. If he is aquitted in the end, it might be because they weren't able to charge him for what happened abroad. And that should tell us something. I've always loved the player, an extremely important player for the club, and I suspect that is the reason he still plays.