Mattd

4 minutes ago, imjmn said:

It would be interesting to know which airline he was travelling on and if it was a direct flight or via a hub?

Quote

Instead, he has to fly on the Ukrainian airline back to Ukraine and CONNECT to the USA through Kiev.

This from the OP, so it must have been with Ukraine International Airlines.

20 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

According to the OP, his friend departed for Ukraine on a TV, having already previously spent the max 90 days in 180 days in the Ukraine.

OK, I must have missed the bit where the OP confirmed that his friend had stayed for 90 days in the 180 days, I was under the impression that he had overstayed by one day, although you are correct in that the airline did not check thoroughly enough, as he did have a stamp for this overstay in his passport.

Checking the Ukrainian MFA website, it appears that short term visas are not issued to US citizens?

There are three types of visas:

9 minutes ago, lkv said:

How would the personal income tax be calculated on 200K per month out of interest? Or what's the final value?

Total tax owed on 2,400,000 income per year would be 455,300 THB based on the same assumption, single person, no kids etc.

CORRECTION: it would be 434,300 THB per year, first time I forgot to increase the allowances etc. to the new rates.

58 minutes ago, lkv said:

I don't think so. Tax on 70K at 20% is 14K per month, so 168K per year.

Just to be correct, the income tax on 70,000 THB per month for a single person would be 53,150 THB per year.

The first 169,000 THB is deducted for personal allowance, expense & social security payments, the next 150,000 THB is tax free, then scaling up from initially 5% to a max. rate of 15%. 

21 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

The airline has to return him at their cost in these situations.

 

I am not questioning this, however, it does interest me as to why the airline is liable if the passenger has a valid passport, can enter on visa exempt, or has a valid visa and outwardly there is no known reason for the Ukrainian immigration to refuse entry?

I can understand it if the airline had not carried out proper due diligence in checking if a passenger is eligible to enter, but in cases like this, I would have thought that the airlines would have this covered in the T&C's for carriage.

His detention is probably something to do with his status here, i.e. in transit, rather than in the country, it might be some rule that the Thai immigration implement in these cases, I still think that they would have the discretion to allow him to book a flight and let him go on it, even if it meant him being escorted through immigration etc.

At the end of the day there isn't that much difference in sending him back on a flight to Ukraine.

Certainly serves as a warning to us all if ever in the same situation, as going back to your home country would mean that they could not refuse entry.

6 minutes ago, Ban Phe Dezza said:

I have 800K Baht at Present will not be available when renewal is due, My pension will not reach required 65k

 

Can you not combine the two, or will the 800k be completely gone?

14 hours ago, cnx355 said:

I remember it was during  Mr. Taksin first or second mandate that one of his Minister decided to force the Malls to open at 11h00.  It was to save electricity cost and the Minister said to help the employees have shortest working hour.

I have lived here for close to 30 years and the big malls (at that time most were in BKK apart from Royal Garden in it's infancy) have never really opened before 10am at the earliest, certainly there was no 'rule' made to force them, it is all to do with market forces / closing times, if they were to open earlier then it would probably either mean closing earlier, or another shift of workers and therefore cost, that is probably just not worth it, basically it is a trade off, open early close early or open late close late.

People quote Big C extra as an example of open early, which is true, it is a supermarket, if you observe 90% of the shops / stalls that are within the building, most are rarely open before 10am.

There is a big advantage in someways to closing later, as the office hour workers can actually go shopping, unlike places like the UK, where the usual late night (8pm!!) is on a Thursday, otherwise join the mobs at the weekends.

I can't see Thailand changing their ways for many a decade to come.

7 minutes ago, thecolonel said:

Sorry to be dim, but how does one tell that that's a Tourist exempt entry and not a proper Visa ?

Number of days that are allowed to stay, i.e. 30 on a VE

6 minutes ago, jerojero said:

A 10% increase in visitors from SAfrica is not an obsession. Sheesh!

Probably all from Cape Town and coming for a shower.............

1 hour ago, webfact said:

She says that during an argument last year, Rujira violently attacked her son slashing him across the face, leaving a scar from the top of his forehead to the bottom of his nose.

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Rujira would often tell Amaury how her Italian husband would beat and put cigarettes out on her, although there is no way of substantiating the claims.

Doesn't add up, she (though I'm not sure of this...) can slash a 34 year old man with a knife (I assume) and yet a 61 year old man would beat her.......... hmmmm

36 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

4: in countries with which Australia participates in the Regional Movement Alert System

Regional Movement Alert System

1. The country specific information will be removed from the list of persons to whom information may be disclosed for the purposes of implementing the Regional Movement Alert System (RMAS) with all foreign border agencies.

The purpose of these amendments is to support the operation of RMAS between Australia and participating countries; an APEC counter-terrorism initiative designed to strengthen the capacity of participating economies to detect lost, stolen and invalid (including counterfeit) travel documents.

Amending the Determination in the manner proposed will enable Australia to enter into new agreements with APEC members as they seek to join without the need to amend the Determination on each occasion to provide for disclosure to the particular new participant. RMAS does not involve countries directly accessing or transferring each other’s passport data. Data is not exchanged. Through the RMAS electronic broker system, passengers’ passport data is verified prior to entry to a participant country. The response is limited to a “Y” for a valid passport or a “N” for an invalid passport. The US, Philippines and New Zealand are already participants in the scheme. This is reflected in the current Determination.

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection has been working for some time to implement RMAS with Thailand.

Source: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2014L01194/0c3db335-7496-478e-be8d-2cb3eed68d90

See also: https://www.icao.int/Meetings/TAG-MRTD/Documents/Tag-Mrtd-18/TagMrtd18_ip05.pdf

This appears to work in conjunction with APIS, an enhancement if you like.

It is seemingly intended for counter terrorism.

11 hours ago, wgdanson said:

Two 7 hour flights gives you 2 x 3 hours kip. Direct gives you at least 7. Last time I went thru Abu Dhabi on Etihad, we had to go thru security check between flights, and prove we were MAN CITY supporters!

This is all down to personal preference, I've been lucky over the past 15 odd years, as all of my UK flights were on business class, even then the chances of me getting 3 hours sleep are virtually none, been flying most of my working life, yet still never managed the fine art of getting a good sleep on a plane.

AUH airport is not really different to any other transit hub, don't know of many that you do not go through security checks between flights, flown EY loads of times, luckily have yet to prove I'm a Man City supporter, thank god!

11 hours ago, wgdanson said:

You mean FORTUNATELY

Not in the context of the OP, i.e. flying QR out of UTP!

4 minutes ago, ZeeshanY said:

Second, taxes on Non-B are lesser than Non-O as my HR explained. Is it true?

Your personal income tax liability will be exactly the same, no matter what visa or extension of stay you have.

The biggest advantage of being on a non o or extension of stay based on marriage is if you were to ever lose your job, then you can remain in Thailand, with an extension of stay based on working, then the permission to stay is cancelled on the day that the work permit is cancelled and you would have to leave the country and start the whole visa / extension process again.

I'm sure that ubonjoe will reply regarding where you can go to obtain a single entry non b visa, last I heard this was available in Penang for sure, although you will need all of the accompanying documentation from your company, this would apply no matter where you were to make the application.

33 minutes ago, ZeeshanY said:

Now, as you said ''leave the country to apply for new visa''

As Ubonjoe has stated, you can legally work whilst remaining on your current extension of stay based on marriage, you do not have to change this to a non b unless you really want to.

15 hours ago, steve187 said:

would also depend on your final destination in the UK

Absolutely, when I go to visit the UK, then it is to Manchester, so a direct flight to LHR doesn't appeal or work that well, much rather fly via DOH, AUH or DXB to MAN, breaks a long flight in to two medium ones and the connections times are usually OK.

Unfortunately the location of my house means that there isn't a huge difference in time to travel either UTP or BKK.

4 minutes ago, Faeton said:

 

Do them have same no. or different ? It's says some where in passport about another one ?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Completely different numbers and no mention in either one of the other.

I traveled for years using two British passports whilst working offshore, entered Thailand using one or the other over the years, I was asked more than once if I was using another passport, agreed it wasn't every time, but they were certainly aware of me holding 2 valid passports.

4 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

Sorry but that is incorrect.

My brother worked at a dance hall called "The Beach House" in Sydney back in 1962 and he was only 18. There was some trouble there one night and he told someone he was a police officer to try to stop things and someone reported him to the police and he was arrested and charged with impersonation and it cost him 20 pound fine in court and when he went for his security license in 2000 he had to supply a police check and it was listed on that. So all convictions remain on the police data bank.

This from the AFP website regarding spent convictions.

Convictions covered

The scheme applies to spent convictions where a waiting period has passed and the individual in question has not re-offended.
The following conditions apply to convictions for a Commonwealth, Territory, State or foreign offence:

• it has been 10 years from the date of the conviction (or 5 years for juvenile offenders)
• the individual was not sentenced to imprisonment for more than 30 months
• the individual has not re-offended during the 10 year (5 years for juvenile offenders) waiting period
• a statutory or regulatory exclusion does not apply

The scheme also covers convictions that have been set aside or pardoned under Part VIIC of the Crimes Act 1914. An individual whose conviction is protected does not have to disclose the conviction to any person, including a Commonwealth authority.

Exclusions

There are some exceptions which require you to disclose a spent or protected conviction.

The Act includes specific exclusions for some positions of employment. The Attorney-General has also granted exclusions from the scheme for several categories of employment.

This means that people applying for such positions must declare all convictions, or any convictions for specific offences, as required for the specific position.

Details of exclusions should be provided to you by the employing organisation before your consent is sought to obtain a criminal history check.

8 hours ago, Zam said:

Hello Seniors,

 

For Thai citizenship is singing the national anthem a prerequisite to approval.

 

I see that if one can speak and understand Thai well this should not have any impact right???

 

Finally does it require 5 years post PR to apply or can we do this earlier.

 

Advise much appreciated.

 

 

Everything is contained within to answer your questions.

5 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

Nothing very new or revealing in these documents.

What did interest me was the fact that this agreement is not that old and the way that the information can or cannot be used.