Thailand Requires Tourist Insurance to Ease Healthcare Strain

I've seen four or five instances recently on this site, including the Russian model, and each one of them had insurance that didn't pay out because the person concerned either went around on a motorcycle without a helmet, drunk, on drugs, or without a license. Any new law wouldn't have remedied these situations. Want to fix things? Enforce the law. Crack down on Thai companies renting scooters and motorcycles to people who landed in the country less than 24 hours ago and decided to ride around on the side of the road they're unused to, without a helmet, speeding, while drunk as a lord. Wheeeee. I'm in Thailand. No rules!!!

This is no problem with an entry health insurance tax if the Thai hospitals and authorities treat people that have issues on valid visas, after taking all this money.

Most tourists with come and go with no prblem, but those who have accidents etc. should be covered because they paid. Will everyone benefit who arrives?

The proof will be in the pubbing. Won't be holding my breath, as most hospitals are in serious debt due to the 30-baht health scheme for the locals. Could be just a scam and foreigners aren't welcome really as usual... just their money.

Thought the 300 Baht entry tax was meant to cover the medical shortfall?

3 minutes ago, bdenner said:

Thought the 300 Baht entry tax was meant to cover the medical shortfall?

That's what the government promised five or six years ago. But they clearly intend to pocket that for themselves.

All insurance companies will find a way out of not paying - if no bike license or pissed, falling over a balcony that only a midget wouldn't fall over etc

They want the 300 baht per visitor to cover if the worse should happen - to cover the cost at hospitals if treatment needed - as long as used for that don't see a problem unless it's a 2 tier price (scarasm)

5 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

Despite tourism insurance options costing as little as 1,100 baht for substantial coverage, uptake remains low.

"Coverage" is only in force if, when the incident occurs:
a) you have a licence to ride the motorcycle in the first place;
b) you're not off your dial on [insert substance here];
c) you're not breaking any other law;
d) the other person/s involved (if any) aren't Thai Hi-Sos, government officials, police officers, members of a taxi co-operative, or friends of same; or
e) the insurance company just can't be tooled assessing your claim and demand so much paperwork, which hospitals are lax in providing, so that it's cheaper to just pay out of pocket. Which many avoid and p off back home before the invoice is due.

As for ฿1,100? for "Substantial" coverage? For what period? And covering what?
A British(?) woman was denied coverage for the "extreme activity" sorry, the "increased risk activity" of riding a pony on a beach...

Then there's the original reason for requiring 800k in a bank to cover health and other contingencies so long-stay foreigners on O-A visas wouldn't be burden on the Thai system as they had a nest-egg of sorts to garnishee if required. Now, it is just dead money sitting in a bank account until you die and you need the compulsory health insurance on top of that, the premiums of which jumped 40-70% as the minimum coverage requirements changed during C19.

And now the renewed call for a 300 baht tax to cover every tourist that turns up? Really?

It would be absolutely fine if it actually meant tourists would be covered if something did go awry. But it won't. It would mean a transfer of moneys from one department to another.

AXA and World Nomads et cetera will take all the money they can, and deny coverage on the slimmest of reasons, and then the 300 baht coverage tourists pay will also be for naught as it is just a flagrant cash grab to cover the flailing tourism industry. It won't make to the hospitals or clinics, nor to the volunteer organisations we hear of so often that respond to accidents.

Do I sound bitter? Yeah, probably. But I'm actually covered and have car and motorcycle licences, which I actually sat for in person.
I'm not concerned about the morons that do Warp Factor Five on a hired Click in Phuket/Pattya/CM whilst on [insert substance here] without a helmet at 3AM and plow into a power pole.
I'm concerned about the poor sods that think they're covered, but aren't.

Only had private medical insurance on 2 occasions thru my life and that was in the mid 80's for the private hospital birth of my 2 daughters in Aus.

At 77 and been here for > 25 years have had 3 private hospital events and paid cash.

Way in front of the private health scheme "lets screw you!! IMHO, just be repaired for the unforeseen.

Most people who are seriously injured are riding without a helmet, drunk, on drugs,no licence, driving recklessly, driving a big bike....So their insurance will not pay out.

And guess what.If they buy some mandated Thai insurance, and they have a accedent for any of the above reasons...The Thai insurance will also not pay out.

51 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

Most people who are seriously injured are riding without a helmet, drunk, on drugs,no licence, driving recklessly, driving a big bike....So their insurance will not pay out.

And guess what.If they buy some mandated Thai insurance, and they have a accedent for any of the above reasons...The Thai insurance will also not pay out.

Sensible post..and very true...Catch 22 situation

There is precedent for the government to require insurers to provide cover without normal exclusions, namely the Por Ror Bor no-fault motor scheme. It's basically a modified personal accident policy with low limits and few exclusions. It was also brought into force due to hospitals complaining about unpaid medical bills. That's why it does not cover third party liability for property damage as hospitals weren't interested in that.

Anything addressing tourists' medical bills would have to provide higher limits than the Por Ror Bor. It should also be made to pay only in the event the tourist or their insurer couldn't or wouldn't. Basically the hospital would be insured for its inability to collect their fees after best efforts, not the tourist for their medical expenses. Probably the only way to fund this would be some type of tax or levy on tourists.

There's a big difference between what the hospitals bill patients and what it actually costs them to provide the care. So they're not really losing as much as it appears.

If they make it mandatory for tourists, what about those with retirement visas. That would be a hardship for many.

What I cannot understand are these unpaid hospital bills; how does that happen? At our local hospital, you pay the bill before you get your drugs, etc., no payment, no drugs.

A few years ago, I had a hip replacement done, they would be no way I could have not paid and done a runner. I was almost watched the whole time, no saying I will pay you at the end of the month.

How a tourist cannot pay, cannot speak Thai, probably does not know how things work, I do not know, don't they keep the patient's passport, if it is available, or some sort of ID.

56 minutes ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

There is precedent for the government to require insurers to provide cover without normal exclusions, namely the Por Ror Bor no-fault motor scheme. It's basically a modified personal accident policy with low limits and few exclusions. It was also brought into force due to hospitals complaining about unpaid medical bills. That's why it does not cover third party liability for property damage as hospitals weren't interested in that.

Anything addressing tourists' medical bills would have to provide higher limits than the Por Ror Bor. It should also be made to pay only in the event the tourist or their insurer couldn't or wouldn't. Basically the hospital would be insured for its inability to collect their fees after best efforts, not the tourist for their medical expenses. Probably the only way to fund this would be some type of tax or levy on tourists.

As far as I know, the Por Ror Bor will pay up to 40,000 baht; after that it is up to you, a Thai will get the 30-baht scheme.

My numbers are unverified but ~90% of sensible and responsible tourist will be taxed to cover for the ~10% that are clueless idiots?

Sounds fair to me, as long as those that don't have accident insurance are required to wear a "Do not resuscitate" bracelet or toe tag.

Hard to argue against......although one of the biggest costs is people who have never ridden a motorbike being allowed to hire motorbikes.....HELLO

5 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

My numbers are unverified but ~90% of sensible and responsible tourist will be taxed to cover for the ~10% that are clueless idiots?

Sounds fair to me.

That's insurance. The sensible ones pay for the ones smoking, obese, on drinking binges, etc.

2 minutes ago, kickstart said:

As far as I know, the Por Ror Bor will pay up to 40,000 baht; after that it is up to you, a Thai will get the 30-baht scheme.

Por Ror Bor pays 30,000 baht in medical expenses regardless of fault. If the injured party is not at fault, it goes up to a limit of 80,000 baht.

A scheme to address tourists' unpaid medical bills would have to have much higher limits.

2 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

Hard to argue against......although one of the biggest costs is people who have never ridden a motorbike being allowed to hire motorbikes.....HELLO

That's a law enforcement issue and as long as these lucrative motorcycle rental shops are either owned by, or paying an operating fee to the police, nothing will change. Ever.

Just now, NanLaew said:

That's a law enforcement issue and as long as these lucrative motorcycle rental shops are either owned by, or paying an operating fee to the police, nothing will change. Ever.

Agree 100%......anything that demands enforcement (by the BiB) is doomed

1 hour ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

There is precedent for the government to require insurers to provide cover without normal exclusions, namely the Por Ror Bor no-fault motor scheme. It's basically a modified personal accident policy with low limits and few exclusions. It was also brought into force due to hospitals complaining about unpaid medical bills. That's why it does not cover third party liability for property damage as hospitals weren't interested in that.

Anything addressing tourists' medical bills would have to provide higher limits than the Por Ror Bor. It should also be made to pay only in the event the tourist or their insurer couldn't or wouldn't. Basically the hospital would be insured for its inability to collect their fees after best efforts, not the tourist for their medical expenses. Probably the only way to fund this would be some type of tax or levy on tourists.

Agree with you in principle. This part however

"It should also be made to pay only in the event the tourist or their insurer couldn't or wouldn't. "

Would lead to coverage by external companies being denied since there's coverage already. Of course the official reason will be a different one.

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Agree with you in principle. This part however

"It should also be made to pay only in the event the tourist or their insurer couldn't or wouldn't. "

Would lead to coverage by external companies being denied since there's coverage already. Of course the official reason will be a different one.

It could be modeled along the lines of other financial lines insurance products that address financial losses. The hospitals would be insured for their uncollectible receivables from tourists. The tourists themselves would not be insured.

4 hours ago, John Drake said:

I've seen four or five instances recently on this site, including the Russian model, and each one of them had insurance that didn't pay out because the person concerned either went around on a motorcycle without a helmet, drunk, on drugs, or without a license. Any new law wouldn't have remedied these situations. Want to fix things? Enforce the law. Crack down on Thai companies renting scooters and motorcycles to people who landed in the country less than 24 hours ago and decided to ride around on the side of the road they're unused to, without a helmet, speeding, while drunk as a lord. Wheeeee. I'm in Thailand. No rules!!!

Just another way to extract money from you.

Someone must sit thinking of ways to extract cash from tourists, make them to pay Visa agents done, duel pricing Done , tourist tax done , mmm insurence tax maybe, what next ?

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

That's insurance. The sensible ones pay for the ones smoking, obese, on drinking binges, etc.

Thank you.

There is no 'short fall'....

Here of the numbers - I posted this in the 'Russian Model' thread...

The medical cost burden of tourists to Thailand in 2024 was 2.24 Billion Baht.

That is mostly uninsured migrants (migrant labour ) - the best 'estimate' of the Medical burden cost of 'genuine tourists' is 500 Million Baht.

Also of note (as a comparison).

Thailands income from tourism in total is 1.5 Trillion Baht.

Thailands income from Medical tourism and 'wellness' is 679 Billion Baht

Thailands income from Medical Tourism is 123 Billion Baht.

Which ever way we look at the optics - 500 Million Baht medical cost burden of tourists is a drop in the ocean...

The medical cost burden of unpaid tourist bills: 0.033% of total tourist income.

The medical cost burden of unpaid tourist bills: 0.074% of total income from medical tourism and wellness.

The medical cost burden of unpaid tourist bills: 0.41% of total income from medical tourism.

Thailand had 32.9 Million International Visitors in 2025.

x 300 baht per entry - would be: 9.87 Billion Baht.

The medical cost burden of unpaid tourist bills would be 5.1% of possible income from a '300 baht tourist tax scheme' / Insurance Scheme.

Someone is looking at that extra 95% and rubbing their hands !!

That said - its still good optics - tie the insurance to the TDAC - Feed the money into the Thai Healthcare system.

Emergency care at any public hospitals - no matter the cause or reason.

Private hospitals for serious cases - up to 72 hrs (as is the current law) and moved to a public hospital when safe to do so.

Keep the optics positive - Thailand looks after foreigners and has set up a system to protect them.

But, Thailand should 'also' protect foreigners and everyone else, by enforcing existing laws.

Enforce helmet laws, enforce license laws, enforce rental companies only renting out to licensed riders.

Enforce DUI laws on Thai's and Foreginers.

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Agree with you in principle. This part however

"It should also be made to pay only in the event the tourist or their insurer couldn't or wouldn't. "

Would lead to coverage by external companies being denied since there's coverage already. Of course the official reason will be a different one.

It doesn't actually need to be an insurance... It simply needs to be an 'agreement' that foreigners get full treatment in Thai hospitals - and that cost difference is covered by the 300 baht entry tax.

Given the current burden of actual 'genuine' tourist unpaid bills - thats 5.1% of total income from a potential 300 Baht per international tourist.

The numbers probably vary depending on source - however, the bigger picture conisistently shows that the medical cost burden of tourism is tiny compared to the income of overall tourism, and tiny compared to the cost of medical tourism to Thailand.

A 'tax' is not actually needed - but if it were put into action Thailand 'could' turn it into a win.

Tie that same 'tax' into an addition for non-Immigrant B visa's etc - offer full medical cover for residents at Thai prices (for a health insurance surcharge included in the Visa / Extension fee's).

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

If they make it mandatory for tourists, what about those with retirement visas. That would be a hardship for many.

Worth remembering that the incumbent PM was health minister at the time this was implemented on the excellent Non O-A retirement visa back in 2019. Wouldn't be surprised to see more of the same.

Feels a bit like wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Thailand depends heavily on tourism, yet every few months there’s another proposal that seems designed to make visiting more complicated or less appealing.

You can’t keep saying “we need more tourists” while simultaneously throwing up new hurdles.

And if the argument is that foreign visitors are straining the healthcare system, then it’s only fair to ask the obvious question: how many Thais themselves are unable to pay for treatment after accidents or emergencies?

That’s a huge issue too, but it rarely gets the same attention. If the real problem is underfunded hospitals, then singling out tourists feels more like a convenient scapegoat than a real solution.

3 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Worth remembering that the incumbent PM was health minister at the time this was implemented on the excellent Non O-A retirement visa back in 2019. Wouldn't be surprised to see more of the same.

With so many expats of age too old for Thai Insurance, it would be hard to implement.