darrendsd Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 1 minute ago, balo said: True , officials in different provinces will come up with different answers , just like TM31 are treated differently from city to city . And that's the big problem in Thailand , that's why we need to hear it from the big boss himself, in the labor dep, whoever that is , the one responsible for labor laws in Thailand must come forward and be clear. Or just rewrite the laws so there will be no confusion. The Big Boss gives instructions to regional offices, if he felt that DN's need WP regional offices would have been made aware of this 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moontang Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 2 minutes ago, balo said: True , officials in different provinces will come up with different answers , just like TM31 are treated differently from city to city . And that's the big problem in Thailand , that's why we need to hear it from the big boss himself, in the labor dep, whoever that is , the one responsible for labor laws in Thailand must come forward and be clear. Or just rewrite the laws so there will be no confusion. yep, some offices even call it a TM30.....I have had three bad bank letters over the years here. Real estate agent caught one, the second I had to go back to the bank from Immigration, and the third, I sent the seller to get the letter pre-approved, based on my experience with the others...yep, they botched it. Need to change it. Surprise, surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elviajero Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 28 minutes ago, balo said: 30 minutes ago, Loaded said: sounds great but you haven't got the balls If there is someone at the labor dep who actually speaks good English and understand what a digital nomad is , we can have a conversation , if not it would be a waste of time Next time I’m in the country I’ll happlily go with you as a translator. It will be a waste of time because the labour dept aren’t interested in foreign online workers that aren’t working for a Thai employer. As far as I’m told any case for prosecution would have to be brought by immigration. It is the immigration law that you are breaking by working (engaging in an occupation) online without permission. Edited June 1, 2018 by elviajero 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackdd Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 1 hour ago, LivinLOS said: Because buying and selling stocks isnt work according to the act. Its specifically excluded. Can you post a link specify where exactly it says so? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elviajero Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 42 minutes ago, darrendsd said: It's a outdated law that means even Immigration are unsure if working online is legal or not When we start seeing convictions of people working online you can come back and say you were right, you may or may not be right, I have no idea Until then ..... You aren’t going to convictions because immigration aren’t interested in online workers. Again, this tolerance does not change the written law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrendsd Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, elviajero said: You aren’t going to convictions because immigration aren’t interested in online workers. Again, this tolerance does not change the written law. Have you actually read the article I have posted? The one with officials in CM, if not I suggest you read it Edited June 1, 2018 by darrendsd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernRyland Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 I told an IO officer in Chiang Mai immigration a couple months ago that I have an online business and I'm in Thailand so often on TV's because I live most the year here. She didn't care and gave me my 30 day extension. Even if working online is technically illegal it would be silly for the authorities to waste their already limited resources deporting people who are, at the end of the day, just bringing in foreign investment to Thailand. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elviajero Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 33 minutes ago, darrendsd said: Have you actually read the article I have posted? The one with officials in CM, if not I suggest you read it Not fully yet, but the conclusion pretty much sums up what I have been telling you. CONCLUSIONS Most cases of Digital Nomads who stay in Thailand for a long time (say several months instead of several weeks) with the purpose of "work" can officiallly be viewed as doing work by authorities. This means, they actually need a work permit and are acting illegally if they work without a work permit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrendsd Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) And it sums up what I have been telling you, no one knows for sure If you work illegally for one day or one year it doesn't matter, you are working illegally The officials say if more than a few weeks, so 2, 3, 4 weeks? At which point do they say it's to long? It's very clear that even officials are unsure, they say yes you can work but only for so long? in which other job in Thailand are you allowed to do that? None that I can think of If the officials are unsure how can you be? You can't Edited June 1, 2018 by darrendsd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 1 hour ago, elviajero said: As far as I’m told any case for prosecution would have to be brought by immigration. It is the immigration law that you are breaking by working (engaging in an occupation) online without permission. Every post of yours shows just how clueless you are. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenny2017 Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 Moving to Thailand, working online - what do I do? Selling soft and hardware on eBay. I'll start in a few days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elviajero Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, darrendsd said: And it sums up what I have been telling you, no one knows for sure LOL!!!! No it doesn't. It confirms that DN work is illegal which is what I've been telling you. You quote an article in which the writer concludes by saying DN work is illegal and you still dispute it. Unbelievable! 5 hours ago, darrendsd said: If you work illegally for one day or one year it doesn't matter, you are working illegally Yes. So the only thing in dispute is at what point immigration or the labour department would consider prosecuting illegal work, which as we know by their inaction is, so far, never. 5 hours ago, darrendsd said: The officials say if more than a few weeks, so 2, 3, 4 weeks? At which point do they say it's to long? As I have been telling you for a long time. The authorities have to allow genuine typical tourists the right to keep up with their work whilst on holiday and need to afford the same rights to DN's. That is why this person is prevaricating. DN's are supposed to nomadic surely, passing through, not living long term. What this article confirms is, again what I have been telling you, that they are treating DN's as short term tourists and they are happy for them to keep up with their business like genuine/typical tourist. But if they hang around too long they could face prosecution. 5 hours ago, darrendsd said: It's very clear that even officials are unsure, they say yes you can work but only for so long? in which other job in Thailand are you allowed to do that? None that I can think of If the officials are unsure how can you be? You can't They are sure that it is illegal. What they are not clear on is at what point they would consider prosecution. Or should I clarify by saying this one representative from one labour office is sure. I am clear from my own research, the writer of the article you quote is clear, and the labour office representative is clear that it's illegal otherwise he couldn't consider any prosecutions. AND its spelt out in the immigration act. You wanted proof of my claims and you have provided most of it yourself. Well done. Edited June 1, 2018 by elviajero 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elviajero Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 4 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said: Every post of yours shows just how clueless you are. ? If I'm clueless, what on earth does that make you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted June 1, 2018 Share Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 8 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said: <snip>Now we know that makes you angry... really angry.... but hey, get over it. You're no one and matter not a jot. <snip2> I don't understand why some of you guys keep pointing the the UbonRat hotel scene where Labour folks said that the Chinese broke no Labour Laws. Of course they broke no Labour laws. They had only been there for a couple of weeks when the Labour folks showed up. Labour and Immigration have always said that a tourist (as in genuine tourist) to Thailand can keep in tabs with the home office and do other business-like things for the duration of their short touristy time in Thailand. And the article said that, at the end of their current visa, all the Chinese will go home or, as one report put it, be 'repatriated'. So what has that got to do with someone long-time in Thailand? Edited June 1, 2018 by JLCrab 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrendsd Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 3 hours ago, elviajero said: LOL!!!! No it doesn't. It confirms that DN work is illegal which is what I've been telling you. You quote an article in which the writer concludes by saying DN work is illegal and you still dispute it. Unbelievable! Yes. So the only thing in dispute is at what point immigration or the labour department would consider prosecuting illegal work, which as we know by their inaction is, so far, never. As I have been telling you for a long time. The authorities have to allow genuine typical tourists the right to keep up with their work whilst on holiday and need to afford the same rights to DN's. That is why this person is prevaricating. DN's are supposed to nomadic surely, passing through, not living long term. What this article confirms is, again what I have been telling you, that they are treating DN's as short term tourists and they are happy for them to keep up with their business like genuine/typical tourist. But if they hang around too long they could face prosecution. They are sure that it is illegal. What they are not clear on is at what point they would consider prosecution. Or should I clarify by saying this one representative from one labour office is sure. I am clear from my own research, the writer of the article you quote is clear, and the labour office representative is clear that it's illegal otherwise he couldn't consider any prosecutions. AND its spelt out in the immigration act. You wanted proof of my claims and you have provided most of it yourself. Well done. Dear oh dear or dear, absolutely unbelievable, you really can't see it can you? @HappyGrumpy, your last post, never a truer word spoken 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 It seems this topic has run its course since it has turned into a bickering fest between a few members. Topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts