Compulsory Health insurance for 0-A visa applicants effective 31st October

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, AussieBob18 said:

I also think that there is something to the claim about over 50s not paying hospital bills.  It is not the minor stuff, it is the long term Expats on retirement Visa who have no money (besides pension etc.) and they die in Thai hospitals, and the bills are not paid. There is a lot of them and palliative care can be very expensive (and if an Expat the bill would be high).

 

One of the problems with that notion is the Thai authorities usually seem to lump together all foreigner supposed unreimbursed medical expenses at government hospital -- figures that I suspect are more than a bit dubious themselves.

 

They typically don't separate out or report tourist unreimbursed expenses vs. annual visa/extension expenses. And clearly, the annual population of foreign tourists coming to Thailand vastly outnumbers the number of quasi-permanent annual visa/extension residents.

 

And in this latest salvo, they're pointing their gun entirely at the O-A visa holder population, and doing nothing to address the vastly larger tourist population.

 

[Momofarang]

15 hours ago, madmen said:

extensions are required to have 400k in the bank. Gee what coinidance that the new insurance is also 400k !!

It is only coincidence indeed, as these lousy insurances cover 400k PER INCIDENT, hence potentially a lot more than what you'd be able to cover with 400k in a bank account.

[Pattaya46]

1 minute ago, Momofarang said:

15 hours ago, madmen said:

extensions are required to have 400k in the bank. Gee what coinidance that the new insurance is also 400k !!

It is only coincidence indeed, as these lousy insurances cover 400k PER INCIDENT, hence potentially a lot more than what you'd be able to cover with 400k in a bank account.

… and BTW extensions do NOT require 400k in the bank. It's only one of methods to get it. Many retirees choose other methods.

And BTW again, this thread is about people on O-A Visa, not on extension; so no need of money in Thai bank.

[AussieBob18]

6 hours ago, jacko45k said:

You cannot say that unless we see an order specifying it. I figure it is best not to have a knee jerk reaction to this yet. I am 3 months into an insurance policy that would not qualify as per the O-A terms, and when retirement extension comes along next month expect it not to be an issue. 

Knee jerk reaction?  Good luck Jacko but this is reality for you:

 

Many Expats are struggling now in Thailand because of the high Baht – demanding more money from them is going to be the final straw for many.
Many are already angry about the 90 day reporting problems – and the fines when they are late because the <deleted> system fails to record their notifications.
Many are already angry about the requirement that they keep in a Thai bank and do not touch 400K (Marriage) or 800K (retirement), when they apply to extend their marriage permission to stay.
Many are already angry about the new TM30 rules that means they get fines when they try to extend their retirement permission to stay, because a hotel/s have not correctly reported them staying.
Many are already angry about the Police turning up at their house to check they are a genuine marriage every year, when they apply to extend their marriage permission to stay.
But many more are very angry now this additional insurance scam will force them to pay another 100K+ Baht for every year they live in Thailand (if 60+).
Many more Expats are now looking to leave Thailand or go underground – there has been a lot leaving already (like me) – but this insurance scam will make a lot more leave.

 

Before you tell everyone that the water receding from the beach is nothing to worry about, take a look at what happened last time that happened.  The point being that the current Thai Govt has done NOTHING to encourage 50+ O-A Visa applicants or those living in Thailand under that Visa. The reality is that all they have done is make things much worse. Sure - the 'bad guys out' is the main part of the reason for the changes. But in atypical Thai fashion, they are throwing the baby out with the bathwater - like they always do.

 

Did you not see the Head of Thai Immigration District 1 Bangkok answer the questions:  "Why should I have to pay a fine if the Hotel does not report me staying there? How do I know they have not reported me?"

Answer:  "You have to pay the fine. That is the Law."

 

 

 

[Momofarang]

3 hours ago, Pib said:

.let's hope this step by the Thai govt to require medical insurance for people using an OA Visa is not just the "first step" of a grander plan to require medical insurance for any "long stay" visa or extension of stay.  A plan they will be implemented step-by-step....first step was the OA Visa. 

Reminds me very much the days when Ireland considered switching to right hand driving, and someone proposed to start, for the first year, with trucks and buses.

[AussieBob18]

11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

One of the problems with that notion is the Thai authorities usually seem to lump together all foreigner supposed unreimbursed medical expenses at government hospital -- figures that I suspect are more than a bit dubious themselves.

 

They typically don't separate out or report tourist unreimbursed expenses vs. annual visa/extension expenses. And clearly, the annual population of foreign tourists coming to Thailand vastly outnumbers the number of quasi-permanent annual visa/extension residents.

 

And in this latest salvo, they're pointing their gun entirely at the O-A visa holder population, and doing nothing to address the vastly larger tourist population.

 

I agree with you John.  The 'real' problem is the tourists. But the Thai Govt has looked at the Hospital complaints about 50+ Expats dieing and not paying, and have jumped on that.  10% of the total problem? Probably less.  

[JohnnyBKK]

23 hours ago, AussieBob18 said:

That is the end of any chance that I will ever return to Thailand under a Retirement Visa. 

When this was first raised, I checked out what looks like the most reasonable of the insurance companies listed.   https://www.viriyah.co.th/en/longstay-form.php#.XZ2HTFUzYa1

I costed for the health insurance to start when I am 66, and that I will live in Thailand for 15 years (until 80). 

The total premiums (at today’s rates) over that period added up to 1,035,000 Baht - and it is guaranteed that they put the costs up over the years. And there are <deleted> all consumer laws I could use if they ever refused to pay. And it is heavily limited with exclusions. And there is always the possibility that after 70 they will not insure me anymore.

69,000 Baht a year for a maximum of 400,000 Baht coverage that will be as hard to get as soup with a fork. 

Unbelievable.  Clearly Thailand does not want Expat Retirees.  Ok - it is their country. 

 

That is so cheap, my insurance if I'm 65 is 500,000 thb Per year !

[jacko45k]

25 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Knee jerk reaction?  Good luck Jacko

Excuse me cutting your post, simply to retain space.

I have a retirement extension, there is no requirement for insurance (as of the time of writing), but I have it anyhow for my own peace of mind. Perhaps the angry many need to accept the price of living here, after all, I presume it is better than their origins.

 

I have learned not to expect too much from Thai officialdom, perhaps more generally nearly all of them... they replaced the polite palms together 'wai' some time back in my region... replaced by a single upturned palm. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by jacko45k

[Exploring Thailand]

Ignore post. I see that it has been reported already that this is on the UK website.

 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Exploring Thailand
Already reported in earlier post.

[AussieBob18]

27 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I have a retirement extension, there is no requirement for insurance (as of the time of writing), but I have it anyhow for my own peace of mind. Perhaps the angry many need to accept the price of living here, after all, I presume it is better than their origins.

Dont leave Thailand and then re-enter on that Visa.  Then you will be required to have the required and approved Thai Insurance - including 40K outpatient.  Will you be able to convince the IO that your existing policy is as good as that required?  Good Luck with that.  In a year when you go for next extension - will you also need to have the required and approved insurance? IMO you probably will.  

[AussieBob18]

22 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

They were going to try the tourist health tax but got cold feet because they were afraid the Chinese wouldn't come. 

I agree that most of the unpaid bills are tourist and probably emergency related. It like a version of dine and run. Biggest is probably motorcycle accidents. What about a mandatory tax on motorcycle rentals or bungee jumping places?

Thai Hospitals will usually not refuse treatment until you show you can pay (like in USA), but they will never refuse to accept an emergency patient.  The problem for them is that they canot stop that person from getting up and walking out when they are well enough.  And that is exactly what a lot of tourists do - and then they go home for treatment. Timeframe for a Hospital to lodge complaint about a non-paying tourist and getting them stopped at immigration and asked to pay? - Forever.  And what will Immigration do with them? Deport them?? Arrest them and put in jail???

[Tanoshi]

38 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I have a retirement extension, there is no requirement for insurance (as of the time of writing), but I have it anyhow for my own peace of mind.

 

8 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Dont leave Thailand and then re-enter on that Visa.  Then you will be required to have the required and approved Thai Insurance - including 40K outpatient. 

With respect Bob, Jacko doesn't have a Visa, he has a permit.

[AussieBob18]

50 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

With respect Bob, Jacko doesn't have a Visa, he has a permit.

Yes - true - and I accept that.  But that Permission to Stay in Thailand 'Permit' is based on a previous 12 month Visa. The Permit is an extension of the permission to stay in Thailand afforded under that original Visa and requires the same/similar requirements as under that Visa to be approved.  If that previous Visa was an O-A Visa, then when he leaves and returns (if he does) then he will be re-entering under that original Visa.  He will have of course to get a Permission to Re-enter 'Permit' but it will be based on his original Visa and the extension of his permission to stay in Thailand.  In the abscence of any specific directive that those re-entering using a Permission to Re-enter Permit under an O-A Retirement Visa will not be required to have the insurance, then I believe it will/can be interpreted that way by an IO at the Immigration entry point.

 

That is all very complicated of course.  But either way - my point is that it is a risk for him (and anyone else) that re-enters Thailand after 31st October under a O-A Visa, or under an Extension of Permission to Stay under that Visa.  And IMO this rule/interpretation by the Thai Authorities will be extended within a year or so, to include all 12 month Visas, and all Extensions of Permission to Stay Permits based on those Visas.  IMO - I could be wrong - but it is a valid risk (that I will be right).

 

 

[jacko45k]

1 hour ago, AussieBob18 said:

Dont leave Thailand and then re-enter on that Visa.

This is NOT correct. 

My extension will be renewed late November, I do not expect insurance will be required. 

Coincidentally neighbour renewed yesterday, no insurance, nor TM30 mentioned (Jomtien).

[Exploring Thailand]

5 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

The way I read it, yes it does if you arrive on 7 November. but not if you arrive before 31 October. (not for the first year of stay, that is. You'll need a policy to get a second year). 

However, if Spambot is British, as the UK website is now listing insurance as a requirement, it is possible that the application he has saved on the system will be rejected. 

 

I'm in a similar situation to Spambot, but I don't yet have an application saved. I've written to them asking if the requirement is in effect immediately or from 31st Oct.

[jacko45k]

29 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Yes - true - and I accept that.  But that Permission to Stay in Thailand 'Permit' is based on a previous 12 month Visa.

Again bad information. My Permission of stay is simply an extension of a previous one. You have to go back over a decade to get to an entry/ permission to stay based on a Visa. That visa was not a one year one. 

 

Compulsory health insurance is only required for O-X Visas, and O-A Visas from Oct 31st. I do not have, nor have ever had, either. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by jacko45k

[Martyp]

42 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Yes - true - and I accept that.  But that Permission to Stay in Thailand 'Permit' is based on a previous 12 month Visa. The Permit is an extension of the permission to stay in Thailand afforded under that original Visa and requires the same/similar requirements as under that Visa to be approved.  If that previous Visa was an O-A Visa, then when he leaves and returns (if he does) then he will be re-entering under that original Visa.  He will have of course to get a Permission to Re-enter 'Permit' but it will be based on his original Visa and the extension of his permission to stay in Thailand.  In the abscence of any specific directive that those re-entering using a Permission to Re-enter Permit under an O-A Retirement Visa will not be required to have the insurance, then I believe it will/can be interpreted that way by an IO at the Immigration entry point.

 

That is all very complicated of course.  But either way - my point is that it is a risk for him (and anyone else) that re-enters Thailand after 31st October under a O-A Visa, or under an Extension of Permission to Stay under that Visa.  And IMO this rule/interpretation by the Thai Authorities will be extended within a year or so, to include all 12 month Visas, and all Extensions of Permission to Stay Permits based on those Visas.  IMO - I could be wrong - but it is a valid risk (that I will be right).

 

 

I’m not sure what happens if you are on the second year of an O-A visa. However, if you file a TM7 and get a 1 year extension of stay then you are divorced from the original O-A visa and not subject to the insurance requirement. They may stamp “Retirement” on it but it is the same stamp as those obtained by others pathways. 
 

Your O-A visa has an end date. After that you no longer have a visa to enter the country. 

[Genericnic]

19 hours ago, La Migra said:

Why would you not want/have health insurance where you live?

This seems common sense for someone, personally. 

From Thai Govt standpoint, if they, or their citizens/hospitals get stuck with the medical bills, then extending it to all long term visas (and extensions) seems to make sense.

 

The issue isn't having or not having health insurance. I can't imagine not having health insurance. The issue is who provides it.

 

I have health insurance through my former employment with the State of Texas in the US. It covers me in Thailand as well as the rest of the world. The in and out patient coverage is higher than that required by the new regulations. Best of all, it costs me nothing in yearly premiums. So why should I be required to pay for a substandard policy issued by a Thai company? We all know that it is for the same reason that we are required to deposit/keep funds in Thai banks.

 

Since my health insurance appears to be sufficient for the issuance of a new retirement visa at the RTE in the US, this new requirement and the most recent financial requirements will give me a good excuse to head back to the US every 2 years to get a new visa. For what I save on fund transfers and crappy insurance policies, I can pretty much cover the cost of the flights back.

 

David

[AussieBob18]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

correct. 

Cut out what one says and the meaning cxhanges.

I said it is a risk - after 31st October. Risk.

 

[AussieBob18]

1 hour ago, FredGallaher said:

I think its best to let this play out on its own. It's impossible to predict the outcomes at this time. Similar schemes have been floated in the past only to be rescinded. 

However it has had an effect to wake it posters here. 

BTW I checked the Thai Embassy USA website and there is nothing about this. Strange, but maybe it's not up to date. 

Agree for those in Thailand now using Extensions to stay. For us not in Thailand it is much more of a worry.

Checked the Thai Embassy website in Australia - also no mention of this either - not a thing.

 

[Exploring Thailand]

I thought the insurance had to be from one  of these companies, but looking again, I see there is an overseas insurance certificate, that can be downloaded. Does that mean they will accept insurance from any company?

Edited October 10, 2019 by Exploring Thailand

[AussieBob18]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

Again bad information. My Permission of stay is simply an extension of a previous one. You have to go back over a decade to get to an entry/ permission to stay based on a Visa. That visa was not a one year one. 

 

Compulsory health insurance is only required for O-X Visas, and O-A Visas from Oct 31st. I do not have, nor have ever had, either. 

Extension - Your permission to stay is because of Marriage? 

You may request for more time for your stay from Thai Immigration. This is called an “extension of stay.” Typically, a short term extension of stay is granted up to 30 days for Tourist Visa or Non-Immigrant Visa. Most people who come to Thailand want to extend stay. They may apply for an extension of stay for one year, but it must be for one of the following purposes: Business, Education, Marriage or Retirement. If you hold a tourist visa, you must first convert to a non-immigrant status before the long term extension of stay.

https://www.thaiembassy.com/visa/thaivisa.php

 

No O-A Visa? Good for you. I do have. So do lots of others.

 

[AussieBob18]

45 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I’m not sure what happens if you are on the second year of an O-A visa. However, if you file a TM7 and get a 1 year extension of stay then you are divorced from the original O-A visa and not subject to the insurance requirement. They may stamp “Retirement” on it but it is the same stamp as those obtained by others pathways. 
 

Your O-A visa has an end date. After that you no longer have a visa to enter the country. 

Perhaps and perhaps not.  Some people are saying you do and quoting the Law/Act where is says you are 

 

Correct.  It has an end date to enter. At the moment it is clear it applies to thsoe who enter after 31st October. The risk is that it also applies to those who re-enter. And another risk is that in the future it will apply to Extensions for all who extend under the terms of a retirement Visa. It is also a risk that it will apply to those who arrive under a Marriage Visa, and also to their extensions. 

 

For those in Thailand now who are staying and have no intention to leave and return, it does not yet apply. Yet.

 

 

[AussieBob18]

8 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

I thought the insurance had to be from one  of these companies, but looking again, I see there is an overseas insurance certificate, that can be downloaded. Does that mean they will accept insurance from any company?

If that overseas insurance company completes the Thai Govt certificate - which is extremely unlikely.

 

[Sheryl]

Dont leave Thailand and then re-enter on that Visa.  Then you will be required to have the required and approved Thai Insurance - including 40K outpatient.  Will you be able to convince the IO that your existing policy is as good as that required?  Good Luck with that.  In a year when you go for next extension - will you also need to have the required and approved insurance? IMO you probably will.  

Assuming what he has is an extension of stay based on a non-O there is no conceivable way he could run into indurance requirement by leaving snd re-entering on re-entry permit.

The new requirement pertains only to new entries on an OA visa.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Exploring Thailand]

12 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

If that overseas insurance company completes the Thai Govt certificate - which is extremely unlikely.

 

Yes. I guess the wording will frighten them off. If the certificate just indicated the inpatient and outpatient sums insured, they might be prepared to sign it. But they would no doubt be reluctant to sign a document that states they are proving insurance that complies with a Thai Cabinet resolution.

[Sheryl]

I thought the insurance had to be from one  of these companies, but looking again, I see there is an overseas insurance certificate, that can be downloaded. Does that mean they will accept insurance from any company?

The police order does not mention this option. The longstay website -- which is not an official govt source and has a disclsimer to that effect -- does but says possible in first year only. A member posted something about mention having been made of it in the press conference but not clear.

If newly getting an O-A visa best to ask the Embassy where you will apply. It appears that initial visa will come with a notation from the Embassy/consulate that insurance requirement was met. (That may not work for second entry though).

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[AussieBob18]

2 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Assuming what he has is an extension of stay based on a non-O there is no conceivable way he could run into indurance requirement by leaving snd re-entering on re-entry permit.
The new requirement pertains only to new entries on an OA visa.

I mean if he re-enters within the 12 months period of the O-A Visa, or in the second year automatic extension period. Not everyone who has an O-A Visa enters and stays for a year or two. Some - like me in past and planned in future - enter for 6-9 months on the O-A Visa, go back home and then re-enter Thailand.  I did that because the only other Visa option available for me is a 2 months Tourist Visa and I wanted to stay for 6-9 months ata time.   

 

I know it is supposed to only apply to new entries on an O-A Visa, but good luck arguing that with an IO when you arrive at Swampy if he/she says it is for any entry under an O-A Visa . The whole thing has been organised very poorly and implemented extremely badly.  The Aust Thai Embassy and the USA Thai Embassy do not even mention this issue on their websites today, and based on what people say who rang them - they do not know anything definitively - it clearly caught them by surprise too.  I doubt that the IOs at the Immigration entry points are going to all be fully up to date and have total understanding of what this is all about within a few weeks - many will take the easy route - all O-A Visa arrivals (first or later) must have the compulsory Thai insurance valid for 12 months from the day they arrive.

 

Until and unless there is some directive stating this is not going to happen, then I believe it is a very strong risk that it is going to happen.  TiT. 

   

 

 

[AussieBob18]

I have probably said enough, but I would like to make one more point.  The statements I have made claiming that this new insurance requirement is likely to apply to all 12 month Visas and all related Extensions of Permission to Stay is because of many reasons - but one in particular.  The likelihood that the Thai Authorities are only going to apply this to those arriving on an O-A Visa and only for their first year in Thailand, is extremely small.  They are doing this (they say) because of risky 50+ Expats who dont have health insurance.  There is IMO nil chance that they will force someone to get insurance when they arrive on an O-A Visa, but then allow them to cancel it after 12 months when they get an Extension. And IMO there is very little (if any) chance that they will not also extend this requrement to all other 12 month Visas for 50+ Expats, and also to all Extensions under those Visas. 

 

[Exploring Thailand]

26 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

There is IMO nil chance that they will force someone to get insurance when they arrive on an O-A Visa, but then allow them to cancel it after 12 months when they get an Extension. And IMO there is very little (if any) chance that they will not also extend this requrement to all other 12 month Visas for 50+ Expats, and also to all Extensions under those Visas. 

 

 

Agreed. The alternatives will be money in the bank or insurance. Everyone over 50 will have to have one or the other.