Mandatory health insurance due for long stay tourists

[Samuel Smith]

2 minutes ago, Angry Dragon said:

why not allow foreigners to opt out of an insurance requirement for preexisting conditions if they can't get coverage?  or go further and allow them to opt out of the insurance requirement altogether? 

 

by opting out, the foreigner would be denied treatment for any preexisting condition or treatment in any hospital unless they had their own funds to pay for it.  sounds inhumane perhaps, but if people can understand the choice they're making, then let them make it. 

The overpriced policies are only offering up to a max of 400,000 bt coverage, so aren't going to solve the alleged problem of people not paying their hospital bills.

[Capt Rob]

3 hours ago, glennb6 said:

So now, a few days back I read that health insurance was to be manditory for new O-A visa applicants over 50 yrs of age. Not a very clear explanation for an official announcement, but I'm now extending my O-A visa, not applying for a new one, so I passed on the details.

 

Today I read that the plans are "updated" to include ALL over 50 O-A visas, new and extensions, and again with less than clear guidelines. I will only speak for myself because that's the only person I am an expert in knowing.

 

Seems I am considered first, a long stay TOURIST. I thought I was a long term Non-immigrant? Something about being deemed a temporary tourist bothers me both from the perspective of being considered temporary by the authorities, and from the point of security of lifestyle. The later in that I am retired here, intend to live here until I die, and if that makes me a "non-immigrant" fine, but a temporary tourist?? Maybe tourists will be limited to X number of months one of these days at the whims of, well...

 

I am very INSULTED to be called "high risk" because I am over 50 yrs old. Hey, we all die some day but some people are healthier than others regardless of age. Some people live a healthier life style than others, regardless of age. I do know age discrimination when it's typed in print in my face by the host government!

 

Me, knock on my wooden head, I am healthy, never needed a hospital or a doctor in countless years. I'm not fat/overweight. I eat healthy, I exercise regularly and am in better shape than most 30-40 yr olds. I don't smoke, I rarely drink alcohol, I am in a monogamous relationship with my GF, and my stress levels are near zero. Sound pretty good and low risk to me.

 

I rarely ride public transportation, which seem to overturn, have brake failures, and driver brain failures resulting in crashes thus ranking Thailand rather high on road fatalities and injuries. I drive an older Toyota pickup and a whimpy Honda Wave motorcycle. I have Thai driver licenses and extra insurance on the pickup truck. I drive safely, sober, and on the lookout. Anyone who has ever been here and especially who live here knows how bad the driving is.

 

Tourists who rent larger motorcycles and blast around drunk. Locals who believe Buddha will protect them and don't bother looking who they drive in front of or on which side of the road they drive. Half the population who rides motorcycles sans helmets, and frequently three plus people on two seat motorcycles...yea. Many locals don't have driver licenses, carry insufficient insurance if any, and apparently frequently run from the scene of accidents (according to the daily news reports)...yea, who is it that is 'high risk'???

 

Police? Apparently they are there at the occasional roadblock to check helmets, license, and other minor stuff. Many people remember the recent news report with pictures of three young boys stopped at a roadblock, one wearing a metal pot on his head, and the police standing around chuckling how funny that was. Too young for licenses, no helmets, insurance? Driving skills?  Say no more.

 

I stress the road safety issues because driving is high risk here, but hey, because I'm an over 50 non-Thai, I am considered high risk. Essh.

 

So, I checked the premium rates for the stated minimum required insurance of 400k in patient and 40k outpatient coverage and surprise surprise surprise... 81,746 baht per year for 61-67yr olds. Seems a bit high for very minimal coverage, especially when the government has recently and officially condoned public hospitals to charge "whatever they feel like" for foreigners.

 

My current coverage with same company is 780k inpatient, zero outpatient. If I am injured and require outpatient care I will pay out of pocket. As my visa requirement is that I must have 800k in Thai banks, I think I can cover the 40k baht minimum.

 

My current coverage including discounts for no outpatient coverage, a deductible, and not having used the insurance (now in 2.5yrs since I started) is 19,238 baht per year.

 

So for lesser coverage the government is expecting me to pay an additional 62,508 baht every year!?? Expecting me to be OK with insurance that provides me with lesser coverage but costs 425% more than what I voluntarily buy now!??!!

 

At the very best and kindest, this is full on incompetence and disregard, and at worst it smells like government corruption, collusion with the insurance business, graft, and theft from a small segment of the non-resident population that is expected to say nothing as they are not Thai and just pay, just pay.

 

I don't like (but knew and agreed to before retiring here) having to keep 800k baht in Thai banks on a permanent bases. Didn't really care for the 2 months prior and 3 months after extension requirements because it sounds like the government assumes I'm trying to cheat the system with an agent (I am not). I don't travel in country much at all so the TM30 tracking doesn't affect me, but it seems childish and ineffectual if really intended to track criminals. I grin and report myself in to immigration every 90 days even though it makes me feel like a parolee, but at least the process is quick.

 

Now, the government says I will be required to pay an additional $2050 USD for their approved insurance scheme. I am not a big spender like the 2 week millionaire tourists or rich Thais, but my spending is a 100% positive income for the country, not to mention the 800k baht stuck in the bank. It costs Thailand ZERO, NOTHING to have me here, and I expected to live this way for another 20 to 30 years.

 

This mandatory insurance scam is insulting, way over the top costly, and provides significant mistrust in what the government may come up with next for me trying to live here.  Of all the policies and rules, this is one that may well push me to look elsewhere to live in retirement.

 

This rant is mostly "preaching to the choir" but maybe it will be read by some Thais, may some Thail government officials.

This is a well written precis of actual costings ( as far as I can tell ). If it is a "rant" it is on target. As regards my own feelings I have previously opted for a philosophical acceptance of life in Thailand.

This latest barrage of ' controls ', without serious critical annalysis is a bridge too far for me - it would appear to be un-sustainable for many retirees in LOS unless they downsize there retirement bucket list.

Like the author of the above I believe we should pay our way but being slowly 'cooked' for banquet of sorts for the elite is not at all inviting.

Generally I very much enjoy the life here and the cultural quirks mostly amuse, but I think I will saddle up for other parts and opt for a tourist visa when required.

The insurance impost, requiring bank deposit thereby foregoing earning of reasonably interest will likely make it revenue neutral.

 

Possibly the mandarins will take a deep breath but the proposed dubiously applied ' user pay ' concept has gained traction and will now seemingly be applied in the manner described - the dust may clear and it maybe an attempt to 'stir up the possum', overlooking the possibility of self-harm ( to Thailand as a destination ).

 

 

[Angry Dragon]

12 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Because . . . They . . . Want . . . Your . . . Money.

so it's the result of the Thai insurance lobby?  odd that they would allow foreign policies to meet the requirement (unless it's a global conspiracy). 

[smedly]

3 hours ago, monkfish said:

Ok I can understand the inpatient requirement but is the 40K outpatient really necessary it will double the cost of any premium.
Isn't the 800k we have in the bank account enough guarantee that we can cover any outpatient needs?
 

currently on 12 month extension you must maintain a bank balance of Bt400k 12 months a year so that covers the inpatient cover of 400k

 

as for outpatient 40k who knows but the financials for 12 month extension are 65k a month for 12 months or a bank balance equal to that

 

so 12 month extension of stay basically meet or exceed this scam cover

 

 

unless of course you use an agent to bypass the rules with a bribe

[Russell17au]

There are a lot of uneducated people on here that prefer to sprook false information instead of stating the facts about this. Go and read the official police order that has been available on TV for the last three days and it clearly states that this insurance is "only" for the "O-A" visa and no other visa. Elite visa = not affected, Non-Imm "O" visa with retirement extension = not affected, Non-Imm "O" visa with marriage extension = not affected.

This is the official police order that was listed here on TV 2 days ago. Read it and you will see that it is only the "O-A" visa that is affected by the insurance and non of the others.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 hours ago, Fore Man said:

There are a great number of US military retirees who chose Thailand as their home, most of whom are supporting Thai families. These retired members and their enrolled family members are all fully eligible to receive medical benefits under the Defense Tricare Program.  Family members are required to be registered on the US Department of Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS), which can conveniently be done with a visit to the nearest DEERS office located at the Joint U.S. Military Advisory Group Thailand in Bangkok.  Tricare provides its beneficiaries with extremely comprehensive coverage for both outpatient and inpatient care.    Beneficiaries pay 25% of all costs until an annual catastrophic cap of $3,000 is reached...per each enrolled family.  Once that $3,000 (roughly THB 91,500 today) family cap is reached each year, there are no further costs incurred. In practical terms, this means that significant surgical procedures, hospital stays and rehabilitative costs are 100% covered for most beneficiary families because they generally run close to the annual spending cap anyway in their routine outpatient care. I sincerely hope that the US Embassy will spell out in explicit terms the excellent benefits of Tricare to their Thai Government counterparts and that our retired servicemen living in the kingdom will not be doubly penalized by being forced to buy totally unneeded additional commercial coverage. 

 

Despite what this OP article says, the TGIA website on O-A health insurance appears to say that NON-Thai health policies meeting the required coverage amounts will ONLY be accepted for the FIRST year. After that, it's got to be one of the listed Thai insurers -- no others accepted.

 

Good luck getting Tricare recognized as acceptable insurance under the scheme they've cooked up.

 

 

[Pattaya46]

14 minutes ago, smedly said:

currently on 12 month extension you must maintain a bank balance of Bt400k 12 months a year so that covers the inpatient cover of 400k //

That's not exact...

It's only for one of 4 methods to get your Retirement Extension.

Don't think that most retirees use this method. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 hours ago, MRToMRT said:

You will need this form completed by your insurer (re two posts above yours)

 

https://longstay.tgia.org/document/overseas_insurance_certificate.pdf

 

And you need to add in this little detail, according to TGIA:

 

Quote

First year, all applicants can buy health insurance from insurance companies in their owned countries or authorized insurance company in Thailand. When the applicants want to renew the visa, the applicants must buy insurance from authorized insurance companies in Thailand only. 

 

http://longstay.tgia.org/home/guidelineoa

[zydeco]

28 minutes ago, Angry Dragon said:

so it's the result of the Thai insurance lobby?  odd that they would allow foreign policies to meet the requirement (unless it's a global conspiracy). 

Read the other threads on this topic. The foreign policies will be almost impossible to get with the required government declaration.

[Russell17au]

3 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

That's not exact...

It's only for one of 4 methods to get your Retirement Extension.

Don't think that most retirees use this method. 

even you are incorrect....

There are only three methods of financials to qualify for a retirement extension that smedly is talking about and they are the income method where you must transfer 65,000 baht per month from outside Thailand into a Thai bank account, The combination method of where you use a combination of income and seasoned money and then there is the seasoned money method where you are required to have 800,000 baht in a Thai bank account for 2 months before your application and then it must remain in the bank for another 3 months after your application and then you must keep 400,000 baht for the remaining 7 months until it is time to top up to 800,000 baht again. The combination method is currently a very grey area. Most retirees use the Non-Imm "O" visa with the extensions and not the "O-A" visa.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

21 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

There are a lot of uneducated people on here that prefer to sprook false information instead of stating the facts about this. Go and read the official police order that has been available on TV for the last three days and it clearly states that this insurance is "only" for the "O-A" visa and no other visa. Elite visa = not affected, Non-Imm "O" visa with retirement extension = not affected, Non-Imm "O" visa with marriage extension = not affected.

This is the official police order that was listed here on TV 2 days ago. Read it and you will see that it is only the "O-A" visa that is affected by the insurance and non of the others.

 

Yes, the order on its surface appears to relate only to O-As....  But then there emerge a multitude of signs suggesting otherwise:

 

1. the language in the OP Nation article here:

 

Quote

 

It will be applied to immigrants applying for Non-Immigrant Visa “O-A” , who will stay in the country for no more than one year.

 

The pilot project will also be applied to elderly tourists seeking a longer stay in the country, but no more than a year, he said.

 

The first pgh is talking about O-A holders, but then the 2nd pgh appears to be talking about another, different group of "elderly tourists."

 

2. Immigration has included the O-A health insurance language in the Immigration regulations relating to retirement extensions of stay. Which at least raises the appearance that they intend to apply the insurance requirement to retirement extensions of stay where the original visa was O-A.

 

3. there is a forum thread today where someone visited Jomtien Immigration and was told the insurance requirement is going to be applied to retirement extensions.

 

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1128064-jomtien-says-extensions-need-to-show-insurance/

Edited October 11, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[monkfish]

Taken fro Thailife website a 40,000 THB pa OPD coverage cost between 6,137-27,618 THB pa 
For me that would be 10,079 Baht for 40,000 pa. now ain't that a great deal? lol

IPD seems quite reasonable But only until 70y

Edited October 11, 2019 by monkfish

[Pattaya46]

1 minute ago, Russell17au said:

even you are incorrect....

There are only three methods of financials to qualify for a retirement extension

No, there is a 4th one who is more and more popular : Visa Agents...

I do not approve this method,

but can't disagree that it save many people a lot of hassle...

[Bogbrush]

3 hours ago, Thaidream said:

 

 

1.  Any Non O A Visa issued after 31 October 2019 will have the new requirement- Only this type of Visa. Any extensions on this Visa  will also have the new requirement for insurance.  In other words if your original O-A ihas an issue date of 1 Nov 2019 and after- the holder has the insurance requirement.   

 

All others who are in Thailand or entering on a Non O-A with a date of issuance prior to 31 October 2019 are NOT subject to the requirement.  In other words if some entered originally on a Non O-A dated 31 October 2010 and has several extensions- they are not subject to the requirement.

 

2. The wording of the police order spells out that anyone  holding the Non O-A peioe to the effective date of the new requirement is 'grandfathered' or not applicable.  At the same time if  a person let's his Non O-A expire or goes back to their home country and applies for a NEW O-A Visa after 31 October 2019- the new requirements DO apply.

I’ve read the Police Order but maybe I’m missing something; I see no wording that states holders of an OA issued prior to 31 October 2019 are not subject to the insurance requirement. Can you maybe be more specific and quote/underline the salient part? It would be a great help to all..

 

I attach the Police Order for ease of reference.

[Russell17au]

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, the order on its surface appears to relate only to O-As....  But then there emerge a multitude of signs suggesting otherwise:

 

1. the language in the OP Nation article here:

 

The first pgh is talking about O-A holders, but then the 2nd pgh appears to be talking about another, different group of "elderly tourists."

 

2. Immigration has included the O-A health insurance language in the Immigration regulations relating to retirement extensions of stay. Which at least raises the appearance that they intend to apply the insurance requirement to retirement extensions of stay where the original visa was O-A.

 

3. there is a forum thread today where someone visited Jomtien Immigration and was told the insurance requirement is going to be applied to retirement extensions.

 

On the criteria page clause #6 was added  which is the clause for the new health insurance requirements for the "O-A" visa only. Too many people are reading the wrong things into this and therefore stating incorrect information. Anyone on a Non-Imm "O" visa with a retirement extension is NOT required to have the health insurance the same as the person who is on the marriage extension is NOT required to have the health insurance.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 minutes ago, Bogbrush said:

I’ve read the Police Order but maybe I’m missing something; I see no wording that states holders of an OA issued prior to 31 October 2019 are not subject to the insurance requirement. Can you maybe be more specific and quote/underline the salient part? It would be a great help to all..

 

You're right. He's wrong. The order pertains to the date someone attempts to enter the country using the visa, not the date of issue of the visa.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

8 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

On the criteria page clause #6 was added  which is the clause for the new health insurance requirements for the "O-A" visa only. Too many people are reading the wrong things into this and therefore stating incorrect information. Anyone on a Non-Imm "O" visa with a retirement extension is NOT required to have the health insurance the same as the person who is on the marriage extension is NOT required to have the health insurance.

 

I never said anything about straight O visas....

 

I said, the implication of the wording in the revised Immigration regulation is that the insurance requirement will apply to people who have retirement extensions of stay that originate from past O-A visas...

 

If that was not the case, then it's hard to figure why they would have included the O-A visa insurance requirement in the broader list of requirements for people wanting to obtain retirement extensions.

 

However, the news report in this thread pretty much suggests they intend to apply the insurance requirement even more broadly... Although, you pretty much have to take anything The Nation reports with a big grain of salt when it comes to the details.

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[bangkokbanjo]

Travel insurance on OA Visa

 

So I come to Thailand for six month every year.  I get an OA Visa so I don't have to do border runs.   I always get travel insurance when I go to Thailand.  I'm curious if that would satisfy the requirement for health insurance.  It more than covers the minimum requirements.   Honestly, I don't think it would but want to hear from you.  The reason I don't think it would is that , immigration doesn't care if I'm here for only six months on an OA visa, they want insurance that a person living here would have, incase I get cancer for example.  Travel insurance  would not cover that.  I would of course fly home if I ever had that,so my travel insurance is for anything else from accident to heart attacks abroad     Thoughts?

 

[Russell17au]

14 minutes ago, Bogbrush said:

I’ve read the Police Order but maybe I’m missing something; I see no wording that states holders of an OA issued prior to 31 October 2019 are not subject to the insurance requirement. Can you maybe be more specific and quote/underline the salient part? It would be a great help to all..

 

I attach the Police Order for ease of reference.

First off, this is not the official police order, so you are reading the wrong document. If you go back to my previous posts you will find the official police order there and then read the bottom paragraph.

[UKresonant]

4 hours ago, weedywhaoo said:

Will the insurance companies accept the dual pricing at the hospitals? I'm looking forward to see what will happen.

That's a good point,

So if your new to Thailand (from far away countries) on an O-A, no cover for the first 6 months in the T&Cs (actually I thought they could not give you a policy until you had been in TH for the 180 days), only a certificate. so you could get maybe 5.8 ish months cover

Then..-

..with the dual pricing may perhaps only give you 300000 worth of treatment, with perhaps 100000 donation for the nationality element, from the 400k of cover.

 

Must of been a committee that designed this horse...(Girrraffe image)

[zydeco]

How about all those Latin American alternatives some people keep telling us about like Ecuador???  Uh, oh.  

 

[Neocon]

5 hours ago, Fore Man said:

There are a great number of US military retirees who chose Thailand as their home, most of whom are supporting Thai families. These retired members and their enrolled family members are all fully eligible to receive medical benefits under the Defense Tricare Program.  Family members are required to be registered on the US Department of Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS), which can conveniently be done with a visit to the nearest DEERS office located at the Joint U.S. Military Advisory Group Thailand in Bangkok.  Tricare provides its beneficiaries with extremely comprehensive coverage for both outpatient and inpatient care.    Beneficiaries pay 25% of all costs until an annual catastrophic cap of $3,000 is reached...per each enrolled family.  Once that $3,000 (roughly THB 91,500 today) family cap is reached each year, there are no further costs incurred. In practical terms, this means that significant surgical procedures, hospital stays and rehabilitative costs are 100% covered for most beneficiary families because they generally run close to the annual spending cap anyway in their routine outpatient care. I sincerely hope that the US Embassy will spell out in explicit terms the excellent benefits of Tricare to their Thai Government counterparts and that our retired servicemen living in the kingdom will not be doubly penalized by being forced to buy totally unneeded additional commercial coverage. 

 

5 hours ago, Captain Monday said:

 US Embassy or counculates won't even verify the guaranteed income received from social security and government pensions. Take the following form to the non-existent Tricare customer service office and get two Director level officials to sign it with your inpatient and outpatient limits, which you don't have because coverage is not limited.  A pipe-dream. Game over the Thais won. Buy limited, expensive, and redundant Thai Insurance company coverage or seek other options for O-A stay in Thailand not to exceed one year. 

 

 

http://longstay.tgia.org/document/overseas_insurance_certificate.pdf

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Fore Man said:

 Much appreciated, Captain, but this is an issue far greater than each Tricare-covered member should be expected or required to take on as an individual. I urge every retired American service member to write to the US Ambassador in Bangkok requesting official assistance in preventing what would otherwise easily be a grave injustice to those of us who served. 

JUSMAGTHAI TRICARE staff is acutely aware of this developing issue and has up-channeled this issue to JUSMAG leadership. JUSMAG leadership, in-turn, is planning to speak with the U.S. Chargé d’Affaires about the specific negative impact to U.S. military retiree TRICARE beneficiaries (and the impact to U.S. citizens in general).

 

Intra- and inter-governmental coordination takes time. U.S. Embassy staff is aware of the confusing local news reports on this issue. As of this morning, U.S. Embassy staff have not yet received any notification on this issue from the Thai government.

[Max69xl]

25 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

A couple of comments. The Nations thrives on sensationalism not facts. It's pretty much akind to supermarket tabloids. Someone visited Jomtien has about the same weight. All mush without facts. I call it fake until I see a credible source.

There is already a credible source, the released police order from April this year. It's only about O-A Visas. 

Edited October 11, 2019 by Max69xl

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

There is already a credible source, the released police report from April this year. It's only about O-A Visas. 

 

Except they included the O-A insurance requirement in a section of requirements that pertain to retirement extensions..... meaning, retirement extensions that stemmed from prior O-A visas....

[Andrew Dwyer]

"It will be applied to immigrants applying for Non-Immigrant Visa “O-A” , who will stay in the country for no more than one year."
 
I think this should say 90days? The one year multi-entry non-immigrant OA visa for retired people is no longer available in the UK or any other country I believe. I can currently only get a single entry visa of this type which allows up to 90 days.
 
Or are they re-introducing the one year multi-entry non-immigrant OA visa for retired people? That would be good news.

You are confusing the non imm O with the non imm OA !!
Multi entry non imm O ( 90 day stay ) is no longer available.
Multi entry non imm OA ( 1 year stay + 1 year extra ) remains unchanged, except for the additional mandatory health insurance.

[UKresonant]

22 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The order pertains to the date someone attempts to enter the country using the visa, not the date of issue of the visa.

So before 31st Oct enter no problem on an O-A ME, you have used your crystal ball an asked for the insurance (cert) to start on the day of entry.

You then decide to go to Japan for the weekend, a month later for 4 days. You re-enter and get 365 days - 1 month -4 days, so you get 330 day entry stamp. Is that the way it works?

If it does work that way, could you arrive with 91 days of insurance and just get a 90 Day stamp? As the year is no longer the default must have. This is ignoring the link to the foreign insurance cert thingy, that someone linked,  which is printed on unobtainium

[Max69xl]

6 minutes ago, Neocon said:

 

 

JUSMAGTHAI TRICARE staff is acutely aware of this developing issue and has up-channeled this issue to JUSMAG leadership. JUSMAG leadership, in-turn, is planning to speak with the U.S. Chargé d’Affaires about the specific negative impact to U.S. military retiree TRICARE beneficiaries (and the impact to U.S. citizens in general).

 

Intra- and inter-governmental coordination takes time. U.S. Embassy staff is aware of the confusing local news reports on this issue. As of this morning, U.S. Embassy staff have not yet received any notification on this issue from the Thai government.

There's an official police order from April this year and it's already released. It's not confusing at all.

 

"and the impact to U.S. citizens in general"

 

What's so special with US citizens?

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

3 minutes ago, UKresonant said:

So before 31st Oct enter no problem on an O-A ME, you have used your crystal ball an asked for the insurance (cert) to start on the day of entry.

You then decide to go to Japan for the weekend, a month later for 4 days. You re-enter and get 365 days - 1 month -4 days, so you get 330 day entry stamp. Is that the way it works?

If it does work that way, could you arrive with 91 days of insurance and just get a 90 Day stamp? As the year is no longer the default must have. This is ignoring the link to the foreign insurance cert thingy, that someone linked,  which is printed on unobtainium

 

As I said above, the guidance memo from the Immigration commander appears to be applying the insurance requirement for entries into Thailand as of Oct. 31 and focusing on the entry date, not the visa issuance date.

 

What it's all going to mean in practice, I have absolutely no idea!

 

[Max69xl]

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Except they included the O-A insurance requirement in a section of requirements that pertain to retirement extensions..... meaning, retirement extensions that stemmed from prior O-A visas....

The police order only mention O-A visa extensions. Nothing else. 

[zydeco]

3 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

There's an official police order from April this year and it's already released. It's not confusing at all.

 

"and the impact to U.S. citizens in general"

 

What's so special with US citizens?

 

 

He is talking about the Joint US Military Advisory Group Thailand and the US Embassy. Who else other than US citizens would be addressed by those two institutions?