This year I am thinking of changing to a Non-B ext

Currently using a marriage ext 

 

Similar amounts of documents needed if you are working.

 

Are there any advantages with a Non-B?  

 

The only thing I can see is that you dont have to drag your wife to TM

and your are not dependent on her for a extensions...

If you do work or own a company with the wish to work in the near future, then Non-B will be the best choice. In other cases only regarding marriage and retirement they wish you to go with the exetension as that is thought of as the right choice.

I would always choose a spouse extension over a work extension so permission to stay is not reliant on work.

2 hours ago, Matzzon said:

If you do work or own a company with the wish to work in the near future, then Non-B will be the best choice.

Why do you think that?

Working with a extension of stay based upon marriage is allowed and there is not a problem with doing it.

A extension of stay based upon working requires proof of a minimum salary of 50k baht for most western countries and a lot of documents to support it (more than marriage).

Also with and extension of stay based upon marriage it will remain valid if the job ends.

2 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Why do you think that?

Working with a extension of stay based upon marriage is allowed and there is not a problem with doing it.

A extension of stay based upon working requires proof of a minimum salary of 50k baht for most western countries and a lot of documents to support it (more than marriage).

Also with and extension of stay based upon marriage it will remain valid if the job ends.

Actually in this case just assuming, and are very well aware of what you post. However, according to the visa climate, I am out of the belief that they want people to have visas for different things. Means that there is one extension for retirement, on for marriage and a B-visa for working as well as visas for short stays and tourism.

Seems to me that the climate are shifting towards that way of looking at things. Just because there is no law that states how many tourist visas you can have, does not take away the fact that they deny entry for some people. Just thinking that they in reality not want people to work on anything else than a B-visa even if it´s no law that states you can not work on a visa based on marriage.

1 hour ago, Matzzon said:

Actually in this case just assuming, and are very well aware of what you post. However, according to the visa climate, I am out of the belief that they want people to have visas for different things. Means that there is one extension for retirement, on for marriage and a B-visa for working as well as visas for short stays and tourism.

Seems to me that the climate are shifting towards that way of looking at things. Just because there is no law that states how many tourist visas you can have, does not take away the fact that they deny entry for some people. Just thinking that they in reality not want people to work on anything else than a B-visa even if it´s no law that states you can not work on a visa based on marriage.

You are talking about an Imm' attitude. The local Labour office issue WP's not Imm'.

Imm' are not interested in denying your extension just because you start work.

Edited October 18, 20196 yr by overherebc

10 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Imm' are not interested in denying your extension just because you start work.

The futore will tell. ???? I really hope you are right. As it is as of today you are.

4 hours ago, Matzzon said:

The futore will tell. ???? I really hope you are right. As it is as of today you are.

And by that logic, as of today you are not.

 

if your personal reading of the tea leaves proves correct in future, then those working while on a marriage extension can make the necessary change with all the additional paperwork.

 

There's enough to worry about without becoming stressed by unsubstantiated speculation.