Will Thai Health Insurance be mandated for O Visas and Extensions

[Jingthing]

7 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

How is that remotely related to the OP.

Please explain. Actually skip it. I give up.

Really? You want to play games like that?

No, I will respond.

It was a direct and 100 percent on point reply to the post I was quoting.

I considered that post very much on topic.

Did you even read that post that I was replying to?

[GeorgeCross]

1 hour ago, ballpoint said:

The way I understand it, as explained to me by an immigration agent, the 400,000 baht you need to keep in the bank under the terms for a Non-O retirement extension serves the same purpose as the 400,000 baht inpatient insurance required for the OA.  It's no coincidence that the (meagre, in my opinion) figure is the same in each case.  Anyone under a Non-O extension who doesn't have medical insurance, and can't cover the cost of treatment, would have the 400,000 baht to fall back on - either for treatment here or to be used for evacuation, and then would be unable to get a new extension, which is really what they want.  No doubt I'll be attacked for saying this, but I agree with them.  Anyone here long term who is unable to cover the costs of emergency medical treatment - either by insurance or savings, should really be returning to their own country.

 

 

not having a dig at you but why would they then enforce oa visa extensions? those guys have to have 800K in the bank and 400K all year round 

 

 

[DrJack54]

48 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Really? You want to play games like that?

No, I will respond.

It was a direct and 100 percent on point reply to the post I was quoting.

I considered that post very much on topic.

Did you even read that post that I was replying to?

Yes I did. BTW did you read my posts along with noted posts that your left field.

Along with other members quoting you along with OP confirming exactly what I posted very early. 

Address some of those posts from others rather than smoke screen. 58k posts coming soon. Any have merit?

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

Yes I did. BTW did you read my posts along with noted posts that your left field.

Along with other members quoting you along with OP confirming exactly what I posted very early. 

Address some of those posts from others rather than smoke screen. 58k posts coming soon. Any have merit?

I have no idea what your post means but jingthing’s post was a direct reply to mine. The poll he conducted (hardly conclusive of course) indicated that the ratio of non O A retirement to non O retirement was about 1:3 which to me feels right. 
 

I was hoping for more official figures though. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

Yes I did. BTW did you read my posts along with noted posts that your left field.

Along with other members quoting you along with OP confirming exactly what I posted very early. 

Address some of those posts from others rather than smoke screen. 58k posts coming soon. Any have merit?

Word salad. No interest in such games. Goodbye. 

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I have no idea what your post means but jingthing’s post was a direct reply to mine. The poll he conducted (hardly conclusive of course) indicated that the ratio of non O A retirement to non O retirement was about 1:3 which to me feels right. 
 

I was hoping for more official figures though. 

Thank you. His replies to my posts made no sense and games like that should simply be IGNORED.

 

Yes more official stats on the ratio of retirement extensions O to OA would be interesting but I doubt we'll ever know about those. 

 

I reckon the poll roughly reflects the reality though. 

 

Why? 

 

Because OA visas initially required more hassles even before the health insurance requirement. 

 

Because O visas to start in the retirement system have been available from neighboring countries, within Thailand, and in some cases home country Thai consulates. 

 

Assuming the pool of O based retirement extensions is bigger or even much bigger than OAs I suppose the O crowd including me have cause for concern that we'll be next.

 

But I don't see that anyone can have full confidence that this will or won't happen. 

Edited December 27, 2019 by Jingthing

[swissie]

The only guy I ever heard of that has spent over 4 years in a tropical environement without having to pay a penny is Robinson Crusoe.
It is getting more expensive to park ones bones under a palm tree. (Brits living in the south of Spain can sing a song about it).
- My Brother emigrated to Australia in 1966: Requirements: Absolutey none! Just come, welcome"! Today one has to be a some sort of a rare vocational "specialist". Or produce a 500'000 $ Bank Account.

No matter where you look "the doors are closing".

Contemplating to re-locate? Make sure you do it in the near future and make sure that your current "Immigrant-Status" can be "Grandfathered" in your future country of choice.
If not, one may find himself in a situation that is comparable to the "Thai-Situation" as it unfolds.
- The doors are closing. Move now or not at all.

 

PS: Does not apply to those that have decided to move their Yacht from Monaco to Pattaya harbour.

[lamyai3]

Although there's clear vested interests from some government departments and the private sector in widening the scope of this mandatory insurance, it's also quite possible that the pilot project was utilised primarily to raise the bar on the Non O-A. The terms of this visa class had become disproportionately generous compared with other alternatives in 2019 and the insurance requirement serves as an effective tool to take the shine off it. In this regard, even a dismal failure of the new insurance project would still translate to a roaring success from the point of view of immigration if it disincentivises people from using the Non O-A or forces them to pay a lot more for the privilege. 

 

Assuming the requirements aren't expanded to include Non O's, the O-A in future will probably shift to the Non O-X end of the spectrum, with far fewer applicants, although it will no doubt remain the preferred option for some people.

Edited December 27, 2019 by lamyai3

[jacko45k]

10 hours ago, baansgr said:

Only a matter of time. Providing policies are available for all at reasonable cost its not a bad thing

That has not been the case for the O-A requirement!

 

I do not expect a change to be implemented on other Non-Imm Categories... not the O for example as it doesn't make sense to obligate 1 years medical insurance for a 90 day entrance.

As to extensions, Retirement ones are a possibility, if indeed they wish to protect their hospitals from non covered Expats. I expect Marriage Extensions to get away with it, as people can be younger, and even working. 

[saengd]

I just changed the reason for my (O-A) extension from Retirement to Marriage. During one of the interviews the officer asked why we decided to make the change and we replied that we understood it was the right thing to do and was what Immigration wanted. The officer replied yes and you've done it just in time.....we didn't ask any leading questions. Make of that as you will, we interpreted it as it may not be possible to switch in the future.

[fishtank]

Yet another pointless topic.

As none of us has a clue as to what might happen in the future it is all guesswork.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, fishtank said:

Yet another pointless topic.

As none of us has a clue as to what might happen in the future it is all guesswork.

This is a discussion forum. Certainty of outcomes is not required for people to DISCUSS things.

[fishtank]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

This is a discussion forum. Certainty of outcomes is not required for people to DISCUSS things.

Why do you keep shouting?

[flexomike]

11 hours ago, ballpoint said:

The way I understand it, as explained to me by an immigration agent, the 400,000 baht you need to keep in the bank under the terms for a Non-O retirement extension serves the same purpose as the 400,000 baht inpatient insurance required for the OA.  It's no coincidence that the (meagre, in my opinion) figure is the same in each case.  Anyone under a Non-O extension who doesn't have medical insurance, and can't cover the cost of treatment, would have the 400,000 baht to fall back on - either for treatment here or to be used for evacuation, and then would be unable to get a new extension, which is really what they want.  No doubt I'll be attacked for saying this, but I agree with them.  Anyone here long term who is unable to cover the costs of emergency medical treatment - either by insurance or savings, should really be returning to their own country.

 

OK, but OA extensions have the same financial requirements, so by this theory if you have to get medical insurance then you shouldn't have to keep the 400,000 in the bank

[saengd]

8 minutes ago, flexomike said:

OK, but OA extensions have the same financial requirements, so by this theory if you have to get medical insurance then you shouldn't have to keep the 400,000 in the bank

But they didn't have the same financial requirements for the first two years, only at time of extension incountry. When I first got mine in 2004 I was required to show money in the bank but not in Thailand and that seems to be the loop hole that people were exploiting by getting a new OA visa every two years. It's quite right that avenue was closed. 

[Langsuan Man]

With the history of Immigration-Police-Cabinet how can anyone doubt that it's coming to all "non immigrant " visas, it's just a matter of time

 

And I am tired of hearing that the reason for the O-A being the canary in the coal mine is because it did not require proof of funds or monthly income.  It does require provide proof of income or enough money in the bank, the only difference is whether it is in a Thai bank or not

 

This outrage over the health insurance isn't about the health insurance it's about the lousy Thai health insurance we are forced to buy and anyone who thinks Thailand is going to let that little earner go away is just plain delusional  

[Chicken George]

17 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

So your including non o based on marriage, parent of Thai child etc. 

The whole box and dice?

Yes. It will happen. I just wish we could pay  monthly to be included in the Thai health system. 

[worgeordie]

If it does come about it will be the final straw for many people,

the Immigration dept,keeps making changes,NONE of them good,

just last week Chiang Mai immigration introduced the need to show

a 6 month statement, they already see your bank book, all pages

copied,and bank letter.

regards worgeordie 

[MJKT2014]

13 hours ago, EricTh said:

So you are saying that people on OA visa don't need to have at least 400K in Thai banks to get a retirement visa?

That's always been the case, O-A's can keep their money in home country banks providing they go home every 1-2 years to get another O-A. 

[sfokevin]

We are all in their sights... 

 

Edited December 28, 2019 by sfokevin

[MJKT2014]

14 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

Personally I don't believe it will spread to non O based on whatever. 

Thinking it was never planned to include folk here on extensions with long expired O-A visas. Time will tell.

Agreed. The immigration rules on retirement have traditionally been grandfathered, such as the 200KTHB bank balance for the much older retirees. I think the Thai's will not be so unjust as to change the laws on people they have already made agreements to stay with.

[Peter Denis]

13 hours ago, ballpoint said:

The way I understand it, as explained to me by an immigration agent, the 400,000 baht you need to keep in the bank under the terms for a Non-O retirement extension serves the same purpose as the 400,000 baht inpatient insurance required for the OA. 

It's no coincidence that the (meagre, in my opinion) figure is the same in each case.  Anyone under a Non-O extension who doesn't have medical insurance, and can't cover the cost of treatment, would have the 400,000 baht to fall back on - either for treatment here or to be used for evacuation, and then would be unable to get a new extension, which is really what they want.  No doubt I'll be attacked for saying this, but I agree with them.  Anyone here long term who is unable to cover the costs of emergency medical treatment - either by insurance or savings, should really be returning to their own country.

The requirements and conditions for an extension of stay for reason of retirement based on an original OA Visa or an original O Visa, are exactly the same.  Both have to keep 400.000 THB in their thai bank-account when proving their financials using the money-in-bank method. 

And yes I agree it would make sense to use that 400.000 THB as guarantee for any hospital treatment.

 

But imo this once again proves that it was never the intention to impose the health-insurance requirement for those on extension of stay based on an original Non Imm OA - retirement Visa.

It would have made some sense for the initial period that an OA Visa holder stays in Thailand, before his first extension to stay is due, because during that period there is no need to prove any financials in Thailand.

But the whole implementation process has gone horribly wrong resulting in the present mess.

 

[nycjoe]

As with everything else. I will wait to see what hoops I have to jump through, but I will not let fear be my guide. 

[SoonOh]

Eventually ALL long term expat will be forced to pay worthless health insurance. Single, Married, or child supporting expats are irrelevant to Thai gov. Government need to suck all the money from all of us.

[DennisE]

LMAO ???? what’s the point of this topic? This is not even currently under consideration by the Thai government at all, and even if it was when ever they start considering passing a new bill into law or an amendment to the immigration act that usually takes them a very long time as it did when they first made it mandatory for new NON OA visas. They were considering doing it for at least a year before it was passed they had been talking about doing it for a very long time before they passed it. Currently there are not even any new rules being considered by the Thai government. So even if they did it would take at least a year and honestly probably longer obviously.
 

And if you really think they’re going to make anymore changes in THIS ECONOMY ???? after they have already started loosening up the rules then you should probably pay closer attention to the news because even the Issan Lawyers confirmed yesterday that immigration is starting to loosen up a little because of the economic crisis that they are experiencing here today. 
 

In fact here’s their post from yesterday from the attorneys and honestly this post here pretty much tells you everything you’ll ever need to know for the foreseeable future. It’s pretty much impossible to spray anymore doubts on this issue at this point as it’s pretty much set in stone now and that’s not just from the attorneys that is also from my local immigration office as of this month.
 

See this topic here they have pretty much laid to rest all of these falsified rumors so I don’t know maybe from here consider getting a hobby or something ????. Have a good day happy New Year ????. 
 

Check it out: 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 28, 2019 by ubonjoe
removed a oversized emoji (forum rule)

[DennisE]

See this topic here they have pretty much laid to rest all of these falsified rumors so I don’t know maybe from here on out consider getting a hobby or something ????. 

 

Have a good day happy New Year ????. 
 

Check it out: 

 

 

 

[zaZa9]

56 minutes ago, MJKT2014 said:

Agreed. The immigration rules on retirement have traditionally been grandfathered, such as the 200KTHB bank balance for the much older retirees. I think the Thai's will not be so unjust as to change the laws on people they have already made agreements to stay with.

But they already have.

My O-A Retirement Extension only required 800k in the bank for 3 months.

Now its required for 5 months.

And 400k is required in the bank forever.

Plus I need to buy yet another insurance policy.

 

And just to remind those out there constantly searching for reason and logic when it comes to the instruments of Thai government !

 

Rule number 5 in DennisE's link -

 

5) Map to your residence (must be hand-drawn)

Edited December 28, 2019 by zaZa9

[Peter Denis]

12 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

...

So for the moment there is a scramble  for  people such as myself to  change and acommodate to a Non O  marriage status which contrary to the claims of  justification actually lowers a financial commitment.

Even when Immigration is well  aware or  could require confirmation of  married status they have offered  no alternative avenue of discretionary consideration for those who are  married  but were initially here on Non O A status.

...

Not fully sure if I correctly understand what you are saying, but it is possible that there is some misunderstanding here from your part.  So below might clarify the issue.

>>> When initially applying for a Non Imm OA (long stay) Visa there is no marriage option.

However, once in Thailand and your permission to stay based on that original OA Visa almost expires, you can apply for an extension of stay of that original OA Visa.  At that point (extension of stay) however, there are options.  You can extend for reason of RETIREMENT, or - when you are married to a thai national - you can extend for reason of MARRIAGE.

The requirements are different, but an extension for reason of marriage does NOT require health-insurance and has the additional bonus of lower financials that need to be proven.

So there is no need to change Visa-type (and switch to Non Imm O) when wanting to extend your OA based permission to stay for reason of marriage.

Please note that the requirements for an extension of stay based on an original OA or O Visa are exactly the same, be it for reason of retirement or for reason of marriage.

 

 

[puan]

Yes, of course, it will eventually include Non O visas and their extensions.

 

It is a cash cow for the Thai insurance companies.

[mokwit]

1 hour ago, MJKT2014 said:

I think the Thai's will not be so unjust as to change the laws on people they have already made agreements to stay with.

I don't think the Thai's feel they have made any kind of 'agreement'.