Will Thai Health Insurance be mandated for O Visas and Extensions

[EricTh]

4 minutes ago, tonray said:

Absolutely incorrect. Extensions if an original OA visa have exactly the same financial requirements in Thai banks

 

Now I am beginning to understand. Different people give me half the story.

 

In the first year, the money doesn't need to be transferred to Thailand.

 

In the second year and thereafter, the money has to be deposited in a Thai bank.

 

It is only the first year that the financial requirements aren't the same as O-A and immigration is worried hence the insurance requirement.

 

Edited December 28, 2019 by EricTh

[4MyEgo]

19 hours ago, steve187 said:

I don't think it will, but if it does that's a whole lot of hurt for a whole lot of people.

Yeh, I think they know that if they inflict this onto the retirees on the O based on retirement, or even going further and include those on the O based on marriage, then they will have made at least half if not more expats leave, that includes a lot who cannot get the insurance because of age, and those who have pre-existing conditions that won't to be covered and then those that don't like to be pushed into a corner, having lived in a democratic society for what it's worth.

 

The above said, multiply that x how much is spent into the Thai economy by those two visa types/extension/categories and there you have the math, then ask yourself if the Thai's are good at math, and don't hold your breathe while the jury is out.

 

While I understand their concerns, I think a more positive approach would if they are thinking of extending this, it should be grandfathered and implement it to new arrivals contemplating to retire in Thailand, no doubt that will be quashed after a year as they will see Thailand would no longer be an appealing retirement destination IMO. 

[ubonjoe]

3 minutes ago, EricTh said:

In the first year, the money doesn't need to be transferred to Thailand.

In the second year and thereafter, the money has to be deposited in a Thai bank.

The financial proof only has to be shown when applying for a OA visa.

No need for financial proof for the 2nd year since it possible to get almost 2 years of total stay by doing an entry just before the OA visa expires.

It is only needed at end of the 2nd year if a extension of stay is applied for.

[Caine]

Definitely Yes, and so they should. But be able to insure with reputable western companies, not the Mickey Mouse scam outfits here.

[NoshowJones]

While I have no time for the Thai government or their immigration, I do not see medical insurance for marriage and retirement extensions happening anytime soon. Only an opinion.

[Kelsall]

Yes, for most people Thai health insurance will be required for Non-O visa extensions based on retirement, but Americans will be allowed to use insurance policies that cover them in Thailand regardless of where that insurance is based.

 

Sheryl posted an email she received from the US Embassy regarding this issue.  My feeling is the Embassy will be successful in their efforts for reasons which by now should be obvious.

 

Here is the text of the email:

 

"Sheryl,

 

Thank you very much for your email and this on-the-ground perspective.  Over the past six months, we have been engaging the Royal Thai government (RTG) to attempt to ensure that U.S. health insurance policies can be used to satisfy the new immigration requirement for health insurance for foreign retirees.  This advocacy was done by official Diplomatic Note, as well as during the recent RTG press conference announcing the policy.  During that event, the Consul General cited US veterans with TRICARE coverage specially as a population of concern in Thailand.  At least one other Embassy (the UK) cited concern as well.

 

The U.S. Embassy plans to continue our advocacy with the RTG regarding the option for U.S. citizens to use existing insurance – regardless of where that insurance is based – to meet the requirements.  We acknowledge there could be a difficult transition period as the Thai’s determine exactly how to implement the new health insurance requirement.  As you note, the language in the official police order is vague in some respects.  Therefore, we may have some room to navigate and improve on implementation. 

 

Ultimately, this is a Thai regulation and the Thai government is the final arbiter of how this regulation will be implemented.

 

Again, we will continue to engage with the RTP on this issue.

Respectfully,

ACS"

 

Sheryl's post is here:  https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1132569-oa-visa-and-insurance-experience-today/?do=findComment&comment=14747221

 

Edited December 28, 2019 by Kelsall

[NoshowJones]

7 hours ago, jacko45k said:

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. 

Immigration don't want expats to be on marriage exts, it is a lot more work for them than dealing with retirement exts.

[NoshowJones]

6 hours 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.

It is not a pointless topic, the OP asked for opinions, that's what the Thaivisa forum is mostly about.

[jacko45k]

27 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

Immigration don't want expats to be on marriage exts, it is a lot more work for them than dealing with retirement exts.

I find nevertheless a good number are. The monetary toll is less, and may soon be more so.

[Dumbastheycome]

3 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

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.

 

 

Unfortunately a consecutive application of  stay initially on retirement  is  not always accepted in all Immigration Offices inside Thailnd to be changed to marriage if the  following link is correct.

https://www.thaiembassy.com/faq/convert-a-retirement-visa-to-marriage-visa.php

 

[JackThompson]

 

17 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

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.

If I were in this situation, I would go out and come back on a Non-O based on marriage from Savannakhet or Vientiane.  It's not difficult, and removes the whole "Non-OA" issue from the equation, permanently.

[JackThompson]

18 hours ago, EricTh said:

Immigration is trying to close all the past loopholes eg.

 

1. Declaring false affidavits by Americans, British and Australian. This loophole is not plugged for other nationalities yet.

Yet they never requested prosecution of anyone for using these (a Felony for Americans), so I suppose no cases of indigent false-affidavit visitors were ever discovered?   If some were lying, they must have had enough money to stay afloat.  As to why only those numbers, they went after the big numbers, to maximize agent-returns.   It wasn't about, "Are they really telling the truth or not."  Whatever "It" is never about what they say it is.

 

18 hours ago, EricTh said:

2. Increasing the number of months required to be deposited into Thai bank for retirement purpose for those using agents to borrow money and for those sharing the required amount.

Yet easily bypassed by using an agent, who lends the money, but has "connections" with Immigration (share the loot).  Looks like they don't really care if you have the money in the bank, just money for them.

 

18 hours ago, EricTh said:

3. Border/visa runners on tourist visa with the intention to stay long-term in Thailand.

Non-corrupt Tourist Visas replaced with Agent / School + ED Visa, with "extra fees" to fill the necessary envelope.

 

18 hours ago, EricTh said:

4. If everyone on O-A visa just switch to O visa, then what's the point of introducing health insurance in the first place??? so this is another loophole.

 

Eventually this loophole will be plugged...

The 400K Baht in the bank would cover the required insurance-amount - but Immigration's agents will "fix" that for you, so you don't need anything but their fee.  Seems to me, the hole they are trying to "plug" is not getting their envelope of cash with each application.

 

Think about it - just come in on a TR or Exempt entry, pay the agent, and all of these important restrictions magically vanish?  It's clear what they are after, and it isn't "protecting the country from unpaid medical bills," or tourists who stay and "spend money here too long."  

 

Per the official numbers, the total medical-loss is tiny pittance per visitor, which could be charged upon-entry - thereby covering ALL visitors, including the often drunk and reckless short-timers.  This could even yield a large surplus for the Thai medical system, if so allocated.

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, JackThompson said:

Yet they never requested prosecution of anyone for using these (a Felony for Americans), so I suppose no cases of indigent false-affidavit visitors were ever discovered?

Are you suggesting Thai immigration issue a formal complaint against a US National and then that National's Embassy require the USA Justice dept prosecute him. Would that be likely?

[Krataiboy]

2 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

Krataiboy, I was told by the Thai Consulate Los Angeles this past November that eventually the insurance will be rolled out for all visa applications for all categories.  Now whether or not this rolls down to all including those on extensions of stay is what I am sure is being debated here.  Since I entered on an O-A issued prior to October 31, I did not need to show it, and I have a US life time policy due to a state pension. However, I still have a policy here in Thailand as, I always have to cover the initial visit, and then file with my US health company to pick up the remainder.  Of course I am only 55, and the cost is minimal to me, as I pay nothing in the US for that heath policy.

Thanks. The rumour mill grinds on.

Edited December 28, 2019 by Krataiboy

[oldcpu]

1 hour ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Unfortunately a consecutive application of  stay initially on retirement  is  not always accepted in all Immigration Offices inside Thailnd to be changed to marriage if the  following link is correct.

https://www.thaiembassy.com/faq/convert-a-retirement-visa-to-marriage-visa.php

That refers to changing a Visa.  It does not state renewing a Permission to stay under "marriage extension" as opposed to "retirement extension".

 

I am on the understanding they are two different things.  

 

I assume in the coming year, if more people who originally entered on a Type-OA visa (and extended their permission to stay after the Visa expiry) attempt to change their permission to stay from "retirement" to "marriage", than in the coming times we will read more actual experiences wrt Immigration Office consistency.  I am optimistic that there won't be an issue wrt changing to "marriage".

[flexomike]

3 hours ago, EricTh said:

But you don't need to put that amount of money into Thai banks.

 

Furthermore, there is more opportunities to forge foreign financial statements than in Thailand.

 

After all, immigration won't be able to verify those foreign bank statements unlike the standard Thai bank letters here.

 

You are wrong, to do an extension for an OA Visa you have to either show 800,000 in the bank or twelve months of 65,000 plus for an extension of an OA based on Retirement

[MeePeeMai]

15 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

I am optimistic that there won't be an issue wrt changing to "marriage".

I wish I was as optimistic as you are.  I have been told that I must leave Thailand and get a new Non-O to then be able apply for an extension based upon marriage to a Thai. 

[Peter Denis]

29 minutes ago, MeePeeMai said:

I wish I was as optimistic as you are.  I have been told that I must leave Thailand and get a new Non-O to then be able apply for an extension based upon marriage to a Thai. 

The application for reason of marriage does require quite some paper-work both for you as applicant as for your local IO that has to process the application. 

Some IOs therefore try to use excuses not to handle your application (some will say that also an OA Marriage extension requires health-insurance, thereby hoping that you will simply extend for reason of retirement / some will say that you need to apply at a thai embassy/consulate abroad to make the conversion, thereby forcing you to make a border-run).  They are not correct, and when confronted with such a rogue Immigration officer, you should politely ask to speak to the highest officer in charge of the local IO to plead your case. It is appalling that some IOs do this, but luckily they are a minority and most IOs will handle your application as foreseen in the IO rules/legislation.

Edited December 28, 2019 by Peter Denis

[oldcpu]

33 minutes ago, MeePeeMai said:

I wish I was as optimistic as you are.  I have been told that I must leave Thailand and get a new Non-O to then be able apply for an extension based upon marriage to a Thai. 

With a Type-O Visa, is it not possible to apply for an Extension based on RETIREMENT  with no need to prove the Health Insurance (ie no need to go for an extension based on MARRIAGE)?  

 

Further I have read of a user on an extension (of an original Type-OA) who when it came time for the Extension (of their permission to stay) switched from "RETIREMENT" to "MARRIAGE" (producing of course, all the needed documents associated  with (to justify) the 'marriage extension'.

 

I wonder if what you have been told is only 'one' way to do this, and there may also be 'other ways' ?

Edited December 28, 2019 by oldcpu

[Peter Denis]

5 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

With a Type-O Visa, is it not possible to apply for an Extension based on RETIREMENT  with no need to prove the Health Insurance (ie no need to go for an extension based on MARRIAGE)? 

Completely wrong and totally confused.

Of course it is possible, and that is what most retirees on an OA - retirement extension are or will be doing that want to escape the bogus health-insurance requirement imposed on extensions of original OA Visa for reason of retirement.

 

[MeePeeMai]

26 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Some IOs therefore try to use excuses not to handle your application (some will say that also an OA Marriage extension requires health-insurance,

Sorry Peter, I left this part out.  YES, I was told that they would grant me an extension based upon marriage but that I would need health insurance (since I entered on an O-A originally) unless I left LOS first and then started over with an "O" visa.  Sorry about that.

[oldcpu]

15 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

26 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

With a Type-O Visa, is it not possible to apply for an Extension based on RETIREMENT  with no need to prove the Health Insurance (ie no need to go for an extension based on MARRIAGE)? 

Completely wrong and totally confused.

 

Confused at my post?

 

Quote

Of course it is possible, and that is what most retirees on an OA - retirement extension are or will be doing that want to escape the bogus health-insurance requirement imposed on extensions of original OA Visa for reason of retirement.

Just to be certain I am not reading this wrong ... Those on a Type-O (not a Type-OA, but on a Type-O) can apply for a 1 year extension based on RETIREMENT (assuming they meet all the retirement requirements with age/money) with no need to prove Health Insurance ... and those on a Type-O do NOT have to go for an extension based on MARRIAGE.

 

Did I get something wrong ? 

 

If I read the above thread correctly, user MeePeMai stated he was told he should leave the country, and come back in on a Type-O and apply for an extension on Marriage. To me that's not the only thing he could do.  He could come back on a type-O and then apply for an extension on either marriage OR retirement.  Further, I've read of cases where one on a Type-OA Visa (with entry to Thailand since expired) when going for the extension of the permission to stay, can when going for the extension/extension-renewal change the reason to be for "MARRIAGE" and not need to leave the country.  ....

 

Again, puzzled if comment aimed at my post.

.

Edited December 28, 2019 by oldcpu

[MeePeeMai]

4 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

If I read the above thread correctly, user MeePeMai stated he was told he should leave the country, and come back in on a Type-O and apply for an extension on Marriage. To me that's not the only thing he could do.  He could come back on a type-O and then apply for an extension on either marriage OR retirement.  Further, I've read of cases where one on a Type-OA Visa (with entry to Thailand since expired) when going for the extension of the permission to stay, can when going for the extension/extension-renewal change the reason to be for "MARRIAGE" and not need to leave the country.  ....

Yes this is true but I choose to leave only 400k in my bank account (vs 800k) therefore I will be applying for a marriage extension.  I was told that I could apply for a marriage extension from my original O-A (expired) but that they would require a Thai health insurance policy (unless I leave and return with an "O" from a nearby Consulate or return on a VE entry and start the process here).  I do not want to purchase a Thai health insurance policy.

 

 

5 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

Just to be certain I am not reading this wrong ... Those on a Type-O (not a Type-OA, but on a Type-O) can apply for a 1 year extension based on RETIREMENT (assuming they meet all the retirement requirements with age/money) with no need to prove Health Insurance ... and those on a Type-O do NOT have to go for an extension based on MARRIAGE.

I believe this is correct.

[oldcpu]

6 minutes ago, MeePeeMai said:

.... I choose to leave only 400k in my bank account (vs 800k) therefore I will be applying for a marriage extension.  I was told that I could apply for a marriage extension from my original O-A (expired) but that they would require a Thai health insurance policy (unless I leave and return with an "O" from a nearby Consulate or return on a VE entry and start the process here).  I do not want to purchase a Thai health insurance policy.

 

I can understand not wanting to purchase a health insurance policy on the Thai approved list, as there could be good reasons for not doing so - where the reasons (for not purchasing health insurance from a company on the Thai approved list) benefit both the "Permission to Stay" applicant, and benefit financially the Thai Health care system.  ie. one has already superior Health Insurance that can provide better funding to Thailand (than those on the Thai approved list).

 

It does read to me that the IO you talked to at the Immigration Office interprets the rules differently than IOs at other immigration office(s)?  I posted on that here:

 

[MeePeeMai]

1 minute ago, oldcpu said:

I can understand not wanting to purchase a health insurance policy on the Thai approved list, as there could be good reasons for not doing so - where the reasons (for not purchasing health insurance from a company on the Thai approved list) benefit both the "Permission to Stay" applicant, and benefit financially the Thai Health care system.  ie. one has already superior Health Insurance that can provide better funding to Thailand (than those on the Thai approved list).

 

It does read to me that the IO you talked to at the Immigration Office interprets the rules differently than IOs at other immigration office(s)?  I posted on that here:

 

Yes I already have far superior Health Insurance (which covers me worldwide) and this is the main reason I refuse to buy a Thai policy.

 

... and yes it appears as though different Immigration Offices are interpreting the new rule independently as some are saying "can do" without insurance and some (like mine) are saying "no can do" without insurance or leaving to get a new "O".  This has been reported in several threads and one of them had a running list of offices and their take on this subject.

[Peter Denis]

43 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

...

Just to be certain I am not reading this wrong ... Those on a Type-O (not a Type-OA, but on a Type-O) can apply for a 1 year extension based on RETIREMENT (assuming they meet all the retirement requirements with age/money) with no need to prove Health Insurance ... and those on a Type-O do NOT have to go for an extension based on MARRIAGE.

...

The above is correct, but that was not what you wrote initially hence my reaction.

[Peter Denis]

48 minutes ago, MeePeeMai said:

Sorry Peter, I left this part out.  YES, I was told that they would grant me an extension based upon marriage but that I would need health insurance (since I entered on an O-A originally) unless I left LOS first and then started over with an "O" visa.  Sorry about that.

So this means you are dealing with a rogue IO, that is incorrectly imposing the health-insurance requirement on ALL OA Visa extensions.  Even though the PoliceOrder is crystal clear that it is ONLY required for extensions of OA Visa for reason of RETIREMENT. 

Did you ask politely to talk with the highest officer in charge of your local IO to plead your case (pointing to the relevant clauses in the PoliceOrder that prove your case)?

Of course, if the highest officer of your local IO insists - incorrectly - that it is also required for OA extensions for reason of marriage, you have little choice but to comply with their faulty interpretation.  And in that case they force you to do border-run and then apply for a 90-day Non Imm O - marriage Visa abroad or at your local IO.  In the last month of those 90 days, you can then apply for a 1-year extension based on that Non Imm O - marriage Visa. 

The requirements and conditions of an extension for reason of marriage of a Non Imm OA or a Non Imm O Visa are identical. 

 

[MeePeeMai]

8 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

The requirements and conditions of an extension for reason of marriage of a Non Imm OA or a Non Imm O Visa are identical. 

Yes you are correct.

 

No, I did not ask to speak to the big boss for clarification because I still have 3 more months before my current extension expires and I have decided to wait until my next 90 day report is due to ask again.  Hopefully by then, the dust will have settled and there will be clear and concise orders from the top down to ALL Immigration Offices on how to handle this situation (and I hope that all will follow the orders as instructed).

 

I know this quite optimistic but they did seem to rectify the situation that was occurring at the airports in Bangkok after 31/10/19 (when this whole mess started).   I am hoping that the same logic and clarification on the rules will trickle on down to the rogue offices by then and soon all offices will have the same policy with regard to marriage extensions (of an O-A) whereby Thai health insurance is not needed.

 

A 3 hour drive to Nong Khai and then a hop over to Vientiane for a new "O" based on marriage is my back up plan (if things remain as they are now and my office is still saying I need a Thai policy to apply for a marriage extension).

 

I will post an update when I do my next 90 day report (end of Feb/1st of March).

 

[scubascuba3]

How many threads on this subject are we going to get?

 

and the answer is NO, they won't make insurance compulsory with the O

[madmen]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz give it rest guys especially those posting at their new address in mommies basement!!!!