Visa Exempt Entry Requirements

[SheungWan]

The London Embassy webpage states that those entering Thailand on a 30-day visa-exempt entry must show onward travel within those 30 days. Assuming that one may be considering a 30 day extension thus giving a 60 day total (confirm can do?), then is the appropriate course of action to still have an exit flight within the original 30 days which can then be cancelled in favour of the later flight towards the end of the 60 day period?

http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84451-Tourist-Visa.html

(PS I am not looking for the discussion to stray into alternative visa options)

[Mr Smithy]

An onward ticket is rarely asked for by Thai immigration but you may be refused boarding by the airline if you do not have one. A cheap throw-away ticket to any of the neighbouring countries will suffice.

[DrJack54]

The need for onward flight is in the main the airline. 

You could try two things.

1. Buy a throw away ticket that is within the 30 days of entry.

2. Ask airline is ticket accepted within 60 days as you intend to obtain extension of 30 days. With option 2 you could try for boarding pass with the ticket outside of 30 day and if refused buy cheapest online ticket.

Edited January 10, 2020 by DrJack54

[jacko45k]

3 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

The need for onward flight is in the main the airline. 

You could try two things.

1. Buy a throw away ticket that is within the 30 days of entry.

2. Ask airline is ticket accepted within 60 days as you intend to obtain extension of 30 days. With option 2 you could try for boarding pass with the ticket outside of 30 day and if refused buy cheapest online ticket.

3) If one is planning to stay over 30 days, get a tourist visa.

[SheungWan]

9 hours ago, jacko45k said:

3) If one is planning to stay over 30 days, get a tourist visa.

Since the 60 day period would be following the expiry of an O visa, then that option not appropriate.

[jacko45k]

2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Since the 60 day period would be following the expiry of an O visa, then that option not appropriate.

O-Visa or an Extension?

So do you plan to re-enter Thailand at a land crossing, or fly out and back in (and have a flight out within 30 days)?

If you do get back in, a 30 day extension should not be a problem. 

Edited January 10, 2020 by jacko45k
punctuation

[SheungWan]

3 hours ago, jacko45k said:

O-Visa or an Extension?

So do you plan to re-enter Thailand at a land crossing, or fly out and back in (and have a flight out within 30 days)?

If you do get back in, a 30 day extension should not be a problem. 

90 day O visa followed by fly out and back. Expect then to get 30 day visa exempt but fly back out again after a further 60 days assuming extension is possible.

[DrJack54]

4 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

90 day O visa followed by fly out and back. Expect then to get 30 day visa exempt but fly back out again after a further 60 days assuming extension is possible.

This is very similar to your other thread. I'm thinking you wish to use a non o based on retirement giving you 90 (cannot be extended) followed by visa exempt entry via air. Then extend giving 30+30.

Then I imagine do 2 more VE via border and extend each. Further 120 days. Giving 9 months all up. Yes possible. Or you could just get an METV.

[SheungWan]

5 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

This is very similar to your other thread. I'm thinking you wish to use a non o based on retirement giving you 90 (cannot be extended) followed by visa exempt entry via air. Then extend giving 30+30.

Then I imagine do 2 more VE via border and extend each. Further 120 days. Giving 9 months all up. Yes possible. Or you could just get an METV.

Others might try pushing the boat out with 3 border runs, each followed by extensions, but I don't think immigration would take too kindly to this and anyway it is not going to be me putting it to the test. It will be interesting hearing any reports in the future though. As for right now, I still prefer the single O over METV, for reasons I have given elsewhere. If the METV fits the requirements of others then fine. Also, if I really was wanting to spend 9 months continuous in LOS, then I think I would bite the bullet and get a one-year permission to stay.

[Max69xl]

2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Others might try pushing the boat out with 3 border runs, each followed by extensions, but I don't think immigration would take too kindly to this and anyway it is not going to be me putting it to the test. It will be interesting hearing any reports in the future though. As for right now, I still prefer the single O over METV, for reasons I have given elsewhere. If the METV fits the requirements of others then fine. Also, if I really was wanting to spend 9 months continuous in LOS, then I think I would bite the bullet and get a one-year permission to stay.

"I would bite the bullet and get a one-year permission to stay."

Just out of curiosity, do you meet the requirements for an 90 days Non-immigrant O Visa followed by a 1 year extension? The only way to get a 1 year visa from day one would be an O-A Visa based on retirement. 

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

"I would bite the bullet and get a one-year permission to stay."

Just out of curiosity, do you meet the requirements for an 90 days Non-immigrant O Visa followed by a 1 year extension? The only way to get a 1 year visa from day one would be an O-A Visa based on retirement. 

I have had an O-A visa before in past years and had actually started the process again last year but abandoned that process as it appeared too much hassle with the insurance requirements. Do I meet the requirements for an extension? Well, I would probably go the agent route if I wanted that extension. It is not something I am planning this year, but some guys will no doubt be rolling up with their O visas to extend to permission to stay and doing the agency route.

[twix38]

What a maze of a mess all the various visa rules and checks are.

 

Love that you can get a visa exempt and extend for a further 30 days so long as you have a flight out before first 30 days! Stop blaming the airlines. If immigration made it 60 days the airlines would not be checking for flight out before 30 days would they!!

Edited January 12, 2020 by twix38

[DrJack54]

28 minutes ago, twix38 said:

What a maze of a mess all the various visa rules and checks are.

 

Love that you can get a visa exempt and extend for a further 30 days so long as you have a flight out before first 30 days! Stop blaming the airlines. If immigration made it 60 days the airlines would not be checking for flight out before 30 days would they!!

Why should they make visa exempt 60 days. I have oz passport. I need visa for Vietnam, Cambodia etc etc. 

The extensions we're designed imo for unforseen needs. If 60 days is required there is option of setv.

Better idea would be do away with VE then. That will solve your concerns.

 

[ubonjoe]

1 hour ago, twix38 said:

Love that you can get a visa exempt and extend for a further 30 days so long as you have a flight out before first 30 days!

That is due to immigration not changing the old ministerial regulation for visa exempt entries when they changed the police order to allow for the extension in 2014. As far as the airlines know a ticket out is still required within 30 days.