Image composite for reference only

 

Thailand’s Cabinet on Tuesday approved new rules that will help people aged over 70 purchase health insurance as part of the application for a Non-Immigrant “O-A” visa.

 

Previously, applicants were required to purchase health insurance from a Thai insurance provider via the https://longstay.tgia.org/ website. 

 

However, it can be difficult for people aged over 65 to buy insurance from a Thai insurance company. Often applicants over 65 are required to undergo a medical, while other insurance companies simply won’t accept new applicants aged over 70.

 

Without insurance, the applicant will not be granted the Non-Immigrant “O-A” visa.

 

According to Siam Rath, the new rules approved on Tuesday are as follows:

 

1. People applying for the visa for the first time must include health insurance or government welfare with minimum coverage of $100,000 or 3 million baht for medical expenses and treatment of Covid-19.

 

2. Applicants can now use health insurance or government welfare from abroad. A relevant government agency, such as a foreign embassy in Thailand or the respective country’s Foreign Ministry must certify the insurance.

 

3. In the case that an insurance company refuses coverage due to health risks, the applicant must submit additional documents with their O-A application such as the letter of refusal, plus securities, deposits and other health insurance not less than 3 million baht.

 

The Cabinet has assigned the Immigration Bureau to issue an order from the Royal Thai Police confirming the new rules. 

 

The Cabinet has also asked the Immigration Bureau to improve the rules and conditions for foreigners applying for short term visas and to ensure that any changes to regulations are properly publicised to foreigners.

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2021-06-16

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

And what about O-A retirement extensions?

 

2 minutes ago, doctormann said:

And what about O-A retirement extensions?

 

Good Question...and why do they continue to punish OA Visa holders and leave O Visa holders unscathed ? Extensions now are absurd...because my OA obtained in 2017 needs insurance(s) and the guy in the booth next to me does not , all other requirements being equal ? 

1 minute ago, tonray said:

Good Question...and why do they continue to punish OA Visa holders and leave O Visa holders unscathed ? Extensions now are absurd...because my OA obtained in 2017 needs insurance(s) and the guy in the booth next to me does not , all other requirements being equal ? 

It's all a bit illogical, especially as extending for marriage from an O-A does not require the insurance.  For those of us who got our original O-A years ago - 2004 in my case - the insurance for retirement extensions has, effectively, been applied retroactively.  Very unfair in my view but their rules so we have to comply as best we can.

1 minute ago, tonray said:

Good Question...and why do they continue to punish OA Visa holders and leave O Visa holders unscathed ? Extensions now are absurd...because my OA obtained in 2017 needs insurance(s) and the guy in the booth next to me does not , all other requirements being equal ? 

 can you not convert to an O visa, tourist visa can be converted, let your OA expire, yes I know it makes little sense

1 minute ago, smedly said:

 can you not convert to an O visa, tourist visa can be converted, let your OA expire, yes I know it makes little sense

Yes, you can, but this cannot be done in-country.  You have to exit, get a non-O and return, or re-enter on a 30-day visa exemption.  Although possible, neither option is easy because of the COVID situation.  I intended to make a trip to Laos and get a non-O there but this is not possible at the moment.  Flying home (UK) to do this is also very difficult and extremely expensive.

8 minutes ago, smedly said:

 can you not convert to an O visa, tourist visa can be converted, let your OA expire, yes I know it makes little sense

As already stated...I'll be first in line at SavannaKhet ..if and when borders open

<<the applicant must submit additional documents with their O-A application such as the letter of refusal, plus securities, deposits>>
not sure what this implies, anyone?

6 minutes ago, lemonjelly said:

<<the applicant must submit additional documents with their O-A application such as the letter of refusal, plus securities, deposits>>
not sure what this implies, anyone?

Probably a bank statement

Some articles on this new proposal by "The Cabinet" mention...

 

deputy spokeswoman for the government, said it would apply to all holders of the one-year, non-immigrant visa (NIV).

 

 

There are other mentions of COVID-specifc insurance.

 

And the ability to self insure, proof of a bank account with 3,000,000 baht.

 

 

Early days, nothing approved/gazetted, so a bit confusing, but this does seem to be about more than just the option for OA's to source their insurance from companies putside of Thailand.

 

 

10 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

deputy spokeswoman for the government, said it would apply to all holders of the one-year, non-immigrant visa (NIV).

There is nothing in the summary of the cabinet meeting about any thing other than OA visas.

See number 8 here in Thai (I used google translate on it) https://www.thaigov.go.th/news/contents/details/42740

As said it is not final yet. It could be months before anything appears in a immigration order or a change of the requirements at a embassy or official consulate.

 

 

1 hour ago, webfact said:

A relevant government agency, such as a foreign embassy in Thailand or the respective country’s Foreign Ministry must certify the insurance.

 

Fat chance of the British Embassy in Bangkok being prepared to provide the necessary certification. Instead British applicants would probably be required to follow the cumbersome legalisation process described in all its "glory" in the following link:-

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/714089/Legalisation_info_June_2018.pdf

 

We British expat retirees can, I think, be forgiven for arriving at the conclusion that the British and Thai governments are actively engaged in some joint initiative aimed at making our lives here in Thailand as difficult as is humanly possible. On top of what the Immigration Bureau have inflicted on us over recent years (as well documented on this and other threads), the British government have inflicted on us over the same period cumbersome bureaucracy in the areas of passport renewal (how many retirees aged 70+ are physically up to making 2 potentially lengthy and difficult trips in person to offices located in Bangkok or Chiang Mai, and why should they have to shell out an extra 5,000 THB+ for an agent to make these trips on their behalf?) and State Pension Life Certificate witnessing - on top of the legalisation process to which I have already referred.

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

See number 8 here in Thai

 

Thanks. 

 

Yes, that is certainly quite a bit more clear than various news reports.

 

Interesting that there is a distinction, in the new guidelines, which covers the permission to stay (along with the initiall visa issuance,a nd the option to self-insure).

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, tonray said:

As already stated...I'll be first in line at SavannaKhet ..if and when borders open

Just out of interest. You would opt obtain a non O at Savannakhet over just a border bounce (without reentry permit) to kill off your current extension and then obtain non O at Thai imm.

Of course this can only happen when borders open.

For any guys reading I think what immigration did to the folk already on a non O-A prior to the requirement for insurance is bloody ridiculous. The fact that a non O-A using extensions based on marriage to not have same requirement rubs salt into the wound.

Outrageous. 

Am I correct in the fact that Phuket imm does not enforce this rubbish on non O-A RT extensions. 

Oh the consistency. 

BTW , I'm Non O (retirement).

Clearly angered by what they did to the non O-A folk.

The embassies are NOT going to get into the business of certifying insurance documents issued in a home country.

2 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Just out of interest. You would opt obtain a non O at Savannakhet over just a border bounce (without reentry permit) to kill off your current extension and then obtain non O at Thai imm.

Of course this can only happen when borders open.

For any guys reading I think what immigration did to the folk already on a non O-A prior to the requirement for insurance is bloody ridiculous. The fact that a non O-A using extensions based on marriage to not have same requirement rubs salt into the wound.

Outrageous. 

Am I correct in the fact that Phuket imm does not enforce this rubbish on non O-A RT extensions. 

Oh the consistency. 

I actually like Savannakhet....want to hang out for a few days anyway. ????

Just now, tonray said:

I actually like Savannakhet....want to hang out for a few days anyway. ????

On your page. My fav is Saigon. Prior to covid went at least once per month.

Never understood the big rush for people exit Thai for visa matters and need to rush back. 

With all the usual questions & worries, nevertheless an interesting indication of an attempt - all too late, all too unclear - to alleviate some difficulties created by earlier decisions. 

 

Responsiveness exists in the byzantine twists & turns of Thai bureaucracy, but at a low level.

41 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

There is nothing in the summary of the cabinet meeting about any thing other than OA visas.

See number 8 here in Thai (I used google translate on it) https://www.thaigov.go.th/news/contents/details/42740

As said it is not final yet. It could be months before anything appears in a immigration order or a change of the requirements at a embassy or official consulate.

 

 

So the report about everyone on all visa extensions requiring 100K insurance in the future is essentially wrong? Only OA is mentioned in the link you provided (at point 8). 

Just now, DrJack54 said:

On your page. My fav is Saigon. Prior to covid went at least once per month.

Never understood the big rush for people exit Thai for visa matters and need to rush back. 

The times I have been there have always been too rushed...when I was teaching going in for Non-B..taking overnight bus there and back...exhausting...arriving back in BKK at 6 Am and had to be at school by 8 to teach....I must have been insane...ha ha ha. I love the little night market behind the old French Catholic church...and the Baguette sandwiches with Pate and Pickled veggies...to die for.

The front page story in the BP titled "Virus cover needed for long stays" is very misleading. I just read the minutes of the cabinet meeting (in Thai) and it clearly says this is only for O-A visas AND their intention is to help long-stay foreigners over 50.

 

https://twitter.com/RichardBarrow/status/1404986885022248962

 

Thats about as clear as mud!

 

Is it only for over 70s?

What about renewals?

Can we dump our crappy over priced Thai insurance?
How can I ask the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to verify my insurance - ridiculous!

Do these people jus simply hate foreigners and revel in making life too complicated? 

Spains looking better everyday.

Obtaining an OA visa and extending an OA visa are two different things.  I have done both.  

 

1.  An Embassy or Consulate issues an OA visa.  They are under the authority of MFA(Ministry of Foreign Affairs)

2. Extending an existing OA is handled by Thai Immigration.

 

This news appears to be only about obtaining the mandatory health insurance(400,000 iPD, 40,000 OPD and $100,000 Covid Coverage).  It can be challenging obtaining the required insurance as a first time OA Visa applicant who is outside of Thailand.  I do not expect much to change anytime soon.  

Not clear if this means the 40K outpatient requirement has been dropped or not. Good if it has.

 

The big catch then is going to be how one proves insurance especially for in-country extension. Sounds like the expectation in case of foreign policy or foreign government  program that covers health care abroad is that Embassies will do it. We know that story....!

4 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Not clear if this means the 40K outpatient requirement has been dropped or not. Good if it has.

Nothing is set in stone yet. The cabinet only approved it in principle. It is now up to the health ministry,immigration and MFA to finalize everything.

Maybe immigration will agree to accept foreign insurance coverage. Tricare for US military retirees for example. 

4 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Nothing is set in stone yet. The cabinet only approved it in principle. It is now up to the health ministry,immigration and MFA to finalize everything.

Maybe immigration will agree to accept foreign insurance coverage. Tricare for US military retirees for example. 

 

I think the issue is not if they will accept it but what sort of proof they will require.

 

I can envision US Embassy possibly issuing letters for veterans but I cannot envision them issuing letters verifyingpoeople's private insurance, same issues as there were for income letters

 

And hard to imagine Immigration going through copies of foreign insurance policies

With an O-A visa you get the benefit of not needing to leave the country every 3 months. Only logical that insurance requirements for 1 year are higher than for a max 3 months stay with an O or B.

2 minutes ago, MadMac said:

With an O-A visa you get the benefit of not needing to leave the country every 3 months. Only logical that insurance requirements for 1 year are higher than for a max 3 months stay with an O or B.

what about requirements for 1 year extensions ? Where is your logic now? 

1 minute ago, MadMac said:

With an O-A visa you get the benefit of not needing to leave the country every 3 months. Only logical that insurance requirements for 1 year are higher than for a max 3 months stay with an O or B.

But you don't need to leave every three months on an extension to a permission of stay derived from a non-O visa.  Apart from the insurance requirement the conditions for a retirement extension for O and O-A are exactly the same.

3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

I think the issue is not if they will accept it but what sort of proof they will require.

At this time immigration flat refuses to accept anything other than Thai insurance.

They could accept the overseas insurance certificate that is used for a OA visa applications.