Jump to content

LTR Visa is Now available for Long Term Residency

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lee4Life said:

The OP is asking about the long-term retirement visa, your link is for the long-term residency visa, are they the same? the residency visa article mentions working in Thailand, retirees can't work, right?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to use this with the Work-From Thailand Visa, but it's always the little details that get you. Got a Master's and make more than 80k a year, but have to work for a large company and I don't. Just working for myself.


Theoretically, I could find a part-time remote job for a big company.... but most of the money to make the requirement would be from myself. I doubt they'd accept that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BritTim said:

The new visa initiatives (for instance Non O-X 10-year retirement, Investment visa, multiple entry tourist visa) are almost invariably attractive when first announced, and usually much less so when closely examined. I expect the LTR to fall into the same category.

The jury is still out for the LTR, but you have a very good point. Smart Visa for instance as per its own web site, has delivered on average 50 or less visas per month in the last year under the scheme, and in some months less than 20; this implies rules that are very restrictive, whether or not this was by design.

Edited by Northwest87
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

The fee is 50k baht.

There are very few details to say with certainty that the total fee for 10 years would be 50k baht. I suspect there would be some kind of "check-in" every year which would involve payment.


Medical insurance is also required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Northwest87 said:

I am in a similar situation, and interested in this visa type, so I'll throw my hat in this ring.  I think I might (and I stress "might") qualify under option 2 wealthy pensioner and 3 digital nomads, and from the info you give I think that you might yourself also fit these options if current publicly available info is correct (for option 2 US$80K income in the last two years at the time of your application, which does not trigger the minimum investment in Thailand rule). The English wording does not say the income has to be from retirement sources, only that it is dated from the time of the application filing. If this is the case, what documents will have to be submitted to prove that income? This has not been confirmed as far as I know; and will work income be satisfactory or subject to interpretation from embassy or whatever agency will run the show (the Board of Investment?) since option 2 is for "pensioners". Hey! is this pre-tax by the way? I will optimistically assume it is for the time being. ???? This is the no-pain option, with only the income having to be justified. 


I agree about the devil being in the details: that may screw up everything, but especially when it comes to work contracts under option 3 (remote work). Here too, I  am in a somewhat similar situation as yours (easily employable remotely in my industry, fits the experience requirements, and have a Master's degree). For instance, the company size of allowable foreign employers is clear enough, but what justificative paperwork will be accepted to prove that the company has made $150 million (or whatever the requirement will be) the last 3 years? If it's a listed company, then the listing should be easy to prove (in principle), but justifying the income for non-listed companies is tricky for the smaller ones, precisely because they are private, and public sources such as Dun and Bradstreet are only indicative in those cases.


Also, what constitute a "work contract" for the purpose of the visa? I don't know about other countries, but in my contractor's experience in the US, and I have an extensive one, I'll get a contract every time I take on a contractual job (remote or not) because "cover-your-ass" is a way of life in the US, but it won't guarantee me a job for a finite period of time. Typically, a contract of this type is essentially a non-disclosure agreement that protects the employer, and not much else aside from the duration and the type of work to be performed; it may mention the pay rate, but not always when the jobs vary and the pay rate varies with it: often, you get a duration and a rate guarantee when you work on-site, but this combination is not the norm in many other situations. I can get employed all year long remote, but my employer(s) may not necessarily know at the beginning of the year what the jobs available will be (especially in government contract work) . So the fact that you have a contract on hand is not a proof of guaranteed income of length of employment. This is where I see the biggest question mark in term of what will be left to civil servants' interpretation; the generic wording of the rules is worrisome and may indicate a lack of understanding/research into foreign contractual practices, at least in the context of using them as proof of guaranteed employment.


That was my 2 cents...



They don't need to rediscover the wheel, the banks in the west (at least in Australia) have a way to deal with contractors/freelancers in regards to loans and credit cards. Usually copies of filed tax returns are required for the last 1-3 years.


In regards to contracts it would be very rare to state periods longer than 12 months explicitly in the terms of the contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...