LTR Visa is Now available for Long Term Residency

[Thailandbuckeye]

I downloaded PDF24, it’s free and you don’t have to register it. I continue to use it a year after my LTR, works great.

[mran66]

49 minutes ago, Thailandbuckeye said:

I downloaded PDF24, it’s free and you don’t have to register it. I continue to use it a year after my LTR, works great.

 

looks like a good tool - but what did you actually do for the scan file with it? 

[Thailandbuckeye]

Not sure what  you mean.

 

I scanned from my printer and saved it on my computer. Downloaded to the LTR website. I used the PDF toolbox which allows you to select where the file is located (e.g. scan from printer, file on computer, etc.).

 

 

[John207]

5 hours ago, mran66 said:

 

Oh that sure is the normal way to do it...the term 'double page spread' I think really means in word processing presentation where two sequential pages of the document are shown next to each other.  Sounds they just tried to express something simple and normal in too technical terms...or I am just too stupid to understand!

A double page spread in word processing may mean a different thing but in this case they're just asking for a copy of your passport which is less technical so I think the google link I've provided explains it well.

 

[BrandonJT]

8 hours ago, mran66 said:

 

Oh that sure is the normal way to do it...the term 'double page spread' I think really means in word processing presentation where two sequential pages of the document are shown next to each other.  Sounds they just tried to express something simple and normal in too technical terms...or I am just too stupid to understand!

You're overcomplicating it. It means both sides of the passport in the scan. 2 pages when the passport is open. double page

[Briggsy]

20 hours ago, BrandonJT said:

You're overcomplicating it. It means both sides of the passport in the scan. 2 pages when the passport is open. double page

Yes, this is correct.

 

I provided the details page of my passport blown up to A4 and this was rejected as it missed the page above which has nothing but my photo (again) and my signature. But it is required apparently.

[jayboy]

I understand from a usually reliable Thai source that the LTR has had seriously disappointing numbers.He thought that only about 6,000 LTR visas in all categories have been granted compared with the target of one million.I would be interested to understand why this scheme is so under performing in take up.

[Ben Zioner]

39 minutes ago, jayboy said:

I understand from a usually reliable Thai source that the LTR has had seriously disappointing numbers.He thought that only about 6,000 LTR visas in all categories have been granted compared with the target of one million.I would be interested to understand why this scheme is so under performing in take up.

There are many alternatives to Thailand. Some in Europe. And Thailand is doing a very effective job in damaging its image. 

[NickyLouie]

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

I understand from a usually reliable Thai source that the LTR has had seriously disappointing numbers.He thought that only about 6,000 LTR visas in all categories have been granted compared with the target of one million.I would be interested to understand why this scheme is so under performing in take up.

 

Low net worth people don't qualify ... 

[jayboy]

7 hours ago, NickyLouie said:

 

Low net worth people don't qualify ... 

 

Actually my Thai source (not BOI but close to it) thought the opposite might be part of the problem.In other words there are too many low net worth people who qualify - thus destroying exclusivity and driving the genuinely wealthy away.While I agree the barriers to entry are oddly low I don't feel this accounts for the scheme's recruitment failure.I think it has more to do with poor market research in the first place.There aren't enough of the high rollers to go round and Thailand is not seen as a prime destination by them anyway.

[BrandonJT]

57 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

Actually my Thai source (not BOI but close to it) thought the opposite might be part of the problem.In other words there are too many low net worth people who qualify - thus destroying exclusivity and driving the genuinely wealthy away.While I agree the barriers to entry are oddly low I don't feel this accounts for the scheme's recruitment failure.I think it has more to do with poor market research in the first place.There aren't enough of the high rollers to go round and Thailand is not seen as a prime destination by them anyway.

Just poor marketing in general.  Among all of the Facebook visa groups, the LTR is rarely mentioned, and people that have done a little bit of research on retirement visas have never heard of the LTR visa.

[Yumthai]

2 hours ago, BrandonJT said:

Just poor marketing in general.  Among all of the Facebook visa groups, the LTR is rarely mentioned, and people that have done a little bit of research on retirement visas have never heard of the LTR visa.

Good marketing would be: "LTR Visa: The easy (only) way to get your foreign income tax-free in Thailand!".

That would surely attract more applicants, however it would be politically borderline (admitting the wealthy as usual don't pay tax).

[jas007]

On 7/10/2022 at 11:16 PM, Hanaguma said:

I suspect it is similar to what happened in Malaysia. The Malaysia My Second Home visa scheme just got retooled and the requirements were quadrupled.  Monthly income requirement is now roughly USD $9,500, plus a fixed deposit of a cool quarter million bucks. Oh, and liquid assets of about $400,000.   The rumor I heard is that, under the previous scheme, waaaaaaaaaaay too many Chinese were applying. So the system changed to prevent it.  Malaysia, like Thailand, wanted to get "quality" retirees- meaning white folks with a few random Asians sprinked in.  Didn't work out that way, so now we have the current mess.

The last time I looked, there was a work-around available by way of the Sarawak MM2H program.  The requirements for that are the same as they always were, and once approved, you can travel and live anywhere in Malaysia, although I think you're supposed to maintain a residence in Sarawak.  

 

Maybe that has now changed? 

[JackGats]

12 hours ago, jayboy said:

I understand from a usually reliable Thai source that the LTR has had seriously disappointing numbers.He thought that only about 6,000 LTR visas in all categories have been granted compared with the target of one million.I would be interested to understand why this scheme is so under performing in take up.

Maybe because as soon as launched such visas get undercut by cheaper more accessible versions, like the Destination Thailand Visa (DTV).

[Ben Zioner]

5 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Actually my Thai source (not BOI but close to it) thought the opposite might be part of the problem.In other words there are too many low net worth people who qualify - thus destroying exclusivity and driving the genuinely wealthy away.

You've managed to make me laugh. Look at the sixth post of this thread. High worth individuals can go to Greece and pay 7% income tax, or maybe better Switzerland where the can negotiate their tax. 

[oldcpu]

14 hours ago, jayboy said:

I understand from a usually reliable Thai source that the LTR has had seriously disappointing numbers.

 

 

I believe most of us who obtained the LTR visa don't care re 'the numbers'.

 

Especially for those of us who had a non-O/OA visa in the past, we are very happy with our LTR visa .  And we hope that Thailand carries on with the Visa  so that we have the option to go for the same Visa after the 10-years are up..

 

My experience in reading posts  contrary to the LTR visa on this forum, is the detractors in the most part (but not always) are those who either did not qualify for the visa, or who qualified but did not get the visa because their finances were not structured in a manner acceptable to BoI.

 

But as noted, those who have the LTR are in the most part very happy with it.

.

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, oldcpu said:

I believe most of us who obtained the LTR visa don't care re 'the numbers'.

 

Why should you?  It's not the concern of those who astutely achieved the attractive LTR package for "wealthy pensioners" when most - judging by the evidence on this forum - were not really wealthy at all.It's the BOI and government departments who might be concerned at the flawed strategy they put in place, and pitching the financial qualification too low.

1 hour ago, oldcpu said:

My experience in reading posts  contrary to the LTR visa on this forum, is the detractors in the most part (but not always) are those who either did not qualify for the visa, or who qualified but did not get the visa because their finances were not structured in a manner acceptable to BoI.

 

 

I haven't seen or heard anyone detracting the LTR.It's only of theoretical interest to me anyway since I have PR.

[Ben Zioner]

3 minutes ago, jayboy said:

Why should you?  It's not the concern of those who astutely achieved the attractive LTR package for "wealthy pensioners" when most - judging by the evidence on this forum - were not really wealthy at all.

Reckon it is "wealthy" that hurts you. You can take it away if you wish. I don't want to consider myself "wealthy", even though my pension is sizeably higher than BOI's requirement. 

 

And thanks for calling me "astute". Others will appreciate too. 

[Ben Zioner]

17 minutes ago, jayboy said:

I haven't seen or heard anyone detracting the LTR.It's only of theoretical interest to me anyway since I have PR.

And you pay your income tax?

[jayboy]

14 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Reckon it is "wealthy" that hurts you. You can take it away if you wish. I don't want to consider myself "wealthy", even though my pension is sizeably higher than BOI's requirement. 

 

It's BOI's problem because they wanted to attract a large number of very wealthy residents and they have failed on both counts -so far.As for the individuals who got LTR, they should be congratulated for spotting an excellent opportunity.It's not their fault (or problem) the scheme doesn't make sense.

[jayboy]

10 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

And you pay your income tax?

 

Of course, if any is due.

[Ben Zioner]

11 minutes ago, jayboy said:

It's not their fault (or problem) the scheme doesn't make sense.

I think the scheme makes sense while it has a glaring flaw. I makes sense in that 6000 visa holders, who have an annual income of 100 KUSD, thats a potential equivalent export of 20 Billion Baht. And there is the flaw: we are not obligated to bring this income to Thailand. But his might be corrected once global income Tax gets introduced, if only remitted income remains exempted.

[jayboy]

13 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

I think the scheme makes sense while it has a glaring flaw. I makes sense in that 6000 visa holders, who have an annual income of 100 KUSD, thats a potential equivalent export of 20 Billion Baht. And there is the flaw: we are not obligated to bring this income to Thailand. But his might be corrected once global income Tax gets introduced, if only remitted income remains exempted.

 

I would have thought the glaring flaw is that the target was 1,000,000 (in all categories) whereas the actual achievement is 6,000, and that of that number most are "wealthy pensioners" who are not actually wealthy by any international standard.

[Ben Zioner]

48 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

I would have thought the glaring flaw is that the target was 1,000,000 (in all categories) whereas the actual achievement is 6,000, and that of that number most are "wealthy pensioners" who are not actually wealthy by any international standard.

Nobody ever believed in that 1,000,000 number. On the current figures they process 10 to 15 visas a day, and having been in the office a couple of times I doubt they could process much more than twice that.

 

For someone who has PR is is remarkable that your are still taking Thai Government announcements at face value.

[treetops]

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

I would have thought the glaring flaw is that the target was 1,000,000 (in all categories) whereas the actual achievement is 6,000 . . . .

 

And around a third of applicants are as dependants so the actual number of people qualifying of their own right is even lower.

 

 

[Ben Zioner]

31 minutes ago, treetops said:

 

And around a third of applicants are as dependants so the actual number of people qualifying of their own right is even lower.

 

, 

But that's not so bad when compared to the MM2H numbers, which are 10 times that for a programme started 23 years ago, in a country which has probably more attraction for affluent, educated people.

 

I am sure, BOI, who are smart people, were aware of that.

[Yumthai]

1 hour ago, Ben Zioner said:

in a country which has probably more attraction for affluent, educated people.

What makes you think that affluent educated people are more attracted by Malaysia than Thailand?

[Ben Zioner]

9 minutes ago, Yumthai said:

What makes you think that affluent educated people are more attracted by Malaysia than Thailand?

Property ownership,

High quality english speaking health care,

No bar fights,

Cheap wine,

Outstanding food,

Nice Chinese educated ladies,

Can have a good conversation in English anytime you want,

 

etc..

 

 

[Yumthai]

7 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Property ownership,

High quality english speaking health care,

No bar fights,

Cheap wine,

Outstanding food,

Nice Chinese educated ladies,

Can have a good conversation in English anytime you want,

 

etc..

I agree with property ownership and the overall English speaking level, everything else is very subjective.

The big downside IMO is Malaysia/Malaysians are quite boring compared to Thailand/Thais.

[oldcpu]

5 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Why should you?  It's not the concern of those who astutely achieved the attractive LTR package for "wealthy pensioners" when most - judging by the evidence on this forum - were not really wealthy at all.It's the BOI and government departments who might be concerned at the flawed strategy they put in place, and pitching the financial qualification too low.

 

I haven't seen or heard anyone detracting the LTR.It's only of theoretical interest to me anyway since I have PR.

 

There are posts of a some who did not qualify, and/or whose finances were not structured to meet the BoI criteria, who detract from the visa.

 

As for BoI not meeting their goals - why post that was bad for them (for Boi for a 'flawed strategy' ) ?  Why say anything?

 

Are you attempting to drum up support to stop the visa?

 

if not then why post at all?

 

The post accomplishes nothing other than risk a good thing for those who obtained the visa.