Opinion Editorial: No, It Isn’t Time to Worry About RETIREMENT VISA Changes….Yet

[jacko45k]

21 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

The health insurance should be mandatory for ALL long term visas, and agents should be declared illegal.

It is a carry over from the O-A Visa...(real visa I mean.... as opposed to Extension which is what you talk of). Hospitals were making a fuss over unpaid bills..... Many years ago O-A Extensions did not require medical insurance. I am against this being included as the insurance available here is mostly overpriced and offers scant cover. Perhaps a self insurance option.  As to agents they serve a purpose,  older Expats can't manage the legwork. I think retirement extensions should only be offered to older Expats, 

[Ben Zioner]

11 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

It is a carry over from the O-A Visa...(real visa I mean.... as opposed to Extension which is what you talk of). Hospitals were making a fuss over unpaid bills..... Many years ago O-A Extensions did not require medical insurance. I am against this being included as the insurance available here is mostly overpriced and offers scant cover. Perhaps a self insurance option.  As to agents they serve a purpose,  older Expats can't manage the legwork. I think retirement extensions should only be offered to older Expats, 

So  easy to fix, just copy the LTR visa HI requirements: any [overseas] insurance with a minimum coverage of USD 50000, Social Security, or USD 100000 cashflow.

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, Ben Zioner said:

So  easy to fix, just copy the LTR visa HI requirements: any [overseas] insurance with a minimum coverage of USD 50000, Social Security, or USD 100000 cashflow.

Why would they want to promote foreign insurance within Thailand? The aim is to line Thai pockets. 

[Ben Zioner]

23 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Why would they want to promote foreign insurance within Thailand? The aim is to line Thai pockets. 

Why does it work for LTR? It works to the extent that many are now dumping their AOs for the LTR.

[jacko45k]

Just now, Ben Zioner said:

Why does it work for LTR? It works to the extent that many are now dumping their AOs for the LTR.

Really, I had heard the take-up was rather poor.....mainly those wanting to work here. 

[Ben Zioner]

4 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Really, I had heard the take-up was rather poor.....mainly those wanting to work here. 

Nope,  the largest group are the pensioners. so far they haven't reached 10k, but issued several thousands of stamps. BOI is just great to deal with. Young, english speaking graduates.

 

There is data on the LTR thread, in the visa section.

[mokwit]

1 hour ago, Ben Zioner said:

So  easy to fix, just copy the LTR visa HI requirements: any [overseas] insurance with a minimum coverage of USD 50000, Social Security, or USD 100000 cashflow.

Will they accept it at IB offices for OA? OA maybe has very specific requirements and likely they will be very pedantic about accepting them - I thought only the Thai insurance was accepted for OA/X so that counter staff could understand it.

 

here is OX requirement.

 

Health insurance (as per the specifications of the OIC office
with coverage of OPD of at least 40,000 baht and IPD of at
least 400,000 baht
Please check http://longstay.tgia.org

[Mike Teavee]

14 minutes ago, mokwit said:

Health insurance (as per the specifications of the OIC office
with coverage of OPD of at least 40,000 baht and IPD of at
least 400,000 baht

That what the standard Insurance for the OA used to be but it changed to 3Milllion Outpatients cover from 1st October 2021 which I believe is the same for the newish LTR Visa So am guessing would be the standard for any future Insurance requirements... https://www.pacificcrosshealth.com/en/longstay-visa/

 

 

 

 

[Ben Zioner]

27 minutes ago, mokwit said:

Will they accept it at IB offices for OA? OA maybe has very specific requirements and likely they will be very pedantic about accepting them - I thought only the Thai insurance was accepted for OA/X so that counter staff could understand it.

 

here is OX requirement.

 

Health insurance (as per the specifications of the OIC office
with coverage of OPD of at least 40,000 baht and IPD of at
least 400,000 baht
Please check http://longstay.tgia.org

Yes, just forget OA/OX, go LTR, or O if you can't match the LTR's requirements. The main advantage of dealing with BOI instead of IB is that the staff comes from Thailand 2025 while IB is populated by Thailand 1700.

[TigerandDog]

13 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

O/A requires no monies to be brought into Thailand. Until a few years ago it was easy to apply for one in your home country, use it for the maximum two years, then repeat the process based on just showing a home country bank statement, no seasoning was even required. The insurance requirements were bought in to take the shine off this visa and remove it's considerable advantage over those visa classes that require money to be held on deposit here (which at least could be drawn on for medical costs in an emergency). 

Not entirely true. O-A requires money to be in a Thai bank account within 3 months of arrival in Thailand (that was the requirement when I moved here) OR the 65k per month or the combined method. Seasoning was in place when I moved here 9 years ago, but it was only for the period prior to obtaining an extension of stay. The insurance requirements were brought in under the guise of stopping foreigners from doing runners from hospitals. Nothing to do with what you have said. Honestly, where do some of you people get this misinformation from?

[TigerandDog]

3 hours ago, jacko45k said:

It is a carry over from the O-A Visa...(real visa I mean.... as opposed to Extension which is what you talk of). Hospitals were making a fuss over unpaid bills..... Many years ago O-A Extensions did not require medical insurance. I am against this being included as the insurance available here is mostly overpriced and offers scant cover. Perhaps a self insurance option.  As to agents they serve a purpose,  older Expats can't manage the legwork. I think retirement extensions should only be offered to older Expats, 

there's a better alternative than that if the Thai Govt had any brains and it would save older expats a heap of inconvenience, viz. for expats that have had 10 consecutive extensions of stay on either O or O-A (whether marriage or retirement) and are 70 or older offer them PR with no language test. Would solve a lot of problems for everyone.

[Mike Teavee]

24 minutes ago, TigerandDog said:

there's a better alternative than that if the Thai Govt had any brains and it would save older expats a heap of inconvenience, viz. for expats that have had 10 consecutive extensions of stay on either O or O-A (whether marriage or retirement) and are 70 or older offer them PR with no language test. Would solve a lot of problems for everyone.

You mean it would solve problems for you 

 

Why should they give you PR if you’ve lived here for 10 years & are too lazy to bother to learn the language? .
 

No country wants Old Foreigners who are likely to cause them problems with unpaid hospital bills / unclaimed bodies so instead why not give everybody <60 who has a few Million THB in the bank & speaks/reads Thai to at least a Basic level PR?
 

Fun factoid,  it’s more or less impossible to get a PR in Singapore after 50 unless you’re married to a Singaporean (or insanely wealthy) 

 

[lamyai3]

1 hour ago, TigerandDog said:

Not entirely true. O-A requires money to be in a Thai bank account within 3 months of arrival in Thailand (that was the requirement when I moved here) OR the 65k per month or the combined method. Seasoning was in place when I moved here 9 years ago, but it was only for the period prior to obtaining an extension of stay. The insurance requirements were brought in under the guise of stopping foreigners from doing runners from hospitals. Nothing to do with what you have said. Honestly, where do some of you people get this misinformation from?

You've got the whole thing completely muddled. There's never been a Non O-A requirement to have money in Thailand 3 months after arrival - presumably you're confusing it with the 3 months seasoning that used to be needed prior to making an extension. Much of the appeal of the Non O-A visa was that it never required money to be held in Thailand at all unless you wanted to switch to extensions - this was the rationale given for imposing the insurance, along with the hogwash about Non O-A holders skipping out on hospital bills.

 

Once the insurance requirements were levied on the O-A (which quickly octupled from 400k to 3 million) most of the better informed folk left the country to kill off the visa and switch to a Non O, thus negating the need for insurance. Sounds like you missed the memo. 

[Artisi]

1 hour ago, TigerandDog said:

there's a better alternative than that if the Thai Govt had any brains and it would save older expats a heap of inconvenience, viz. for expats that have had 10 consecutive extensions of stay on either O or O-A (whether marriage or retirement) and are 70 or older offer them PR with no language test. Would solve a lot of problems for everyone.

And why not, most of them won't last all that much longer. 

[TigerandDog]

2 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

You mean it would solve problems for you 

 

Why should they give you PR if you’ve lived here for 10 years & are too lazy to bother to learn the language? .
 

No country wants Old Foreigners who are likely to cause them problems with unpaid hospital bills / unclaimed bodies so instead why not give everybody <60 who has a few Million THB in the bank & speaks/reads Thai to at least a Basic level PR?
 

Fun factoid,  it’s more or less impossible to get a PR in Singapore after 50 unless you’re married to a Singaporean (or insanely wealthy) 

 

even with the stipulations you state, I'd still qualify. So what problems would it solve for me? So many on here have no idea what they're on about.

[TigerandDog]

1 hour ago, lamyai3 said:

You've got the whole thing completely muddled. There's never been a Non O-A requirement to have money in Thailand 3 months after arrival - presumably you're confusing it with the 3 months seasoning that used to be needed prior to making an extension. Much of the appeal of the Non O-A visa was that it never required money to be held in Thailand at all unless you wanted to switch to extensions - this was the rationale given for imposing the insurance, along with the hogwash about Non O-A holders skipping out on hospital bills.

 

Once the insurance requirements were levied on the O-A (which quickly octupled from 400k to 3 million) most of the better informed folk left the country to kill off the visa and switch to a Non O, thus negating the need for insurance. Sounds like you missed the memo. 

you really ought to get your facts right before posting such drivel. When I arrived here 9 years ago on an O-A it WAS a requirement to have the money in the bank within 3 months of arrival. No confusion whatsoever with the 3 months seasoning. I even had to show the bank a copy of the Police/Immigration rule stating that, before they would open an account for me. I didn't miss the memo about O as I am more than comfortably meet the O-A requirements  So it has nothing to do with MY choice of visa or any need to change to an O. 

 

The ones that left the country to negate their O-A's most likely should never have been here in the first place as they obviously were incapable of meeting the requirements.

[Mike Teavee]

13 minutes ago, TigerandDog said:

even with the stipulations you state, I'd still qualify. So what problems would it solve for me? So many on here have no idea what they're on about.

So you’re under 60, speak/read Thai & have a few Million in the Bank? 
 

Seeing as you advocated Over 70s with no Thai ability I simply don’t believe you…

 

 

[TigerandDog]

Just now, Mike Teavee said:

So you’re under 60, speak/read Thai & have a few Million in the Bank? 
 

Seeing as you advocated Over 70s with no Thai ability I simply don’t believe you…

 

 

I'm over 70, speak Thai enough to hold a conversation and yes have several million in the bank here. I don't give a flying F if you don't believe me. The reason for saying no Thail ability is that MOST over 70 long term foreigners have none.

[Mike Teavee]

11 minutes ago, TigerandDog said:

you really ought to get your facts right before posting such drivel. When I arrived here 9 years ago on an O-A it WAS a requirement to have the money in the bank within 3 months of arrival. No confusion whatsoever with the 3 months seasoning. I even had to show the bank a copy of the Police/Immigration rule stating that, before they would open an account for me. I didn't miss the memo about O as I am more than comfortably meet the O-A requirements  So it has nothing to do with MY choice of visa or any need to change to an O. 

 

The ones that left the country to negate their O-A's most likely should never have been here in the first place as they obviously were incapable of meeting the requirements.

First part you are the only person to have a Non-IMM OA who’s ever reported needing money in the bank except at Extension time. But you are Special. 
 

2nd part youre making stupid assumptions, there were some guys who have more than enough money to Self Insure (the amount quoted for LTR is 3Million) but were unable to get Medical Insurance so switched to the Non-IMM O. 

[Mike Teavee]

Just now, TigerandDog said:

I'm over 70, speak Thai enough to hold a conversation and yes have several million in the bank here. I don't give a flying F if you don't believe me. The reason for saying no Thail ability is that MOST over 70 long term foreigners have none.

So you don’t meet all the criteria I listed (I.e. you’re not under 60, the very 1st thing I listed) 

 

& I’m the one who needs to learn to Read/Comprehend!

 

So yes, I was right to not believe you not that I give a Flying F.

 

 

 

[TigerandDog]

1 minute ago, Mike Teavee said:

First part you are the only person to have a Non-IMM OA who’s ever reported needing money in the bank except at Extension time. But you are Special. 
 

2nd part youre making stupid assumptions, there were some guys who have more than enough money to Self Insure (the amount quoted for LTR is 3Million) but we’re unable to get Medical Insurance so switched to the Non-IMM O. 

I might be the first to report about O-A's having to have the money in the bank, BUT all my foreigner friends where I'm living are also on O-A's and they also had to provide proof to their banks about the requirement for teh funds to be in teh bank within 3 months of arrival. So who's making stupid assumptions now.

 

So all those were over the age of 85 were they? Many of the Thai stipulated health funds increased the age limit for joining up. The fund I'm with increased that age limit from 70 to 85 with a full medical examination required. So perhaps many of those people that opted out of O-A weren't as well informed as you seem to think

[TigerandDog]

4 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

So you don’t meet all the criteria I listed (I.e. you’re not under 60, the very 1st thing I listed) 

 

& I’m the one who needs to learn to Read/Comprehend!

 

So yes, I was right to not believe you not that I give a Flying F.

 

 

 

what does under 60 have to do with anything. Totally irrelevant comment by you AGAIN.

[Mike Teavee]

11 minutes ago, TigerandDog said:

what does under 60 have to do with anything. Totally irrelevant comment by you AGAIN.

Your proposed criteria for PR was >70, been here 10 years & Thai ability didn’t matter. 
 

Mine was  <60, has a few Million THB in the bank & speaks/reads Thai to at least a Basic level

 

You then said you would meet that criteria anyway which was a lie as you’re > 70

 

Thats where the <60 came in.

 
The irrelevant part of it was you making a stupid suggestion of who they should give PRs to. 

[Mike Teavee]

9 minutes ago, TigerandDog said:

So all those were over the age of 85 were they? Many of the Thai stipulated health funds increased the age limit for joining up. The fund I'm with increased that age limit from 70 to 85 with a full medical examination required. So perhaps many of those people that opted out of O-A weren't as well informed as you seem to think

So the only reason for being denied insurance is age? You Never heard of pre-existing conditions that make some people simply uninsurable. 

That aside most insurance companies have a maximum onboarding age of 75 so whilst mine will continue to insure me until I’m 99, I couldn’t get a new policy with them at 76.

 

Please share the name of your Insurance company (mine is Pacific Cross) as I’m sure a lot of guys > 75 would be interested. 

[Olmate]

44 minutes ago, TigerandDog said:

you really ought to get your facts right before posting such drivel. When I arrived here 9 years ago on an O-A it WAS a requirement to have the money in the bank within 3 months of arrival. No confusion whatsoever with the 3 months seasoning. I even had to show the bank a copy of the Police/Immigration rule stating that, before they would open an account for me. I didn't miss the memo about O as I am more than comfortably meet the O-A requirements  So it has nothing to do with MY choice of visa or any need to change to an O. 

 

The ones that left the country to negate their O-A's most likely should never have been here in the first place as they obviously were incapable of meeting the requirements.

"The Castle" movie... Your dreaming!! ????

[Thingamabob]

On 8/5/2023 at 8:03 AM, Gknrd said:

10-1 it will be increased. My guess 2 million, criminal check. The only question is how it will be implemented. Again just a guess, but same as last time .  One year extension on old rules then your next extension will have to comply or out you go. My guess is the agents will have to be pretty well tied into immigration to help, and the fees will double or triple.

No basis for this whatsoever, merely scaremongering.

[jacko45k]

5 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

there's a better alternative than that if the Thai Govt had any brains and it would save older expats a heap of inconvenience, viz. for expats that have had 10 consecutive extensions of stay on either O or O-A (whether marriage or retirement) and are 70 or older offer them PR with no language test. Would solve a lot of problems for everyone.

Very optimistic...also very unlikely. ????

[jerrymahoney]

33 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Very optimistic...also very unlikely. ????

Sure but you can never tell when those in Immigration might check into a website like this to see what they should do if they had any brains.

[mokwit]

51 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

No basis for this whatsoever, merely scaremongering.

I think it is probably the most likely scenario. More likely than grandfathering. This is after all what they did with 400k and 65k proof. They are not going to grandfather the requirement for criminal record check or insurance if these are applied, so how can they grandfather only the money? They could perhaps but you would still be required to furnish other requirements. THEY DON'T CARE and neither does it seem, do our embassies.

 

I reiterate, when Hapkarn said it was "too easy", IMO he clearly meant that to just be over 50 and meet financial requirements was not enough.

[jayboy]

5 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

Why should they give you PR if you’ve lived here for 10 years & are too lazy to bother to learn the language? .
 

This is a very common misunderstanding, namely that the Thai authorities attach much priority to retired foreigners speaking reasonable Thai. Frankly they don't care much about this: of course it's part of the PR process but by no means the most important.To the extent the authorities consider - which they don't very much - retired foreigners (I'm referring mainly to the guys in Pattaya, rural Isaan and other such habitats) the main impulse would be to ensure they are financially solvent and can meet their obligations without calling on the Thai state for support.