Retirement visa versus Marriage visa - which is best?

[lopburi3]

23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

One has to be very brave to claim that they will never have a stroke, a heart attack or a serious car accident. Any of which will bankrupt anyone of moderate means.

Actually use of government hospitals can greatly reduce such expense - likely about 90% less.

[sandyf]

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Only works till the divorce.

Take it you see divorce in the same way as a stroke or heart attack.

"One has to be very brave to claim that they will never have a stroke, a heart attack or a serious car accident. Any of which will bankrupt anyone of moderate means."

[paulbrow]

For me, retirement is my preference. Solely due to me and only me having control over my extension. Marriage can allow wife to have influence on my extension if she decided to do so.

[hotandsticky]

Just now, paulbrow said:

For me, retirement is my preference. Solely due to me and only me having control over my extension. Marriage can allow wife to have influence on my extension if she decided to do so.

 

 

It also means you have to take your wife to Immigration - which is not necessarily a good combination.

 

Some expats think that they need their wives to hold their hand - even with a retirement extension.

[jimn]

18 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

We saw during Covid that those with marriage extensions had higher priority and a few more rights than the retirement extension. 

Retirement extension seems a bit more exposed to ever changing rules.

Thats not exactly correct. If you had a retirement extension but were married you had the same right to enter Thailand as someone on a marriage extension.

[jimn]

33 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Tell that to those that couldn't return under the travel restrictions when those with a marriage extension could.

It is not really the view of expats that count.

BTW Done both and had home visit on retirement.

That is not correct. When the restictions were in place I returned on a retirement extension with proog of marriage. Yet again your posts are incorrect.

[connda]

2 hours ago, Lite Beer said:

Foreign Wives need nothing in the bank meaning that a Thai Husband and foreign wife can live on not a lot.

And they have a path to Thai Citizenship which a foreign man married to a Thai woman will never have.  I read years back that the rationale for that is that foreign men married to Thai women are a national security risk.  Go figure.

[grain]

The retirement ext is miles ahead and definitely the one to go for. The only plus factor for the marriage ext is only having to show half the amount in the bank, 400K vs 800K. But in every other aspect the retirement wins. Less paperwork, faster time, it's YOUR visa not you're Thai wife's. I'm not currently married but if I married my TGF tomorrow I'd still remain on the retirement ext and keep her out of my visa. 

[khunPer]

Retirement extension – because it's less paperwork, easier to administer and I don't need a wife to be present, or being married at all...👍😉

[rickudon]

I'm on marriage, 400,000 in the bank. Originally i did a 12 month multi-entry every year. but they went and changed the requirements for that and i no longer qualified (yes, my income was insufficient). Since coming to Thailand 13 years ago, the visa/extension rules have changed on average every 2 years. So do not get complacent - the changes may not affect you next time - but they might. I could probably now do the 65,000 baht a month for the retirement, but exchange rates falling would be a problem - also i usually spend a few months a year back in the UK, and i am not going to send 65,000 baht to Thailand when i am not there to use it!

 

Renewing involves about 2 days of effort a year. I was only home visited the first year. Use an agent? Why? I have better uses for 15,000 baht. I can use my money in the bank for 9 months of the year. and i earn a lot more from my remaining investments  in the UK than i would if i kept it in a Thai bank. Also have heard from a friend that they are cracking down on agent applications - he had to attend in person, they do not trust agents anymore after another round of fake applications. If you are financially solid, do retirement by all means - legally.

[bbko]

Over the past 17 years, I've done both the marriage & retirement routes.  IMO retirement option is easier, less paperwork, no Kor Lor 2 needed, no family photos, no home visits, no witnesses needed,  etc.

 

As for the money requirement, I do monthly transfers from my stateside bank, so no money is parked in a Thai bank for months on end.

[Jaggg88]

The retirement extension is easier but requires more finances whereas the marriage or Thai child extension requires more paperwork but less finances. The retirement extension is issued at the office you apply but the marriage Thai child extension is issued by either Bangkok or Chiang Mai which is why you are 'under approval' for 30 or 60 days. That is not a typo as I am currently under approval for 60 days - the first time ever.  

[oldcpu]

6 hours ago, Lemsta69 said:

 

No, you don't need insurance for a "Retirement Visa".

It depends .... (as has already been pointed out on this thread). 

 

You are correct that for an underlying Type-O visa, one does not need to show health insurance for a one year extension based on retirement.  

 

But its a different story for a Type-OA visa where one does need to show health insurance (that meets rather specific Thai requirements) for a one year extension based on retirement.  

 

Initially, when the Health Insurance requirement was implemented (when I was on a type-OA visa), to avoid go for worthless (double) health insurance from the Thai branch of a health insurance company, I switched from an extension for reason of retirement, to an extension for reason of marriage.  But where money was not an issue, the paper work requirements (and time to get permission to stay in Thailand extension approved) were more of a 'bother' with the marriage justification, then with the 'retirement justification' for the extension.

 

So a number of us on this forum (such as myself) on Type-OA visas, (despite having great health insurance and despite having a Thai spouse), left Thailand to invalidate our Type-OA visas, and re-entered Thailand successfully visa exempt, and applied for a Type-O visa.  We did this because of the implementation of the Thailand immigration health insurance requirement on extensions on Type-OA visas and because retirement extensions had less paperwork and were quicker then marriage extensions for both Type-O and Type-OA.   

 

Perhaps a salient point in regards to the Health Insurance, is  one pretty much has to obtain their health insurance (when on the Type-OA retirement extension) from the Thai branch of a Health Insurance company, and not from a branch outside of Thailand (even thou our insurance from outside Thailand was massively superior).   (I wish the type-OA visa would follow the lead of the Long Term Resident Visa where one on the LTR visa is allowed to self insure with $100K US equivalent in a bank account anywhere in the world - but to date, the Type-OA visa has not implemented that).

 

Hence I think the recommendation of many is to go for a Type-O visa, and further if money is not an issue, go for an extension for reason of Retirement.

 

Possibly the 'elephant' in the room is the recent concern about taxation of money being brought into Thailand but that is not relevant to the question asked in this thread, and further that topic is being beaten to death in other threads and need not be discussed here.

Edited November 6, 2023 by oldcpu

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, Jaggg88 said:

Thai child extension is issued by either Bangkok or Chiang Mai ...

 

To be more accurate, the extension must be approved at Division headquarters. Depending on where the immigration office is located, this means Bangkok, Mae Rim Chiang Mai, Khon Kaen, or Hat Yai. The headquarters for Eastern Division (while separate from that for Central Division) is also in Bangkok.

[Lemsta69]

42 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

It depends .... (as has already been pointed out on this thread). 

 

You are correct that for an underlying Type-O visa, one does not need to show health insurance for a one year extension based on retirement.  

 

But its a different story for a Type-OA visa where one does need to show health insurance (that meets rather specific Thai requirements) for a one year extension based on retirement.  

 

Initially, when the Health Insurance requirement was implemented (when I was on a type-OA visa), to avoid go for worthless (double) health insurance from the Thai branch of a health insurance company, I switched from an extension for reason of retirement, to an extension for reason of marriage.  But where money was not an issue, the paper work requirements (and time to get permission to stay in Thailand extension approved) were more of a 'bother' with the marriage justification, then with the 'retirement justification' for the extension.

 

So a number of us on this forum (such as myself) on Type-OA visas, (despite having great health insurance and despite having a Thai spouse), left Thailand to invalidate our Type-OA visas, and re-entered Thailand successfully visa exempt, and applied for a Type-O visa.  We did this because of the implementation of the Thailand immigration health insurance requirement on extensions on Type-OA visas and because retirement extensions had less paperwork and were quicker then marriage extensions for both Type-O and Type-OA.   

 

Perhaps a salient point in regards to the Health Insurance, is  one pretty much has to obtain their health insurance (when on the Type-OA retirement extension) from the Thai branch of a Health Insurance company, and not from a branch outside of Thailand (even thou our insurance from outside Thailand was massively superior).   (I wish the type-OA visa would follow the lead of the Long Term Resident Visa where one on the LTR visa is allowed to self insure with $100K US equivalent in a bank account anywhere in the world - but to date, the Type-OA visa has not implemented that).

 

Hence I think the recommendation of many is to go for a Type-O visa, and further if money is not an issue, go for an extension for reason of Retirement.

 

Possibly the 'elephant' in the room is the recent concern about taxation of money being brought into Thailand but that is not relevant to the question asked in this thread, and further that topic is being beaten to death in other threads and need not be discussed here.

 

Dunno why you bothered typing out such a long response to me because I already know all of that. It's the guy I responded to who you should be educating. There's no such thing as a "Retirement Visa" and anyone who uses that term is a time waster.

[oldcpu]

3 minutes ago, Lemsta69 said:

 

Dunno why you bothered typing out such a long response to me because I already know all of that. It's the guy I responded to who you should be educating. There's no such thing as a "Retirement Visa" and anyone who uses that term is a time waster.

I thought your post (that I quoted) by itself could be misleading (for someone who does not read the entire thread) which is why I bothered.

 

I agree with you that calling a visa a "Retirement Visa" can be misleading and not helpful if one is trying to help. 

 

As pointed out, there is no such visa that goes precisely by that name.

[Lemsta69]

7 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

I thought your post (that I quoted) by itself could be misleading (for someone who does not read the entire thread) which is why I bothered.

 

I agree with you that calling a visa a "Retirement Visa" can be misleading and not helpful if one is trying to help. 

 

As pointed out, there is no such visa that goes precisely by that name.

 

Fair enough. I don't have the patience to explain the basics over and over again, not do I comment on every single post that disseminates misinformation.

 

I just happened to think that the post I replied to was particularly egregious for reasons that would contravene forum rules were I to explain them.

[Xin Loi]

On 11/5/2023 at 12:14 PM, connda said:

I just do the marriage extension.  Less funds tied up in a Thai bank.  Regarding the paperwork hassle.  Put it into perspective - it's once a year.  Keep a folder in your file cabinet which contains duplicates of all the paperwork. Take three sets of pictures during one sitting.  Change your shirt between sitting and you now have three years of photos.  Print out multiple copies of your TM-7 that is filled with the exception of the date.  Then you just need to get the bank statement and copies and a new Kor 2 and copies.  Bob's your uncle!

It ain't that difficult.  Then just plan for 45 minutes to an hour at immigration once the IO starts working on your paperwork.  I've spent more time sitting in a dentist's chair.  Again, put it into perspective.  Yeah - it's a PITA, but it's once a year.  Be prepared and it's just another yearly visit to the Amphur (Kor 2), the bank (statement) and then to the Immigration Office.

 

Marriage Extension Requirements - Ubonjoe.pdf 41.52 kB · 10 downloads

I used to use a retirement visa and it was ok for awhile or un til the IO got to playing too many games. There is a whole list of visas available for use and we chose the Thai wife one, that has worked perfect for us.keep the 400K baht around if needed. Last year 6 months, this year two. paperwork the same but copies without dates are helpful. Wife does the actual visa, I do the signing. Easay peasy and I will continue to do so. retirement and others, they have too much control on what you can do.

[Aldo123]

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts on this, which is really interesting. Regarding the issue of health insurance for visa extension by means of retirement, can the insurance policy be from an international company (like Cigna), but not purchased in Thailand? A USD or EURO policy, for example? Or must it be purchased locally?

 

Also, if you already have a Thai bank account with the 800k (or more) and it's there for a year or so when you apply for the O Visa abroad, and then extend for retirement, is that acceptable, or do they insist on a fresh overseas transaction to deposit the money?

[DrJack54]

1 minute ago, Aldo123 said:

Also, if you already have a Thai bank account with the 800k (or more) and it's there for a year or so when you apply for the O Visa abroad, and then extend for retirement, is that acceptable, or do they insist on a fresh overseas transaction to deposit the money?

For extensions the proof funds came from abroad is not required

[CartagenaWarlock]

21 hours ago, lopburi3 said:

All you have to do is exit and return, obtain O visa entry for 2,000 baht from immigration and then extend - there is no need for any bribing anyone (which is not only illegal but idiotic).  

Bribing helps those who are unfortunate earn dollars due to no fault of their own. Just because they were born and grew up in a place where earning dollars is not possible, it is not their fault, really. And good luck starting over by killing your non-OA. 

Edited November 6, 2023 by CartagenaWarlock

[lopburi3]

38 minutes ago, Aldo123 said:

Regarding the issue of health insurance for visa extension by means of retirement, can the insurance policy be from an international company (like Cigna), but not purchased in Thailand? A USD or EURO policy, for example? Or must it be purchased locally?

Believe requires signature from company insurance officials they they comply with Thai regulations (which most would not have a clue about and refuse).

[oldcpu]

2 hours ago, Aldo123 said:

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts on this, which is really interesting. Regarding the issue of health insurance for visa extension by means of retirement, can the insurance policy be from an international company (like Cigna), but not purchased in Thailand? A USD or EURO policy, for example? Or must it be purchased locally?

It must be locally in case of Cigna.

 

My health insurance is from Europe and from Cigna. It is superior to Thai requirements but it was not accepted by Thai immigration. Cigna Europe also refused to sign any Thai forms for insurance. I contacted the Thai branch of Cigna and asked if they would indicate to immigration my insurance adequate ( for a nominal fee) and they refused. They insisted I buy new ( double ) insurance from them, which wasn't as good as my current insurance ( and was more expensive as my current insurance is subsidized as part of my pension).

 

2 hours ago, Aldo123 said:

 

Also, if you already have a Thai bank account with the 800k (or more) and it's there for a year or so when you apply for the O Visa abroad, and then extend for retirement, is that acceptable, or do they insist on a fresh overseas transaction to deposit the money?

As pointed out, proof not required for extensions. But if you are on a Type-OA visa and have left the country and are applying for a Type-O ( to avoid health insurance from Thai branch proof requirements) you may have to prove money from abroad dependent on the immigration office. In my case, when I switched from Type-OA to Type-O,  I used same account I used years earlier (with proof of money coming into Thailand) and I was not asked to provide the proof.

Edited November 6, 2023 by oldcpu

[sandyf]

23 hours ago, jimn said:

That is not correct. When the restictions were in place I returned on a retirement extension with proog of marriage. Yet again your posts are incorrect.

I said "those that couldn't return", but why not distort the context.

So you agree you had to be married to return before those that were unmarried on retirement.

Nothing incorrect about the implication I made in respect of a marriage extension, surely a bit easier than having to prove you are married.

[lopburi3]

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I said "those that couldn't return", but why not distort the context.

So you agree you had to be married to return before those that were unmarried on retirement.

Nothing incorrect about the implication I made in respect of a marriage extension, surely a bit easier than having to prove you are married.

Yes - Covid however was a once in a lifetime event (I and suspect we all hope).  If we base decisions on such low likelihoods suspect we would be better returning to the womb.

[sandyf]

2 minutes ago, lopburi3 said:

Yes - Covid however was a once in a lifetime event (I and suspect we all hope).  If we base decisions on such low likelihoods suspect we would be better returning to the womb.

Apologies if I wasn't particularly clear. The point wasn't about covid, which as you say we can only hope never to see again.

The situation did however highlight how the authorities viewed marital status, which may or may not influence how things evolve going forward.

I did my first 6 years here on ME visas and been on both types of extension, went back to marriage as it was easier to get ME at HCMC. Last couple of years have gotten new SE e-visas which again has been fairly easy being married.

[jimn]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

So you agree you had to be married to return before those that were unmarried on retirement.

Yes thats the point I was making, your post implied that those who are married but on a Retirement extension could not return at the same time as those on a marriage extension. Which is of course incorrect.