Why Do So Few Get Residency?

[grtaylor]

Unless there is some advantage to PR that I'm missing (other than paying the Thai entry fee to national parks)...

While there are several advantages to having PR status as already mentioned, paying the Thai entry fee to national parks is not one of them. I have tried, but am always told that I have to be Thai to pay as a Thai. So it goes.

I disagree.

I have been given the Thai price simply on the strength of my Thai Drivers Licence, on Koh Samet. On Koh Chang I was told I needed to produce my work permit to get the Thai price. I know people personally with PR who have been the Thai price for National Parks, and the Thai price at hotels.

G

Edited August 22, 2007 by grtaylor

[Briggsy]

Good post, highlighting the catch 22 of residency requirements. Namely either work outside Thailand, support Thai family, pay no Thai income tax so no PR. Or work in Thailand, support Thai family, don't earn enough to pay 50,000 Baht a year in Thai income tax so no PR.

It may not be worth it but if you really wanted Residency couldn't you simply pay the 50,000 in tax without a work permit and state that it is income from outside of Thailand?

Technically if you spend more than 180 days in Thailand you are supposed to pay taxes on any income made working outside of Thailand that is bought into the country in the same year that it was made.

Many people try to ensure that they do not bring money into the country until the following year to avoid taxes but if you want to pay taxes it shouldn't be a problem. Just tell them that you don't work in Thailand but you are claiming the income you made from outside. Then you can pay taxes and qualify for residency without having a work permit.

Has anyone ever tried this?

Nice 'out of the box' thinking. However can you imaging the situation? You turn up at Suan Phlu, explaining that you wish to pay tax of 50,000 per year backdated 3 years which is 150,000 on income not earned in Thailand but you feel you are in some way obliged to pay. Oh, and by the way can I apply for permanent residency as well. lol.

The immigration official is gonna think this is some mad farang making a cack-handed clumsy attempt at bribing his way to PR.

This scheme wouldn't even get off the ground.

But nice theorising once again.

[CWMcMurray]

I wasn't advising going in and paying 150,000 and applying for residency at the same time. I was thinking along the lines of filing your taxes at the end of the year declaring the money you made outside of Thailand and brought in during the year, which by Thai law you are supposed to do anyway. Then after 3 years of doing this you go in and apply for residency and you have your proof of paying tax for the previous 3 years.

I still don't know if it would work but I certainly wouldn't advise going in and trying to do it all in one shot.

Are there any lawyers out there? What do you think?

[Briggsy]

I wasn't advising going in and paying 150,000 and applying for residency at the same time. I was thinking along the lines of filing your taxes at the end of the year declaring the money you made outside of Thailand and brought in during the year, which by Thai law you are supposed to do anyway. Then after 3 years of doing this you go in and apply for residency and you have your proof of paying tax for the previous 3 years.

I still don't know if it would work but I certainly wouldn't advise going in and trying to do it all in one shot.

Are there any lawyers out there? What do you think?

I think the key document here is the phor ngor dor 1 which shows income and tax paid for the year (similar to a British P60). I believe that is used to determine how much tax has been paid.

[thaigene2]

Just a couple of random thoughts with no real conclusion.........

1) the main problem I have with the way that the law is currently structured is that it is a bit of a blunt tool.

I have no doubt that income criteria for men (both at the non-immigrant and then at the PR stage) are there obstensibly to prevent marriages of convinience so that some bloke who has fallen in love with Patters or Nana doesn't marry some chick for money so he can get an easy visa. And there would be plenty of them. This of course discriminates against a large group who are legimately married (my parents included), and this latter group get diddly squat from the RTG in terms of rights to stay and rights to work. What to do? I am not sure.

2) PR for retirees I don't believe is the international norm...but I am happy to be proven wrong on this.

3) The other thought I have going through my mind is (and which probably contradicts my first point), is that even if you could get rights to work here when married would you even earn enough to live here? Some people state that the income rules prevent them from even getting extensions which will allow them to eventually qualify for PR. Which is a fair enough point......But what about the raw economics of it all??

For many, wouldn't the fact that wages and salaries for most jobs here are low, meaning that the default option for most would be to move back to farang land instead? Sure, if you were a plumber, accountant, nurse, or bus driver say in the UK, and you migrated to OZ, NZ or the US, you could get by. But to pick up your former trade in Thailand would lead most to financial oblivion - even for those who don't put a huge premium on high pay. Plus there is the language factor. Who is going to employ you even IF you had the right to work? Sure, there would be some English speaking jobs out there, but not enough for everyone. It is a bit of a catch-22 to begin with, even if you didn't have the hassels of the exisiting laws. But I guess the point is that everyone deserves a chance....

Anyway, as i said, just some random food for thought.

A good post Samran. As a farng father and husband of thais-luuk-krung's I also seeth over this. But what to do? I don't know either...and the RTG couldn't give a rat's ass about us (no matter who is in power). The Chinese-Thai luuk-krungs have made darn sure no one else will do what their ancestors did by rolling in, marrrying a thai, then buying up everything and shutting out everyone else from competing in biz with them...It's protectionism pure and simple.

That brings me to your other point - which I take a slightly different view. I think Gerhard the automechanic from Munich knows he could never come here and do as well as he did back home as a 'mechanic'. But like most pioneering migrants he'd like the chance to come here, open a small biz in HIS OWN NAME and try to make a go of it. He can't of course - cause he'd be competing with Mr Wong next door - or Mr ChangsuayWONGchaiyo or whatever the chin's name magically became in the 80's.

TG2

[Big A]

I had been on a yearly extension for 8 years until 6 months ago. Circumstances changed for me and am now on a yearly Non O multiple entry. Any way, that's a long story.

However, during the last 3 years or so, I started looking closely into the PR route. I thought I was well qualified

* yearly extensions for 8 continuous years

* worked for a respected company as a manager

* had more than enough in the bank

* was married to a Thai

* owned my own flat and had my own car

* spoke Thai (below average, admittedly)

Basically, anyone I spoke to was either denied or knew of someone who was denied PR status. I chiselled away for a few years at this and come across the same old dead end. Basically, they don't want us here! What's the intake? 100 or so per year?

Give it a go. It might work for you!!

[grtaylor]

I had been on a yearly extension for 8 years until 6 months ago. Circumstances changed for me and am now on a yearly Non O multiple entry. Any way, that's a long story.

However, during the last 3 years or so, I started looking closely into the PR route. I thought I was well qualified

* yearly extensions for 8 continuous years

* worked for a respected company as a manager

* had more than enough in the bank

* was married to a Thai

* owned my own flat and had my own car

* spoke Thai (below average, admittedly)

Basically, anyone I spoke to was either denied or knew of someone who was denied PR status. I chiselled away for a few years at this and come across the same old dead end. Basically, they don't want us here! What's the intake? 100 or so per year?

Give it a go. It might work for you!!

I think you're being a little negative about your chances. They accept a maximum of 100 applications per nationality each year. In most cases that allowance is never taken up. Of course, it doesn't mean that everyone is granted it. However, I don't know anyone who has applied and been rejected, but I do know almost a dozen people personally (Brits, Americans, Aussies, and a Korean) who have all been successful in the last year or so. For the year 2004-5 they accepted just over 200 total, the information is there on the immigration website for all to see.

G

[samran]

unfortunately, for BigA, the clock has been reset, which is the tragedy of it all.

[KamnanT]

I wold agree that Big A's view is a little too negative. I applied in December 2005 and was accepted in June this year. Yes, it is a bureaucratic process and the initial and final stages can be time-consuming, but most of the 18 months is just waiting. The limit of 100 per nationality is, as others have pointed out, never reached. The biggest hurdle for most in the "Employment" category is establishing a 3 year history of employment income and the associated income tax payments. If you have worked legally and have all of your tax returns and receipts, it's straightforward. If you have lost or misplaced your returns, you can get certified copies from the Revenue Department. If you haven't worked (or have worked but haven't paid Thai tax), then you've got little chance of success, but that shouldn't come as a huge surprise. I have a number of colleagues in the US who are going through the Green Card application process. It takes a LOT longer (minimum 2 and often as long as 6 years) and guess what - you have to prove that you work and pay your taxes!

At the extreme end, I have a Thai colleague whose parents migrated to the US not long after her 18th birthday. Because she was over 18, she couldn't be included on their application and had to apply separately in the family reunification category. She was informed by the US Embassy in April this year that her application had been approved - 12 years after it was lodged. And she was given six months to establish residency in the US or it would all lapse.

Moral of the story - immigration is a drag.

[CDB]

OK, so I'll mention my experience with PR. It was a bureuacratic process lasting from December 2005 to June 2007 but not as hard as some make out. My declared Thailand salary only averaged around 100 K per month for three years (less at some points) and I am single. The Thai test was embarassingly easy and chatting with the Immigration officials they admitted that if you were well qualified in other areas you would get through anyway.

I don't have a university degree. I didn't use a lawyer. If they did some serious investigation they would have found I overstayed my visa for years when I was younger. But I didn't have any real doubt that I would get PR, and the Immigration people instantly gave me the impression that I was going to get it all along. I am committed to Thailand, have built businesses here, own my condo and speak Thai rather well.

Equally I have no doubts I will get my Thai nationality in a few more years. Again and again, I can see that the naysayers are only the people who can't qualify. Want to buy a new car with only 50 K down, or get a mortgage on new condo? No problem with PR. If you have many businesses and need a WP with them all, PR is a big help too. And the main point for me is that PR for 5 years is a prerequisite to citizenship.

[Briggsy]

Congratulations CDB on obtaining your PR.

I feel the main point of the "naysayers" as you call them is that the conditions exclude too many long-staying foreigners who are equally committed to Thailand as you are and make a positive contribution to society. These include anybody who does not have a yearly extension, anyone who is on a marriage yearly extension with no work permit, anyone on a retirement yearly extension, anyone whose main source of income is earned outside Thailand and anyone who works in Thailand but averages under 80K a month. These exclusions actually don't leave very many falling within the conditions and are irrespective of how long you stay and how many kids you have.

I feel that the underlying feeling for many is that it is very worrying that their living and remaining with their families in Thailand can never be upgraded from temporary status.

I hope this goes some way to explain their fears and frustration to you.

[jumnien]

Unfortunately, temporary status comes with the territory. There really is no permanent residency. We are all just passing through our present incarnation though we cling to the notion there is more to it than that.

[Briggsy]

Unfortunately, temporary status comes with the territory. There really is no permanent residency. We are all just passing through our present incarnation though we cling to the notion there is more to it than that.

Even as I was writing that two-word phrase, I knew somebody would introduce an existential theme.

[thaigene2]

I feel that the underlying feeling for many is that it is very worrying that their living and remaining with their families in Thailand can never be upgraded from temporary status.

I hope this goes some way to explain their fears and frustration to you.

Yes I think that pretty much sums it up for those married to Thais and with kids here. As work permits are tied to visa you have 7 days to leave the country once the job/contract is finished. How many civilized countries won't allow the non-national spouse-parent of their own national's to live with the family in that country and provide for them?

Talk of Thailand becoming the world-capital of Sham Marriages for residency is nonesense. All the G-7 countries allow this to best of my knowledge. Isn't it more likely THEY would be the targets of bogus-marriages? It's simply Xenophobia driven by the merchant class to keep out all competitors.

[lopburi3]

There is no such rule (7 days to leave) if you are here on a family extension of stay (which you should be if married). Only when you are here with extension based on employment is that a factor. If you can not show 40k monthly family income you would not be able to obtain another extension of stay but could still live here with 90 day visa runs.

[thaigene2]

There is no such rule (7 days to leave) if you are here on a family extension of stay (which you should be if married). Only when you are here with extension based on employment is that a factor. If you can not show 40k monthly family income you would not be able to obtain another extension of stay but could still live here with 90 day visa runs.

Lopburi - what if you're not here on an O of B visa - or maybe you are but it is tied to your work permit? I am also married to a thai with a family which means nothing to immigration. When the Work permit expires, so too does the visa, I must then leave Thailand - kiss my kids goodby etc, go to Singapore or Penang or wherever APPLY for an 'O' Visa and come back as a family support - but then must show all the other crap about support. Now of course since you no longer have a job, you no longer have an income. So then what?? How do you show your 40,000 baht per month or whatever the limit is required?

Your advice is absolutely very greatly appreciated..

TG2

[lopburi3]

If you are here on a 90 day visa entry the loss of employment does not effect that permitted to stay. Only if you are here on an extension of stay from Immigration that was obtained "for employment" is the 7 day departure required. Obviously if you are on a family 40k and then have no family income (it is not support - the spouse can make the money) the next time it becomes due you will have to change to Non Immigrant O visas, unless you obtain an education visa/extension or some other type alternative.

[thaigene2]

If you are here on a 90 day visa entry the loss of employment does not effect that permitted to stay. Only if you are here on an extension of stay from Immigration that was obtained "for employment" is the 7 day departure required. Obviously if you are on a family 40k and then have no family income (it is not support - the spouse can make the money) the next time it becomes due you will have to change to Non Immigrant O visas, unless you obtain an education visa/extension or some other type alternative.

So Lopburi,

If I understand you correctly, this means that once my Work Permit exprires I have 7 days to leave Thailand and then go to Thai Consulate (in Singapore or wherever), and I should apply for a 90 day tourist visa? Then if I don't find a job within those 90 days, I do a visa-run for another 90 days? Then after that what happens if no job? I guess it's migrate with my family or leave them here. Is that what it comes down to? Pretty bleak if that's the case.

[samran]

If you are here on a 90 day visa entry the loss of employment does not effect that permitted to stay. Only if you are here on an extension of stay from Immigration that was obtained "for employment" is the 7 day departure required. Obviously if you are on a family 40k and then have no family income (it is not support - the spouse can make the money) the next time it becomes due you will have to change to Non Immigrant O visas, unless you obtain an education visa/extension or some other type alternative.

So Lopburi,

If I understand you correctly, this means that once my Work Permit exprires I have 7 days to leave Thailand and then go to Thai Consulate (in Singapore or wherever), and I should apply for a 90 day tourist visa? Then if I don't find a job within those 90 days, I do a visa-run for another 90 days? Then after that what happens if no job? I guess it's migrate with my family or leave them here. Is that what it comes down to? Pretty bleak if that's the case.

no, you'll always be eligible for a 90 day non-immigrant O visa based on marriage to a Thai citizen. If you can't prove 40K per month in family income to qualify for an extentsion of stay, then I am afraid it is doing a visa run.

[lopburi3]

No that is not what I said - I said you would have to change to non immigrant O visa. As samran says you can always obtain a non immigrant O visa to visit wife. In Singapore and Penang you can obtain multi entry type if you have a set amount in bank accounts. To date there has not been any limit on the number of these visas you can obtain, even if just one at a time.

Obviously if you and family can not reach a level of living here that meets everyones satisfaction a move to a place where you can may be a viable alternative; but nobody has been told to "get out of Dodge" if married as far as I know.

[Farang99]

I realize that it is a max number and not a min but it sounds like what you are saying is that even if you qualify in terms of Income and Income tax payments they may still turn you down for the sole reason that you don't make enough money.

Are you saying that the published income and tax criteria are not the actual income and tax criteria? Is there an unwritten ammount that is the real number?

Has anyone who is married got their PR making less than 80,000?

I enquired about the possibility of a residence permit at the Phuket Immigration Office - I have completed 9 years on annual retirement visas. I was told that unless I had 10 million baht to invest in Thai business, I should not waste my money applying. Any truth in this?

[Farang99]

Just a couple of random thoughts with no real conclusion.........

1) the main problem I have with the way that the law is currently structured is that it is a bit of a blunt tool.

I have no doubt that income criteria for men (both at the non-immigrant and then at the PR stage) are there obstensibly to prevent marriages of convinience so that some bloke who has fallen in love with Patters or Nana doesn't marry some chick for money so he can get an easy visa. And there would be plenty of them. This of course discriminates against a large group who are legimately married (my parents included), and this latter group get diddly squat from the RTG in terms of rights to stay and rights to work. What to do? I am not sure.

2) PR for retirees I don't believe is the international norm...but I am happy to be proven wrong on this.

3) The other thought I have going through my mind is (and which probably contradicts my first point), is that even if you could get rights to work here when married would you even earn enough to live here? Some people state that the income rules prevent them from even getting extensions which will allow them to eventually qualify for PR. Which is a fair enough point......But what about the raw economics of it all??

For many, wouldn't the fact that wages and salaries for most jobs here are low, meaning that the default option for most would be to move back to farang land instead? Sure, if you were a plumber, accountant, nurse, or bus driver say in the UK, and you migrated to OZ, NZ or the US, you could get by. But to pick up your former trade in Thailand would lead most to financial oblivion - even for those who don't put a huge premium on high pay. Plus there is the language factor. Who is going to employ you even IF you had the right to work? Sure, there would be some English speaking jobs out there, but not enough for everyone. It is a bit of a catch-22 to begin with, even if you didn't have the hassels of the exisiting laws. But I guess the point is that everyone deserves a chance....

Anyway, as i said, just some random food for thought.

Wrt point 2. Malaysia is happy to grant permanent residence to farang retirees - and permits them to own property. On the other hand, Malaysia was a British colony and based its present constitution on British laws. Thailand, never having bneen colonised, has had to make up its own way of doing things - with the obvious chaotic results.

[Farang99]

Unless there is some advantage to PR that I'm missing (other than paying the Thai entry fee to national parks)...

While there are several advantages to having PR status as already mentioned, paying the Thai entry fee to national parks is not one of them. I have tried, but am always told that I have to be Thai to pay as a Thai. So it goes.

I disagree.

I have been given the Thai price simply on the strength of my Thai Drivers Licence, on Koh Samet. On Koh Chang I was told I needed to produce my work permit to get the Thai price. I know people personally with PR who have been the Thai price for National Parks, and the Thai price at hotels.

G

Some years ago I used to be admitted on the basis of a Thai driving licence and reasonable spoken Thai. Now it seems to have been much tougher, and on the last two occasions I was told Thai prrice only for Thais.

[grtaylor]

I enquired about the possibility of a residence permit at the Phuket Immigration Office - I have completed 9 years on annual retirement visas. I was told that unless I had 10 million baht to invest in Thai business, I should not waste my money applying. Any truth in this?

As I understand it, one of the basic criteria for submitting an application for PR (whatever category) is that you have been working with a WP (and paying income tax) for three years minimum, and that you must have been with the company for whom you currently work for at least one year. The minimum salary level then depends on the category of your application (single/marrried).

I think the only way to get PR if you are already retired is as they said, a LARGE investment.

G