On 8/1/2026 at 4:17 PM, emptypockets said:

Tourists and expat retirees are very different beasts.

Every ex-pat starts as a tourist. If he likes what he sees, he may ultimately retire here. I would think this is good for the Thai economy as they spend all year round. By putting down roots, (some even adopt the children abandoned by their Thai 'fathers') buying property; employing locals to improve it; buy cars and pay mechanics to service/maintain them; dine out etc. ALL YEAR ROUND. I don't think ex-pats are valued enough by the Gov who don't make it easy to become an ex-pat.

44 minutes ago, mikebell said:

Every ex-pat starts as a tourist.

Not necessarily!

Many, like me, first came here on business and stayed, or returned and stayed, without ever being a tourist.

3 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

If you can't get in before 50, they may say you can no longer remain after 75, or 80.

No country has a retirement visa with an upper age limit - it'd be a major disincentive to the market they'd be trying to attract. In any case no Thai government official has ever floated the idea of an upper age limit, whereas they have alluded to increased financial requirements and mandatory health insurance. They have also tightened up on various things at extension time relating to banking etc, and they arm-twisted several embassies into stopping affidavit of income letters in 2019.

Adding mandatory insurance to the Non O is a more serious concern - effectively it would render many older retirees unable to meet the extension requirements. This is more the Thai way of going about things, incrementally raising the hurdles.

1 hour ago, mikebell said:

Every ex-pat starts as a tourist. If he likes what he sees, he may ultimately retire here. I would think this is good for the Thai economy as they spend all year round. By putting down roots, (some even adopt the children abandoned by their Thai 'fathers') buying property; employing locals to improve it; buy cars and pay mechanics to service/maintain them; dine out etc. ALL YEAR ROUND. I don't think ex-pats are valued enough by the Gov who don't make it easy to become an ex-pat.

Arguably they aren't valued at all.

4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It will never happen.

Never say never in Thailand.

Many said cannabis would NEVER be legalized in Thailand. Wrong.

Many say casinos will NEVER be allowed in Thailand. I disagree. Only a matter of time.

3 hours ago, JerryM said:

OK I'll quote you here:

As I said, when the change is made, and the change will eventually be made, it could be insignificant, or be part of a broad policy to clear out Thailand of those living on meager pensions / savings, and there will be no grandfathering.

How the expletive do you know?

You are misquoting me, again.

That quote was for the rise in the 800k / 65k / 400k, which I stand by, not a change to any possible age cap.

In relation to grandfathering, how the expletive do you know they will have it on any changes? They didn't with insurance.

53 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

No country has a retirement visa with an upper age limit - it'd be a major disincentive to the market they'd be trying to attract. In any case no Thai government official has ever floated the idea of an upper age limit, whereas they have alluded to increased financial requirements and mandatory health insurance. They have also tightened up on various things at extension time relating to banking etc, and they arm-twisted several embassies into stopping affidavit of income letters in 2019.

Adding mandatory insurance to the Non O is a more serious concern - effectively it would render many older retirees unable to meet the extension requirements. This is more the Thai way of going about things, incrementally raising the hurdles.

Sure. I never said the WILL do it, or they SHOULD do it, as some members proclaim.

I have said it's an option for them, and they MAY consider, possibly they MAY even do it. They can do whatever they want, it's their country.

In relation to foreigners, have you ever known Thailand to care about whatever other countries are doing? They couldn't care less here.

So, they announce they are changing the name from "retirement visa" to "Thailand long stay visa" and it's only available between the ages of 50 and 75. Now, they are not putting an age cap on a "retirement visa" any more. Also the Thai way. So simple for them.

The OP basically states we have no stability here because of no PR / Citizenship, then wants to post how he will be able to live here forever because the Thai government will not do this or not do that. Which one is it, stability, or no stability?

2 hours ago, mikebell said:

Every ex-pat starts as a tourist. If he likes what he sees, he may ultimately retire here. I would think this is good for the Thai economy as they spend all year round. By putting down roots, (some even adopt the children abandoned by their Thai 'fathers') buying property; employing locals to improve it; buy cars and pay mechanics to service/maintain them; dine out etc. ALL YEAR ROUND. I don't think ex-pats are valued enough by the Gov who don't make it easy to become an ex-pat.

Many are living here on meager western aged pensions. The Australian pension, for example, isn't even 65k baht a month. I'm sure many other western country aged pensions are the same. Whilst I see your point, I can't see why the Thai government would value this demographic too much.

7 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

In relation to grandfathering, how the expletive do you know they will have it on any changes? They didn't with insurance.

That reference to insurance O-A is specious. There was no existing mechanism for grandfathering for that. For the 2.22 reference for amounts for retirement extension (assuming you are not paying a bribe) the verbiage is existing right here. All they have to do is change the numbers:

Whether they do it or not, up to them.

4 hours ago, JimGant said:

That's the dumbest remark I've ever heard on this forum.

So was someone suggesting they would legalize cannabis in the future. 😂 😂

1 minute ago, JerryM said:

Whether they do it or not, up to them.

Wow. You finally get it. You now see that they can do whatever they want, and there isn't anything one, or hundreds of thousands of foreigners, can do about it.

Now, let's just say someone over 80 can no longer secure insurance, but that's probably for another thread.

Edited August 4Aug 4 by KhunHeineken

3 hours ago, save the frogs said:

So you're a long-term tourist.

So what?

Send your family back home a postcard and tell them you've been taking a 20 year holiday in Thailand because the girls are hot and the drinks are cold.

Exactly, but don't buy property here and move your life savings to Thailand. You didn't as a tourist, and that's all you'll ever be. Other than that, enjoy.

3 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Wow. You finally get it.

I've been here full-time now for 26 years on Non B and retirement extension working unofficially with a large Thai NGO under royal patronage and you think I haven't got it until you have said it how any number of times.

They can do whatever thery want. They can also do nothing.

Edited August 4Aug 4 by JerryM

2 minutes ago, JerryM said:

I've been here full-time now for 26 years on Non B and retirement extension working unofficially with a large Thai NGO under royal patronage and you think I haven't got it until you have said it how any number of times.

It took you a while, but you got there. Well done.

You do know you need a work permit for volunteering here, right? 😂

7 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

You do know you need a work permit for volunteering here, right? 😂

That was 25 years ago and I had lunch with the head of ther provincial labor de[parrment.

18 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

Not necessarily!

Many, like me, first came here on business and stayed, or returned and stayed, without ever being a tourist.

'first came here on business and stayed' 'or returned and stayed' - so a bit like a tourist then?

25 minutes ago, mikebell said:

'first came here on business and stayed' 'or returned and stayed' - so a bit like a tourist then?

I'm still in tourist mode, although for the past 20+ years, some lady & kid keep on following me around. Kid finally gave it a rest, although I miss her, till we have a munch together. Damn dog has been following me around for the past 12+ years.

The lady is OK, as I get to live in her house, and she doesn't even charge me rent, or maid service, with a little extra smiling thrown in. Oh well, the things we tolerate.

I guess they'll follow me when I go O&A next week.

20 hours ago, JerryM said:

That was 25 years ago and I had lunch with the head of ther provincial labor de[parrment.

So, you admit to working here illegally, albeit, in the past, but frown upon those using a visa agent. 🙂

7 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

So, you admit to working here illegally, albeit, in the past, but frown upon those using a visa agent. 🙂

If you look at the current nominee legal issues, people say everybody always knew it was illegal but kept under the radar.

With the visa agent extension, there are those on the visa forum who will swear on a stack of bibles it is all legal because of discretion .

So I frown on people saying something is legal when it certainly isn't.

6 minutes ago, JerryM said:

If you look at the current nominee legal issues, people say everybody always knew it was illegal but kept under the radar.

With the visa agent extension, there are those on the visa forum who will swear on a stack of bibles it is all legal because of discretion .

So I frown on people saying something is legal when it certainly isn't.

You worked here illegally, right?

Y

8 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

You worked here illegally, right?

You're looking to score a point on that so yes.

Although at the time as long as I was not getting paid, I never thought or would have thought that it was illegal

What you have admitted to this year is this:

Section 144 Whoever, giving, offering or agreeing to give the property or any other benefit to the official, member of State Legislative Assembly, member of Provincial Assembly or member of Municipal Assembly so as to induce such person to do or not to do any act, or to delay the doing of any act contrary to one's own duty, shall be imprisoned not out of five years or fined not out of ten thousand Baht, or both.

NB And if you look at my posts/run-ins on the Visa forum or elsewhere, it has always been on the legal issue, not whether they should or should not do it.

Edited August 5Aug 5 by JerryM

On 8/5/2026 at 5:52 AM, JerryM said:

You're looking to score a point on that so yes

Not about scoring points, just people in glass houses.

One of my favorites on the "legitimate reason" doctrine of Immigration officers

So the hapless foreigners buying homes using Thai nominees in Hua Hin got arrested.

The crackdown is spreading step by step nationally.

Along with cooperating Thai nominees.

But the respected Thai lawyers who advised the foreigners that this was standard --- crickets.

This is a case study in what's happening here.

We'll have what I call "Thai explat flavored Stockholm Syndrome" f-rangs blaming their fellow f-rangs for following the advice of respected Thai lawyers.

It was illegal! They should have known it!

And then we'll have the f-rangs who see reality much more clearly.

Not getting harder for foreigners?

Are you having a laugh?

Edited August 11Aug 11 by Jingthing

48 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

So the hapless foreigners buying homes using Thai nominees in Hua Hin got arrested.

The crackdown is spreading step by step nationally.

Along with cooperating Thai nominees.

But the respected Thai lawyers who advised the foreigners that this was standard --- crickets.

This is a case study in what's happening here.

We'll have what I call "Thai explat flavored Stockholm Syndrome" f-rangs blaming their fellow f-rangs for following the advice of respected Thai lawyers.

It was illegal! They should have known it!

And then we'll have the f-rangs who see reality much more clearly.

Not getting harder for foreigners?

Are you having a laugh?

Perhaps the "Stockholm Syndrome" f-rangs" asked the question, "Is this legal?". On being told, "It's a grey area", the extremely wealthy among this group might then have thought, "That's ok. I can afford to lose 20m baht", while the more financially strapped might have decided, "No thanks. Not a risk that I'm willing to take".

Meanwhile, another group - what I'll call 'gullible and naive f-rangs' just handed over 20m baht without a word.

Caveat emptor.

On 7/31/2026 at 9:05 AM, KhunHeineken said:

Many here will proudly tell you their extension ONLY costs them 1,900 baht. They don't count the lost approximately 4% per annum in interest on the 800k baht. Yes, that's 32,000 baht, way more than the cost of the agent. 😂 😂

Then, as you say, you have the risk of keeping it in a Thai bank. If / when there is a run on the banks here, you can bet foreigners will be last in the queue.

Why bother with the 800k baht when there is no need to do so?

You forget that you can spend 400k out of the 800k for about 7 months of the year, as long as you top it up 2 months before renewal and do not spend it for 3 months after.

I usually transfer when I believe the rate is good.

On 200,000 NOK, a difference of only 0.4 baht per NOK is 80,000 baht, so timing larger transfers can make quite a difference.

And as noted elsewhere, you can deposit 65K baht every month with no required maintained balances. My wife takes care of that.

17 hours ago, Hummin said:

You forget that you can spend 400k out of the 800k for about 7 months of the year, as long as you top it up 2 months before renewal and do not spend it for 3 months after.

I usually transfer when I believe the rate is good.

On 200,000 NOK, a difference of only 0.4 baht per NOK is 80,000 baht, so timing larger transfers can make quite a difference.

I don't bother with any of it. The agent takes care of the lot. I'm on the golf course, instead of being in an immigration office.

10 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

I don't bother with any of it. The agent takes care of the lot. I'm on the golf course, instead of being in an immigration office.

So you tell Imm you are an invalid, bedridden, and can't attend ... got it.

Thailand piling on the "scrutiny" harder and deeper.

Isn't this getting ridiculous now?

Look I know many people (including myself) aren't the biggest fans of the "American lawyer in Thailand" but don't shoot the messenger, Kay?