No More Dependent Extension Of Stay If The Host Foreigner Has A Retirement Extension Of Stay Permit

[capaotung]

Personally, I think the BOT number is suspect and would be more comfortable with something closer to 8,700 THB,

Excuse me, you blindly believe much more suspect 10yo numbers from some Thai authority but you "suspect" very recent numbers by the Bank of Thailand?!?

And where does this 8700 come from??

but let's go with your number. So what you're saying is that 63 million Thais are spending about 5,821,200,000,000,

Ignoring borrowings and other incomes, the math you should be doing is 7,700 average monthly wage x the 20,000,000 Thais in the workforce x 12 months = 1,848,000,000,000 THB.

You have multiplied the average wage for all of the 62 million Thais!

compared to the tourists' 509,471,621,720, and the resident aliens' between 50,000,000,000 and 159,040,176,515. Even using the larger number for the resident aliens (which I believe is a bit over the top for reasons pointed out in a previous post), it's only 2.7% of the Thai spending; hardly a point that should be heralded from every mountain top far and wide.

I don't know which categories of non-IMM visas (for example, were ED counted? Missionary? 90 days non-IMM?) and/or PR have they included in the census but they have surely NOT included visa runners as residents so you can, at the very least, safely DOUBLE (I would think quadruple is much more like it but OK...) the number of "residents" (people living here full time although not formally "residents").

Redo the math and tell us again that's "hardly a point that should be heralded from every mountain top far and wide".

P.S. Nice how you have avoided otton's comparison with the value of the whole agricultural sector (where 60% of the Thai workforce is employed, 12,000,000 Thais).

[thaigene2]

BLOOMBERG

TEL 662-654-0255 fax 662-654-0265

www.bloomberg.com

these are the news people. they love stories like this about...money...governments...families...misery...EVERYONE CALL AND REPORT THE HARDSHIPS. LETS MAKE THE POWER THAT DID THIS REGRET HIS ACTIONS.

P.S. i am not talking about meeting the financial amounts that they want...i am talking about families being torn apart at no fault of their own. good people who followed the rules to a T. Please take a stand for them and all of us in the future. Once this hits the international news...things will happen fast to correct this injustice. If you dont help...you are part of the problem...

IF YOU HELP...YOU ARE THE SOLUTION.

I think they'd only be interested in an example from a specific couple that had been directly affected, not just hot air from a topic being discussed on a forum.

Geoff, you are right about the human angle that the international media will need in order to create a "hook" for the story. But they also need to understand the problem in the first place. I am fully supportive of IAMSOBAD's efforts to create an awareness of the issue. This is proactive effort, instead of simple whining on an internet site.

I also support a campaign strategy - and it is a great story. But Bloomberg and CNBC are the wrong targets. Their audiences are the people who will always be able to buy here - and they have limited/wrong outreach anyway. They're not your/our friends. I'd suggest BBC, RTF, NHK, RAI, CBC, ABC (Aus), and maybe RTHK... and maybe CNN (maybe -- less so CNN -- as they are also a commercial broadcaster pandering to upmarket consumer-society audiences).

Other options are the Guardian, The Sun, Time Mag (US), The Age (Aus), Fox News (US), and other Thai competitors like Channel NewsAsia, Taiwan TV, Korean TV, etc.

Go for it!

[JimsKnight]

Even if the media raises its voice Thailand is unlikely to change its visa policy. They'll just stick two fingers up and dig their heels in even more! Let it lie for now and await the official confirmation, then raise the roof and see what happens!

Edited September 3, 2007 by JimsKnight

[wolfmanjack]

Personally, I think the BOT number is suspect and would be more comfortable with something closer to 8,700 THB,

Excuse me, you blindly believe much more suspect 10yo numbers from some Thai authority but you "suspect" very recent numbers by the Bank of Thailand?!?

And where does this 8700 come from??

but let's go with your number. So what you're saying is that 63 million Thais are spending about 5,821,200,000,000,

Ignoring borrowings and other incomes, the math you should be doing is 7,700 average monthly wage x the 20,000,000 Thais in the workforce x 12 months = 1,848,000,000,000 THB.

You have multiplied the average wage for all of the 62 million Thais!

compared to the tourists' 509,471,621,720, and the resident aliens' between 50,000,000,000 and 159,040,176,515. Even using the larger number for the resident aliens (which I believe is a bit over the top for reasons pointed out in a previous post), it's only 2.7% of the Thai spending; hardly a point that should be heralded from every mountain top far and wide.

I don't know which categories of non-IMM visas (for example, were ED counted? Missionary? 90 days non-IMM?) and/or PR have they included in the census but they have surely NOT included visa runners as residents so you can, at the very least, safely DOUBLE (I would think quadruple is much more like it but OK...) the number of "residents" (people living here full time although not formally "residents").

Redo the math and tell us again that's "hardly a point that should be heralded from every mountain top far and wide".

P.S. Nice how you have avoided otton's comparison with the value of the whole agricultural sector (where 60% of the Thai workforce is employed, 12,000,000 Thais).

As to the average wage of 8,700 baht or 7,700 baht. I think that if you took out the top 10% you will have an average of minimum wage. What did the 5,000 garment factory workers that just lost their job get paid ? Most of the jobs are these types. About 200 baht a day I would guess. Also don't forget that apprx 10% make less than 922 baht per month. The top 5% or 10% bring the average up quite a bit and much of their money is not spent. It is socked away in the bank or overseas investments.

Yeah using the entire population as a basis is pretty funny. I can see all of the 80 year olds working along side the 2 year olds.

[pointofview]

The gent, would you be posting these same kind of comments on Thai message boards if Western countries started to send the Thais residing in the West back to their smiling home?

My thai wife has had british citizenship for 10 years now, however she recently lost her job and has been told that she is to be deported back to thailand as she can no longer prove she has a monthly income

equivilent to the priminsters. She has also been informed that the house she bought 5 years ago was done so illegally - although she followed advice of british lawyers.

Sounds mad doesnt it - amazing!!

How can she be deported back to Thailand if she has British citizenship before which, if i am not mistaken, she would have had ILR (indefinate leave to remain)?

There is more to this than you are posting if she is to be deported!

Exactly - wouldnt be possible! Some people just read and dont think - try ironic. If this statement was in reverse you would obviously understand it in the literal sense - sorry if you think irony is something made of ore.

[capaotung]

As to the average wage of 8,700 baht or 7,700 baht. I think that if you took out the top 10% you will have an average of minimum wage. What did the 5,000 garment factory workers that just lost their job get paid ? Most of the jobs are these types. About 200 baht a day I would guess. Also don't forget that apprx 10% make less than 922 baht per month. The top 5% or 10% bring the average up quite a bit and much of their money is not spent. It is socked away in the bank or overseas investments.

Yes wolfmanjack, anybody who knows anything about Thailand knows that very well. MANY Thais work in the manifacture and (mostly) agriculture sectors even below the minimum wages which can be as low as 4000-4500 baht/month (it varies with the province).

But I think it's best to keep it as simple as possible when there are so many people around refusing to see even the very obvious.

Take this as an example, the common accepted Thaivisa knowledge is that the "farangs" (residents/tourists/whatever) are very unimportant for the Thai economy (it seems so cool to say so), never mind that the cold hard numbers say exactly the opposite...

[JaiGuru]

Personally, I think the BOT number is suspect and would be more comfortable with something closer to 8,700 THB,

Excuse me, you blindly believe much more suspect 10yo numbers from some Thai authority but you "suspect" very recent numbers by the Bank of Thailand?!?

And where does this 8700 come from??

Exactly… Perhaps my comments below will explain things a little.

but let's go with your number. So what you're saying is that 63 million Thais are spending about 5,821,200,000,000,

Ignoring borrowings and other incomes, the math you should be doing is 7,700 average monthly wage x the 20,000,000 Thais in the workforce x 12 months = 1,848,000,000,000 THB.

You have multiplied the average wage for all of the 62 million Thais!

Exactly… A quick look at the link to the Thai statistics office I provided in a previous post will show that income data seems to be collected on a per household basis, and then divided by the number of average household members to come up with an average income per person. Do the math yourself; it’s easy.

I used the other poster’s numbers to make him feel better, but have no reason to believe they are any more accurate.

I do not know how many actual wage earners are in Thailand, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it’s higher than the 30% percent or so that you alluded to in your post. Wikipedia (and who knows where that data came from) lists the Thai age structure as 22% 0-14 years of age, 70% 15-64 years of age, and 8% 65 years and over. That makes a little more sense to me.

compared to the tourists' 509,471,621,720, and the resident aliens' between 50,000,000,000 and 159,040,176,515. Even using the larger number for the resident aliens (which I believe is a bit over the top for reasons pointed out in a previous post), it's only 2.7% of the Thai spending; hardly a point that should be heralded from every mountain top far and wide.

I don't know which categories of non-IMM visas (for example, were ED counted? Missionary? 90 days non-IMM?) and/or PR have they included in the census but they have surely NOT included visa runners as residents so you can, at the very least, safely DOUBLE (I would think quadruple is much more like it but OK...) the number of "residents" (people living here full time although not formally "residents").

Even doubling things doesn’t change it all that much; the Americans rise to 2%, the Brits to 4%, the Germans to 1%, and so on… It doesn’t seem to be an earth shattering change considering the big picture. But that’s just my opinion.

Redo the math and tell us again that's "hardly a point that should be heralded from every mountain top far and wide".

IMO, no math needs to be redone; the math stands for reasons stated above.

P.S. Nice how you have avoided otton's comparison with the value of the whole agricultural sector (where 60% of the Thai workforce is employed, 12,000,000 Thais).

As I mentioned in a previous post, I have no dog in this fight, and am looking for information and make a small amount of sense out of what is going on. He’s prolly a real nice guy, but a few of the statements he’s posted have been pretty far off the mark (such as “the vast majority of women” or other statements that contradict the Thai statistics office). I’m happy to explain my comments to him, but I don’t have enough experience with the poster to take everything he says as gospel, nor do I see how his statement should change my developing opinion.

The numbers thus far speak for themselves, and don’t need much spin.

[JaiGuru]

Yeah using the entire population as a basis is pretty funny. I can see all of the 80 year olds working along side the 2 year olds.

I agree; however, have a lot at Table 11.1 on the Thai statistics office. It's plain as punch to see how they came up with their numbers.

[capaotung]

Excuse me, you blindly believe much more suspect 10yo numbers from some Thai authority but you "suspect" very recent numbers by the Bank of Thailand?!?

And where does this 8700 come from??

Exactly… Perhaps my comments below will explain things a little.

If the Bank of Thailand isn't to be trusted on economic matters why should whichever Thai authority conducted this 8 years old census when you can't even know who they defined as "residents"??

And why should we prefer 7 years old data to current official data??

Ignoring borrowings and other incomes, the math you should be doing is 7,700 average monthly wage x the 20,000,000 Thais in the workforce x 12 months = 1,848,000,000,000 THB.

You have multiplied the average wage for all of the 62 million Thais!

Exactly… A quick look at the link to the Thai statistics office I provided in a previous post will show that income data seems to be collected on a per household basis, and then divided by the number of average household members to come up with an average income per person. Do the math yourself; it's easy.

I used the other poster's numbers to make him feel better, but have no reason to believe they are any more accurate.

You shouldn't comment sarcastically on any "easy math" having just multiplied the average monthly wage for the whole of the population including newborns and 99 yos on their deathbeds...

That said, on table 11.1 household monthly incomes range from 7,853 THB for the Northeastern Region to 24,690 for Greater Bangkok. The Central Region (where Bangkok is) is 13.301 and the other 2 regions are 8649 and 11407. The national average is 12,167 THB.

Assuming kids don't work (I hope you agree on this one but at this point am not so sure) splitting the household income in half (mom and pop) we have 6,083 THB which is entirely consistent with "my" (BOT's, actually) number of 7,700 since your data is 7 years old and mine is of 2007...

Got it? It's easy...

I do not know how many actual wage earners are in Thailand, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it's higher than the 30% percent or so that you alluded to in your post. Wikipedia (and who knows where that data came from) lists the Thai age structure as 22% 0-14 years of age, 70% 15-64 years of age, and 8% 65 years and over. That makes a little more sense to me.

We were both wrong.

I went with otton's figure and was thrown off myself by the combination 12,000,000/60% workforce in agriculture/20,000,000 total. Most probably his 12,000,000 are people working NOW in agriculture and 55-60% is the THEN percentage not today's so combining the two I came to the wrong 20,000,000.

Thailand's total labour force was 33,000,000 (Table1.16 of your own source) in 2000 and is around 36,000,000 today. So about 50% of the total population (now and then).

Let's redo the math together, then: 7,700 average monthly wage x the 36,000,000 Thais in the workforce x 12 months = 3,326,400,000,000 THB in 2007 and 6,083 average monthly wage x the 32,000,000 Thais in the workforce x 12 months = 2,335,872,000,000 THB in 2000.

Even doubling things doesn't change it all that much; the Americans rise to 2%, the Brits to 4%, the Germans to 1%, and so on… It doesn't seem to be an earth shattering change considering the big picture. But that's just my opinion.

Even considering those figures the contribution is quite high but the real crux of the matter is that we don't know who they classed as residents (OR DO YOU?) and there are many more people living full time or spending very long period of times in LOS whichever visa they are on (mostly on visa runs but also the many categories of 90 days non-IMM and 1 year extensions, who says if both, none or just the 1 year extensions were considered??).

Just consider how many Westerners living in LOS "as residents" Thailand's border passes are still seeing daily on a visa run...

Now, where can we find the total number of work permits issued to Westerners and other rich Asians last year? The total number of 1 year extension of stay permits issued? The total number of non-IMMs?

They have those numbers, why don't they publish them?

For example, isn't the total number of JUST Western English teachers HIGHER than the total of Western "residents" quoted in your census?!?

Edited September 3, 2007 by capaotung

[Patriciachas]

Have read a lot of replies and i must say that what as been suggested is right why should someone who is under 50 be allowed to piggy back staying in thailand without a retiremnet visa the rules are quite straight ,over 50 800,000 baht in thai bank or 65,000 baht a month pension.This as been the norm for a long time as it was stated previosly not many people who are affected have actually placed a reply most are from people who are not affected and WILL NOT BE.

[ozzydom]

It does not take long for a serious thread regarding serious matters to be hijacked by the ."If you dont like it P*#* Off somewhere else" mob. The " Ive got squillions so I dont care" gang also jump on the bandwaggon along with the would-be maths masters and various others who delight in blowing their own trumpet.

Fact is ,there are fellow ex-pats out there that this regulation does seriously affect and they have my heart-felt sympathy.

Picture the retiree who moves to Thailand with his under 50 non-Thai spouse and his little nest egg + monthly pension,buys a house or condo , car etc and settles down to a blissful retirement ,out of the blue he has to come up with another 800k or another 65k per month to retain their status quo, what a bummer!!!

Perhaps the next target on the Immigration shooting gallery will have "holier than Thou" pinned to its chest, as for me, I have my Cambodia business visa in my passport because I have a gut feeling my time in Los is nearing an end, ah well, never to late in life for a new adventure.

[hilly]

What is surprising me is that the newspapers still dont seem to be picking up on this unless I am missing it. This leads me to believe that the article might not be factual or maybe a u turn is being planned and the censors are involved.

TV has ears in high places I understand.

[jumnien]

Isn't it possible that all this hub-bub is being promulgated on farang websites just to scare a few naive house owners into selling their houses cheaply and moving to lovely Uruguay or Vietnam? Then the farang speculator picks up a few houses cheap and resells them at a profit when the dust settles.

[brahmburgers]

all this talk about money / income etc is, I believe, related to this thread because it shows;

1. .......that it takes relatively little money to get by comfortably in Thailand - and therefore the required proof of high amounts of money (by new Imm laws) are unreasonable (nicest adjective I could conjure).

2. ......that farang wanting to reside here contribute mightily to the Thai economy.

On the 2nd point; there are vast amounts of unreported and undocumented money spent by farang in Thailand that are off the radar - certainly not on any statistical sheet - unless you were able to look at cash withdrawals from ATM's via farang.

Nearly every farang, whether pseudo-resident or tourist, goes to their ATM often. Those withdrawals are mutli-thousands of baht - and probably happen several times per week.

Also, the majority of farang long-stayers and tourists are single men - they naturally get wrapped up in romantic endeavors - and that necessitates large withdrawals of money - whether for dowries, supporting the woman's family, for entertainment - and again, most if not all of those big expenditures are off the radar.

If you really want to get a good look at the spending power of farang, look at the amounts being withdrawn at ATM's. And that doesn't include other types of money transfers nor bringing cash in. I bet the real numbers would even overshadow the hundreds of billions of baht that Thaksin and his ilk spirited out of Thailand in the past year.

[ozzydom]

An interesting number taken from Australian Immigration regulations,,,

A long term visa requires that a Thai student and his/her spouse have jointly,348,000 baht per annum for cost of living in Oz.

Given the disparity of costs of living between the two countries the 1.6 mill baht required for a couple here in Thailand seems a bit out of whack.

[gdhm]

ONE QUESTION? Sunbelt really dropped the ball after making their OP.

Why didnt Sunbelt send a lawyer to the Immigration office today and get a complete explanation of the NEW RULES? Since they reprted this was in effect as of Sept. 1,2007...wouldnt the officer in charge have all the details...even if the law hasnt been published in the Gazette? Just my opinion...I hope I dont get booted off the TV forum for being honest. ???

I think that lawyers from Sunbelt are at immigration on a regular basis. And, I am sure that Sunbelt understands how important this information is to members of this forum and that Sunbelt will share information as and when they can.

I suspect that Sunbelt also took some risk in disclosing this information to us before it was officially released and I think we should be grateful to them for their assistance.

I agree with tim77. 100%

The ONLY "moral" hazard for Sunbelt is: being easily able to be 100% open and express views 100% IF these would be to severely criticise those Sunbelt has to deal with on behalf of clients desperately needing its firms help.

Of course IF Sunbelt wished to and did piss off Immigration or the Police etc. (why should they or anybody wish to anyway - nothing to gain) we ALL would suffer, as information would be harder for Sunbelt to obtain and pass on to us.

Its a difficult and fine line to travel but I feel Sunbelt is travelling it perfectly. I consider that Sunbelt have been very open to date and as honest with their views as any reasonable person could expect them to be.

Thank you Sunbelt Asia

Regards, Dave

Edited September 4, 2007 by gdhm

[johnRS]

I’m really quite amazed at the naivety of some posters.

Protest – To whom? Do you really believe anyone within the Thai administration gives a ###### about you?

Write to CNN/Fox/BBC – To what end? Do you honestly believe the overseas media cares about expats in Thailand?

Having worked here for longer than I now care to remember, this is just another ‘inconvenience’ in the long line of rule changes over the years.

Farangs have NEVER been accepted by the people that count, in fact when you consider the economic impact of the proposed FBA changes and last Octobers immigration changes, these far outweigh the current retirement visa issue and yet they still stand.

Unfortunately one has to accept that foreign ideals on fairness, what’s right and proper just do not apply here. We are just barely tolerated under THEIR rules.

I too will be devastated when (not if) the day comes that a future rule change turns my world upside down but I am realistic enough to know that that day is coming.

It’s their play pen. If you don’t want to play their way, find a different play pen.

[gdhm]

Why do you think people are leaving England in mad rushes? Do you think Thailand wants a growing population of people who won't assimilate and choose bread over rice?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news

Deep down inside all you peace-loving, hug-your-black-friend, egalitarian, Cartesian common sense immigrants are just as racist as any of them. It's an ongoing war for cultural sovereignty and preservation....... .

Please kindly keep your generalisations to yourself.

Oh sorry, you are not generalising you have accused us ALL "all you peace-loving, hug-your-black-friend, egalitarian, Cartesian common sense immigrants are just as racist as any of them"

Speaking for myself, I consider it highly inappropriate to make such a racist slur on so many members. Some may be racist, but to suggest all are, is nothing short of outrageous.

And NO I am NOT racist, nor do I wish to impose my own ideals and culture on anybody in their own land (or mine). I did not wish to when living in Spain for 4 years and I do not wish to now I am living in Thailand.

Your comments about bread and rice. Pathetic!!

Do I care when in UK, Spain or Thailand if Chinese or Thais OR ANYBODY eat rice and noodles and not fish and chips, and do you really think Thais care about what I eat (unless I insult them for what they like and chose to eat). Suggest you look in any KFC or Pizza restaurant in Thailand. You will find large numbers of Thais enjoying western style food and you will see many Westerners enjoying Thai food in Thai food only restaurants.

But I am "off topic" (as was much of what you have said) so I will close.

Dave

"All you" is a common term of generality from which you or anyone are free to exclude yourself. Bread and rice is merely as jest at the simple differences which range to far greater degrees. Do you work for Foxx News? You certainly react like a pundit and seem to me to be a bit sensitive. Please accept my apologies for your misunderstanding.

Judging by your reaction, I take it you are a multiculturalist and probably quite proudly. The gist of my post has to do with the fact that, like anyone, you're* proud of who you* are and where you* come from. It's racial protectionism and homogeneity that are the roots of most people in the world. That's why there are differences like eating with your* fingers or using chopsticks or sticking your* pinky up in the air when drinking tea. When people don't do the things that we're* used to it naturally irks us*. Well, not you, because you're so worldly and such a nice, well-balanced fellow.

The point is that most people (and this is a serious generalization) don't like change. They like the things they know. They like their routines without disruption or influence. They look back on the past with nostalgia and say things like, "Those were the good ol' days." As a matter of fact, some people experience total nervous breakdowns over things like the position of a telephone on their desk. And that's the extent of racism I'm alluding to--not lynchmobs and burning crosses--something a little more subtle than what you've perceived. It has to do with cultural identity which in this world, as I'm sure you've noticed being well-travelled and all, is synonomous with about 95% of the world.

*=the editorial you, we, & us. Everyone feel free to exclude yourselves.

by the above post I'd reckon brahmburgers gets it.

Thank you for you reply and explanation, dkstoney.

No I don't work for Foxx News, I don't work at all I am a retiree ages 55. Formerly I worked mostly in an office as an employee (clerk then junior manager) at a major Insurance company based in the UK for 26 years (anything but media related) .

Yes I am sensitive to "throw away" racist grouping comments by person(s) who do NOT know me or most other readers (and never will), and yet feel the need to make such comments in order to support their viewpoints.

I never suggested for a second, nor am now, that your comments regarding racism were anything near cross burning etc. I fully apprecaited the level of racism you were commenting upon, so please lets not get carried away.

Well travelled???.

YES guilty IF you count as well travelled, never having been on a plane until I was 48 years of age (now 55). 3 company day trips to Boulogne, France and 1 coach trip around Europe (10days) when I was 18.

OK in the last 7 years I did visit Canada one time (21 days), Turkey one time (7 days), live in Spain for 4 years and now am in Thailand (1.5 years). THAT'S IT in 55 years of life. Compared to most I would say I am anything but well travelled.

Oh naughty me, I missed out a country I visited, Laos (needed a few 30 days on arrivals whilst sorting out my Retirement Visa requirements

Regarding what you probably consider are clever, pretend loosely disguised snide comments from you like "Please accept my apologies for your misunderstanding" and "Well, not you, because you're so worldly and such a nice, well-balanced fellow."

I am happy I am me, and not you BUT that is just my humble opinion. Others can judge (if they are even bothered which I doubt) whose views and style they prefer.

I thank you for displaying our different views and styles so clearly.

Having responded, I withdraw from further debate with you on this matter, because as I said before "its off subject" and certainly not productive for anybody, including us both.

Dave

Edited September 4, 2007 by gdhm

[coalminer]

Just for the records.

Is the person who made this decision about the changements in the Visa rules the same "compassion feeling" person who wrote in the newspapers on December 25th (the day after Thailand was hit by a Tsunami) that "foreigners who were helping the victims of the Tsunami freely" are considered as "working in Thailand" and therefore are required to have a "work permit"?

[Naam]

My thai wife has had british citizenship for 10 years now, however she recently lost her job and has been told that she is to be deported back to thailand as she can no longer prove she has a monthly income

equivilent to the priminsters. She has also been informed that the house she bought 5 years ago was done so illegally - although she followed advice of british lawyers.

Sounds mad doesnt it - amazing!!

amazing indeed! and how many times have you been abducted by aliens, pray tell?

[ChiangMaiAmerican]

Any doubt they don't want us all to leave? From today's Bangkok Post:

"The Business Development Department is in the process of inspecting as many as 40,000 companies to see if they have used nominee structures to hold shares for foreign investors _ a practice prohibited by the Foreign Business Act. According to department director-general Kanissorn Navanugraha, the investigation would continue even though draft amendments to the law are unlikely to be passed by this government."

http://bangkokpost.com/Business/04Sep2007_biz35.php

[Farang99]

As pleasant and desirable as the country may be, there comes a point where Thailand is no longer a cost effective or desirable option and this type of ruling pushes us all closer to that line. Am I alone in thinking that one morning in the future I might wake up to read a post on TV announcing that Immigration has now doubled to 1,600,000 per year the amount of money required for a retirement visa each year and without the benefit of any grandfather clause? Think about it, it's a very real possibility.

It is not so long ago that they quadrupled the financial requirement from 200,000 to 800,000. Initially there was an exemption for those who came here before 10/1/98, but that was soon scrubbed. As you say, how long before it is increased again?

That information is false - those in the system at the old requirements are still covered at the old requirements and it is part of the current law.

[Naam]

"The Business Development Department is in the process of inspecting as many as 40,000 companies to see if they have used nominee structures to hold shares for foreign investors _ a practice prohibited by the Foreign Business Act.

that means it will take approximately 4000 years to finalise that inspection

[IAMSOBAD]

READ THIS ONE...TALK ABOUT IRONIC

George posted this on TV.

Man, 24, gets death for slaying Russian women

PATTAYA: -- A 24-year-old man was sentenced to death by the Pattaya Court Monday for the murder of two Russian women on Jomtien beach in February.

Anuchit Lamlert got the maximum punishment after the court decided not to cut his sentence on grounds the defendant confessed - because of the weight of evidence against him.

The court said Anuchit's lengthy criminal record showed he had sought to benefit himself through brutal and lawless acts, with no regard for social peace and the country's tourism image.

-- The Nation 2007-09-03

Sounds like the head of immigration...NO REGARD FOR SOCIAL PEACE AND THE COUNTRY'S TOURISM IMAGE.

SAME ###### THING WITH HIS RULINGS!

[gdhm]

Just out of interest, have TV members spotted any comments/reports/letters about this new policy in other media (websites such as BBC, CNN and newspapers such as Bangkok Post and The Nation)?

Or is this important topic profoundly boring to everyone except for those who will be affected?

Simon

In answer to your first para Simon, No I have not.

To be honest I seldom have seen articles outside the Forums (favourable or adverse) concerning the various major immigration issues discussed on this Forum. Nor do I hear or see views or comments being expressed on Embassy websites

You may not expect Embassies to volunteer comment willingly, but I can inform members that when Spain's Valencia province introduced a certain Land law and builders started using it weaknesses the EU and Embassies got involved on behalf of their citizens to pro-actively point out to Spain certain limitations of the problematical law which they considered unfair.

Lack of debate and reporting outside the Forums is very sad coz if very few know outside the Forums (including the Thai people) then few can ask the powers that make to rules to reconsider where maybe they may have inadvertently not seen the full picture. "To err is human" and lets face it many Thai may feel some of the recent rule changes impact and affect THEIR lives, those of their families and businesses negatively. To be fair some maybe be happy with them. BUT the important thing would be to get a cross section of peoples views from all angles and opinions.

It has been suggested that Immigration do at times monitor this Forum and if that is the case that is a good thing as it gives an insight and possibly a different perspective and one would hope better communication (a problem area in EVERY country of the World).

On the other hand it is disppointing and worrying that some obvious things do not change for the better for BOTH Immigration's smooth operations and Visa seekers ease of compliance with immigration Rules and Regulations

To name just 2.

1) Updating the Immigration website with the 1 Oct rules changes.

2) addressing the major consistencies of some of the Immigration Office's interpretation of Rules. One or two offices inconsistencies keep coming up on the Forum over and over and over again and yet they persist in being different from most other offices. I am not talking about leniency or not, I am talking about consistency only.

Of course, there are moaners, worriers, "it won't happen to me so I don't care", loophole users, illegals and never satisfied merchants on all Forums but there is also a huge volume of good proactive, Thailand supporting input as well (be it proactive or reasonable criticism on occasions, or satisfaction).

Wouldn't it be nice to see occasional articles or notes from Immigration (or whoever) accompanying some of the more major Rule changes at time of release explaining the reasoning for the changes or new rules. I am NOT talking about justification as Thailand can decide what it wishes, and rightly so but explanations (like them or not) would provide much greater understanding.

Regards, Dave

Edited September 4, 2007 by gdhm

[gdhm]

Congratulations to all of ThaiVisa. This is post #600, and this topic has enjoyed 40,000 views in less than four days.

Hum... We should rather congratulate our friends of the Immigration...

Give back to Cesar... you know.

And i'm sure that they will continue to entertain us, generating therefore a lot posts on TV...

But I never did like horror movies (but my Thai wife loves them. She can't get enough of them and maybe "others" can't either ....).

Dave

Edited September 4, 2007 by gdhm

[farang prince]

I saw the very first public comment about the new immigration law in the Letters to the Editor in the Bangkok Post on Monday. The letter was written by a farang gentleman from Chiang Rai.

[gdhm]

Have read a lot of replies and i must say that what as been suggested is right why should someone who is under 50 be allowed to piggy back staying in thailand without a retiremnet visa the rules are quite straight ,over 50 800,000 baht in thai bank or 65,000 baht a month pension.This as been the norm for a long time as it was stated previosly not many people who are affected have actually placed a reply most are from people who are not affected and WILL NOT BE.

Your comments and logic are not unreasonable Patriciachas. However, it is worth remembering that it was not us Foreigners that made the original rules. It was Thailand itself, and we merely apply for the various Visas on offer and Thailand accepts us or not.

OK nothing is laid in stone or is forever, but I think most here are unhappy with the new rules' sudden implementation at 1 days notice (officially in force, even before being officially published)

AND

that the changes immediately apply to those already here legitimately under previous rules, who may now be forced out of Thailand with little money (if most is tied up in home and property and family here). It is not easy selling your home in Thailand at the present time ans certainly not quickly.

I am not affected by THIS new rule. But I do worry about this as a human being for those who are affected be they large in number or not,. It is not only English speaking Farangs affected but ALL foreigners from all countries. I (and others not affected yet) worry on a personal front that it may be a precedent for future changes and new rules of NO WARNINGS and NO CONCESSIONS (or grandfathering of ANY kind) for EXISTING Visa holders and that we too in the future may face being thrown out and have our families torn apart over night).

Regards, Dave

Edited September 4, 2007 by gdhm

[ttthailand]

Perhaps all of us should take a month or more holiday out of LOS at the same time to give them what they want. I believe our only power here is in numbers.

You wish for us to leave....Be careful what you wish for LOS !

[Orita]

As my wife will no longer qualify due to the fact that she is not 50 yet, we are looking for alternative

retirement locations.

Today, we went to the Malaysian embassy, where we received a glossy brochure titled:

"Malaysia, my second home". This program allows retirement and residency in Malaysia.

-A visa will be granted initially for 10 years, and is renewal for further 10 years periods.

-You need either a fixed deposit of 150,000 Ringit, or, a monthly income of 10,000 Ringit

this includes your spouse and children.

-You may withdraw 90,000 Ringit after one year. You need a minimum balance of 60,000 Ringit.

-You are allowed to buy 2 (yes two) units of residential housing in your name.

-You can bring in your personal car without paying import taxes.

With such compelling offers elsewhere, we sincerely regret to have opted for Thailand as a retirement destination, where rules are changed at a whim without any regard to the consequences, and without a minimum on decency.

Of course, Thai authorities can do anything that pleases them, but in an international world, this is not

how things are done any longer. On the long run it will always get back at them, I am certain.