27 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Nobody has been caught using a practice that has been openly advertised for decades

And as I noted over on the VISA forum (with the attendant disagrees and thumbs down) the agents are very careful and circumscribed as to what is said in those advertisements.

I wonder how much money extensions bribery rakes in every year? too much for it ever to be looked at seriously probably. Not all offices seem to be involved, which is why some agents have to use upcountry ones. Don't fancy having an address on file and an extension in the passport from a province in I have never even lived in.

6 minutes ago, visalady said:

I wonder how much money extensions bribery rakes in every year? too much for it ever to be looked at seriously probably

The retirement extension machine is chicken manure compared to what some offices see as the real motherlode:

Reports indicated that top immigration commanders in regions including Khon Kaen and Chiang Mai accepted bribes ranging from 100,000 to 300,000 baht per approved visa.

1 hour ago, JerryM said:

No my position is it IS illegal and on what basis might it be caught or disrupted.

Thats a whole different discussion. When anyone steps up to stop corruption that would be addressed.

They have started by shutting down mule and fake bank accounts despite what some on here think.

They are addressing fake and nominee business' and illegal owned property. Im sure there's still corruption in these areas and always will be.

They've again started to address visa exemption entries and and deportation of nuisance tourist. They've been cracking down on border bounces, multiple excess entries and proving money for your stay.

The new software to link multiple agencies may shut some of it down if they ever implement it.

3 or 4 years ago people said the same about those areas and where are we now?

So what will the future hold, no idea but I wouldnt want to be holding a permission to stay provided by an agent who provides the finances if that day comes.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by Dan O

3 minutes ago, Dan O said:

1 hour ago, JerryM said:

No my position is it IS illegal and on what basis might it be caught or disrupted.

Thats a whole different discussion.

When I on this topic posted info on the Thai criminal statute generally referred to as influence peddling, a long time resident of Thailand posted:

Words. All a bit of a nothingburger really.

So how those statutes can be put into force as to my interest IS the topic.

You hear from the agent acolyte crowd: When in Rome, do as the Romans.

So first you have to go after the Romans.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

To the above: I had this conversation with a TV Forum expert' on the Visa forum:

JerryM: I put up a screenshot of the Immigration Action Section 35 on extensions and that got haha emojis from you guys like:

The Immigration Act -- so what's that got to do with us ??

Expert: I can also post the law that shows you must wear a helmet on a motorcycle. Does that change reality?

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

1 hour ago, JerryM said:

When I on this topic posted info on the Thai criminal statute generally referred to as influence peddling, a long time resident of Thailand posted:

Words. All a bit of a nothingburger really.

So how those statutes can be put into force as to my interest IS the topic.

You hear from the agent acolyte crowd: When in Rome, do as the Romans.

So first you have to go after the Romans.

I suspect at some point the agent access to banking and imm fraud will decrease as both areas are slowly tightening the availability to conduct that type of business.

Corruption to some extent will always happen but i suspect the days are numbered for the widespread abuse from the past despite the howls ftom the agent cult

4 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Corruption to some extent will always happen but i suspect the days are numbered for the widespread abuse from the past despite the howls from the agent cult

Well people on these topics have mentioned a crackdown but I don't think there is a 'crackdown' statute. There would be a whole convoluted route involved.

But saying something that the agent cult (as you put it) does not want to hear is like going up to a proud mother and telling her that her baby is UGLY.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

3 minutes ago, JerryM said:

Well people on these topics have mentioned a crackdown but I don't think there is a 'crackdown' statute. There would be a whole convoluted route involved.

But saying something that the agent cult (as you put it) does not want to hear is like going up to a proud mother and telling her that her baby is UGLY.

They dont need a crackdown statute, the laws on the books are being used in those areas I mentioned and could be used on the agent issue as well. Those using agents in a fraudulent manner should reflect on the fact, much like the nominee business roundup, they wil be held accountable not the agents

2 minutes ago, Dan O said:

They dont need a crackdown statute, the laws on the books are being used in those areas I mentioned and could be used on the agent issue as well. Those using agents in a fraudulent manner should reflect on the fact, much like the nominee business roundup, they wil be held accountable not the agents

The laws are on the books. That doesn't mean they can walk into an agent office (if they have an office) and arrest everybody.

And just as with the nominees, all the info the IMM might need to go after the perps is in here. Maybe.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

2 hours ago, JerryM said:

The retirement extension machine is chicken manure compared to what some offices see as the real motherlode:

Reports indicated that top immigration commanders in regions including Khon Kaen and Chiang Mai accepted bribes ranging from 100,000 to 300,000 baht per approved visa.

300.000 baht? That must be special cases since the fees paid for agent extensions don't come close to that.

20 minutes ago, stevenl said:

300.000 baht? That must be special cases since the fees paid for agent extensions don't come close to that.

This is a photo showing what was involved in the Khon Kaen investigation -- and when I posted it on the VISA forum one of the Experts said: Photo OP??

2 hours ago, JerryM said:

The retirement extension machine is chicken manure compared to what some offices see as the real motherlode:

Reports indicated that top immigration commanders in regions including Khon Kaen and Chiang Mai accepted bribes ranging from 100,000 to 300,000 baht per approved visa.

What visa's would they be, and why would people have to resort to such extortion?

11 minutes ago, visalady said:

What visa's would they be, and why would people have to resort to such extortion?

Chinese entered on tourist visa which were then converted to 'O' or 'B' and then given one year extensions based on language study or volunteer or "discretion"

The final police report was 139,000 pages.

It also involved setting up a dummy agent office to serve as an intermediary but when I tried to discuss this on the VISA forum it was deleted.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

18 minutes ago, JerryM said:

Chinese entered on tourist visa which were then converted to 'O' or 'B' and then given one year extensions based on language study or volunteer or "discretion"

The final police report was 139,000 pages.

It also involved setting up a dummy agent office to serve as an intermediary but when I tried to discuss this on the VISA forum it was deleted.

Tricky subject in the past, surprised it has gotten this far. Seems OK as long as an agent is not named.

3 minutes ago, visalady said:

Tricky subject in the past, surprised it has gotten this far. Seems OK as long as an agent is not named.

You can search for it but "That's the beauty of agents" is allowed.

On 8/29/2026 at 8:30 AM, JerryM said:

That is specious argument. The grandfather mechanism is already and has long been in the current Police Order at 2.22(6).

Not a specious argument at all. Facts are facts and those on Non-OA’s were not grandfathered in practice when they introduced the compulsory medical insurance, the only exception I am aware of is the Phuket Immigration office who I think did grandfather this.

Regardless of what is in the current Police Order about grandfathering this was not applied to the compulsory Medical insurance for Non-OA holders.

There are numerous people on this forum who switched from Non-OA to Non-O as a direct result of not being grandfathered!

Do you really think I and many others would have gone through the cost and hassle of exiting Thailand to cancel our O-A’s and starting again with a Non-O if the compulsory medical insurance requirement had been grandfathered!

9 minutes ago, skorts said:

Not a specious argument at all.

The retirement grandfathering already existed in a Ministerial Police Order. The O-A insurance did not. People were saying why would they grandfather any change in the retirement numbers if they did do it with the O-A. That's all to which I was referring.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

3 hours ago, Dan O said:

Thats a whole different discussion. When anyone steps up to stop corruption that would be addressed.

They have started by shutting down mule and fake bank accounts despite what some on here think.

They are addressing fake and nominee business' and illegal owned property. Im sure there's still corruption in these areas and always will be.

They've again started to address visa exemption entries and and deportation of nuisance tourist. They've been cracking down on border bounces, multiple excess entries and proving money for your stay.

The new software to link multiple agencies may shut some of it down if they ever implement it.

3 or 4 years ago people said the same about those areas and where are we now?

So what will the future hold, no idea but I wouldnt want to be holding a permission to stay provided by an agent who provides the finances if that day comes.

Good post.

The use of agents has become so big that I am wondering if the Thai government is prepared to accept, probably thousands of foreigners leaving Thailand, or simply overstaying, because they can not / will not start again in a neighboring country, or head back home. They haven't got the resources to cater for that many overstayers.

It would be great to know the data of exactly how many retirement visas / extensions are granted through the use of agents. I think the numbers would be huge.

A serious ban on agents would see a lot of empty condo's, and the numbers down in bars, restaurants etc. The guys using agents because they can't afford the 800k / 65k would not be a hit to the Thai economy, and I have mentioned this in another thread. Many are living in Thailand on meager western aged pensions, but some local real estate and hospitality businesses may take a hit if / when this demographic are forced out.

It's been a free for all here for decades because of the corruption around the use of agents. It's let that many in, and that many continue to reside here that I can see some turmoil if they were to ban agents.

I've said any banning of agents would most likely give people 12 months to comply, so they these people can comply, financially, and remain here. Of the ones who can not comply with the financials, they either leave, or overstay. Is the Thai government prepared for either of these options for the many who will not be able to comply?

Is it possible the use of agents for retirement visas / extensions has now basically become "too big to fail" at least on a local level?

3 hours ago, JerryM said:

The retirement extension machine is chicken manure compared to what some offices see as the real motherlode:

Reports indicated that top immigration commanders in regions including Khon Kaen and Chiang Mai accepted bribes ranging from 100,000 to 300,000 baht per approved visa.

With prices like that, it must be to overlook long overstays, and avoid black listing.

On 8/29/2026 at 9:02 AM, Celsius said:

Are you kidding me? As IF they give a flying f about deposit insurance.

Sadly I would agree with you. It might be worth noting in this context that OA visa holders, past and present, who are unable to obtain a suitable health policy because of their age and/or medical history have, since 2021, been required to hold a minimum bank balance of ฿3m in lieu of health insurance cover (paragraph 6.3 of Police Order 654/2564 refers). So a precedent requiring bank balances to be held in excess of the DPA guaranteed ฿1m limit already exists.

15 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

With prices like that, it must be to overlook long overstays, and avoid black listing.

No many were deported.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by JerryM

32 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Good post.

The use of agents has become so big that I am wondering if the Thai government is prepared to accept, probably thousands of foreigners leaving Thailand, or simply overstaying, because they can not / will not start again in a neighboring country, or head back home. They haven't got the resources to cater for that many overstayers.

It would be great to know the data of exactly how many retirement visas / extensions are granted through the use of agents. I think the numbers would be huge.

A serious ban on agents would see a lot of empty condo's, and the numbers down in bars, restaurants etc. The guys using agents because they can't afford the 800k / 65k would not be a hit to the Thai economy, and I have mentioned this in another thread. Many are living in Thailand on meager western aged pensions, but some local real estate and hospitality businesses may take a hit if / when this demographic are forced out.

It's been a free for all here for decades because of the corruption around the use of agents. It's let that many in, and that many continue to reside here that I can see some turmoil if they were to ban agents.

I've said any banning of agents would most likely give people 12 months to comply, so they these people can comply, financially, and remain here. Of the ones who can not comply with the financials, they either leave, or overstay. Is the Thai government prepared for either of these options for the many who will not be able to comply?

Is it possible the use of agents for retirement visas / extensions has now basically become "too big to fail" at least on a local level?

The group of "retirees" going on overstay because they cant get a real extension doesnt necessarily cost the government any more than right now if you think about it, other than then payoffs would stop. That grey money isnt going to the government anyway. The government would lose overall revenue spending for those that did leave though.

Im not sure of the numbers but it certainly isnt in the millions and of probably isnt in the hundred thousands either.

Edited August 31Aug 31 by Dan O

46 minutes ago, OJAS said:

Sadly I would agree with you. It might be worth noting in this context that OA visa holders, past and present, who are unable to obtain a suitable health policy because of their age and/or medical history have, since 2021, been required to hold a minimum bank balance of ฿3m in lieu of health insurance cover (paragraph 6.3 of Police Order 654/2564 refers). So a precedent requiring bank balances to be held in excess of the DPA guaranteed ฿1m limit already exists.

Agents can / do facilitate OA health insurance requirement, the added fee is 2500bht annually, when doing the ext. A legit policy is issued but with limited coverage.

5 hours ago, Dan O said:

The group of "retirees" going on overstay because they cant get a real extension doesnt necessarily cost the government any more than right now if you think about it, other than then payoffs would stop. That grey money isnt going to the government anyway. The government would lose overall revenue spending for those that did leave though.

Im not sure of the numbers but it certainly isnt in the millions and of probably isnt in the hundred thousands either.

I don't think that would be the message the Thai government would like to send out. Basically, forget about our visa laws, just overstay, because we only catch about 0.0001% of overstayers. It could cause a lot of people to just not care about complying, but I agree, as far as the Thai economy is concerned, it would not take a big hit.

For those caught, I gather they would buy an air ticket to Vietnam, Cambodia, or wherever, because they were probably going to end up there anyway, but I have read, if deported, you must get a air ticket back to your home country, but I don't know if this is fact.

The numbers, nationally, would be very interesting. Just have a look how many visa shops there are in Pattaya. The numbers would be in the thousands, and given there are 47,000 suspected Thai companies using nominees, it could be in the tens of thousands. I'm not suggesting all of those 47,000 are also using agents, just that the illegality around the use of agents would be used by a significant amount of people.

5 hours ago, JerryM said:

No many were deported.

The ones that couldn't pay 100k / 300k. 🙂

10 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

The ones that couldn't pay 100k / 300k. 🙂

No they paid their money. Then they were depoprted.

On 8/28/2026 at 8:14 AM, JerryM said:

The thing about the grandfather -- whether they do it or not -- is that it is already built into the mechanism at 2.22(6) f the current ministerial order.

Is it possible to have the 800k baht grandfathered down to, say, 400k baht. If so, how many years to qualify ?

9 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Is it possible to have the 800k baht grandfathered down to, say, 400k baht. If so, how many years to qualify ?

This is the the 'grandfather' clause in current police order at 2.22 as of 2014. So from the 1998 date in the (6) header to 2014 is 16 years of "consecutively permitted" stay. As to amount changes +/-/0 no comment.

Edited September 1Sep 1 by JerryM

People here talk of raising the 800K baht as if this is the primary decision and the 65K is an alternative afterthought.

IT MAY BE JUST THE OPPOSITE. The 65K may be the primary decision as to what is an adequate monthly amount for a retired non-Thai person in Thailand and the 800K is the alternative for persons who do not have a demonstrable 65K baht monthly income.

And as noted on the 2.22, the 65K option is (3) and the 800K option is (4).

Edited September 1Sep 1 by JerryM