People Leaving Due To Visa Restriction

[Naam]

None of my worldly possessions can be brought here logically as Import duties for retirees make it a nonsense...

the assessment of your personal situation seems to be fair and logical Dave. but as far as importing "worldly goods" is concerned your information is wrong. i am a retiree, brought in a 60' HC-container stuffed with 58m3 of valuable belongings and paid peanuts of import duties in comparison to the value.

[calibanjr.]

None of my worldly possessions can be brought here logically as Import duties for retirees make it a nonsense...

the assessment of your personal situation seems to be fair and logical Dave. but as far as importing "worldly goods" is concerned your information is wrong. i am a retiree, brought in a 60' HC-container stuffed with 58m3 of valuable belongings and paid peanuts of import duties in comparison to the value.

If you shipped 58 cubes, your 60' (sic, ) HC container wasn't what I'd call "stuffed", nor would a 40' HC or a 40' straight box container!

Just picking on ya, I'm just jealous cuz everything I own in the world (personally, not my export company) now could be shipped in a baht bus! , wait, make that

[Heng]

Let us not forget MANY of us have Thai wives and children.

Does Immigration not feel it has a duty to ALSO protect its Thai citizens married and often dependent upon Foreign husbands (occasionally foreign wives) provided Thailand is not adversely affected or at risk.

I certainly sympathize with those who met their Thai significant others abroad, started families, and are having trouble getting the entire family moved over here, but those who started families on 30 day tourist visas are no different than illegal aliens in the west sneaking in, having babies, and claiming that they should be able to stay forever because their babies are there.

And they would do that in 90 days within 6 months

Of course that also ignoring the vast difference where the westerner would be supporting the child and contributing only not taking social services and welfare from the state. But thats a different topic.

There are all kinds of illegal things I can afford to partake in but do not. Just because one can afford to do something, doesn't mean one has a right to it.

[Heng]

Not sure what category you place me in then, but I am not sure I appreciate the undercurrent of your generalisation.

We married whilst I was in Thailand on a 30 day VOA. The VOA was logical, as when I first arrived back in Thailand for the divorce of my first wife I had no idea what the future held for me and I anticipated returning to Spain quickly.

As a loving, caring, responsible husband I assessed (as best I could) what was best for my family and came up with the logic that me adapting to my wife and stepson's country was easier than vice versa AND additionally I liked Thailand and its people.

First, I hope life works out for you and your family. I assume that there is a chance for you through permanent residency.

As for your logic though, starting a family on a 30 day tourist visa is hardly a solid or logical foundation, despite having your family's interest at heart (which is no different for a lot of folks who swim across the Rio Grande, see a hole in the border fence, stow away in rail cars or 40 foot containers, etc.). I have just as little sympathy for those who enter other countries on student or tourist visas and then break the law and attempt to stay on forever (whether it's to work, play, or make babies.... regardless of how much they send home to mom and dad or love their husbands or wives) as well. For those that can get legal, fine. For those that can't... it's time to move on or go home.

I certainly don't envy the position of immigration officials who have to rubber stamp decisions that no doubt will tear families apart... but one should understand that they can't just let people in because their stories are sad, desperate, or pitiful either.

Edited September 19, 2007 by Heng

[samran]

Not sure what category you place me in then, but I am not sure I appreciate the undercurrent of your generalisation.

We married whilst I was in Thailand on a 30 day VOA. The VOA was logical, as when I first arrived back in Thailand for the divorce of my first wife I had no idea what the future held for me and I anticipated returning to Spain quickly.

As a loving, caring, responsible husband I assessed (as best I could) what was best for my family and came up with the logic that me adapting to my wife and stepson's country was easier than vice versa AND additionally I liked Thailand and its people.

First, I hope life works out for you and your family. I assume that there is a chance for you through permanent residency.

As for your logic though, starting a family on a 30 day tourist visa is hardly a solid or logical foundation, despite having your family's interest at heart (which is no different for a lot of folks who swim across the Rio Grande, see a hole in the border fence, stow away in rail cars or 40 foot containers, etc.). I certainly don't envy the position of immigration officials who have to rubber stamp decisions that no doubt will tear families apart... but one should understand that they can't just let people in because their stories are sad, desperate, or pitiful either.

Hi Heng,

I think a legitmate frustration people have with the system is that there isn't stable marriage visa that you can have (at least for a Foreign male married to a Thai female). The system as it stands is rather blunt.

- No fiance visas for starters (necessitating 30 stamps for most)

- Once married, there is an income threshold (40K per month family income) to extend your visas and no automatic right to work and no path to PR unless and then citizenship unless you are working and paying taxes.

- No grandfathering of people when the rules change could force families apart as they no longer meet the requirements.

We can debate all day and all night whether these income requirements are a good/bad thing (eg do they serve as a deterent to sham marriages?? - lots of people would love to stay in Thailand), or whether even if there was no 40K rule per month who in their right mind would want to raise their family here on any less....

Thailand at the end of the day, makes it realtively straight forward for people to work here as compared to most other places (note to all, work permits are ALWAYS hard to get anywhere in the world), but it isn't too crash hot on the family side of things.

I'm lucky as with my Thai PP my wife can get an visa extension every year without any need for me to show my income. If I'm honest about it, it should be the same the other way around. Having said that, even though I can do that, there is not a snowflakes chance in hel_l that I'd be living in Thailand if I was earning only 40K.

So it is a complex argument....

[Heng]

g'morning Samran,

I hear ya.

Whatever the reasons though, the rough framework for who they want and don't want is there for all to see. All including those wanting to live here and start families here. Just because there are loopholes doesn't mean folks can take advantage of those loopholes and THEN complain when they are closed. At least they are *slowly* closing the loop holes instead of just putting up concrete barricades.

[gdhm]

None of my worldly possessions can be brought here logically as Import duties for retirees make it a nonsense...

the assessment of your personal situation seems to be fair and logical Dave. but as far as importing "worldly goods" is concerned your information is wrong. i am a retiree, brought in a 60' HC-container stuffed with 58m3 of valuable belongings and paid peanuts of import duties in comparison to the value.

I'm confused Dr. Naam then. I am sure you are entirely accurate with your experience and reporting, and I have not tried anything to test the taxation myself. Could it be a case of Thailand's famous inconsistency of application of its rules (some lucky, some not)

When I initially made enquiries and asked around (including on this Forum) replies I got were "It ain't worth it about 5 or 6 different taxes Plus transport to Thailand" and you do not know what you will be asked until you try importing as you cannot find the value Thailand assumes for different items imported. I was also informed no receipts for many cheaper individual items may work against me when tax calculated.

I checked out the Customs & Import website showing example calculations. To me not at all clear but even so the sample calculation seemed to be be confirming it would be costly on tax. I sent them 2 emails to clarify an example (no reply)

Anyway I am happy you got your item in cheaply Dr. Naam.

In my case (even if Thailand had allowed some personal possessions for those on a Retirement Visa I was outside the time rule as I came over VOAs initially and as I could not sell my Spanish home I could not meet the time restriction after entry to bring in personal stuff.

When I go back to Spain I will go with a near empty suitcase and bring back about 6 or 7 (not costly, but personal or favourite items ). One is a pottery dragon from my collection of some 150 dragons (sad to give up the rest, prices range between 35 GBP down to a few pounds but as a collection the value would be high as would the import tax and careful transport) I hope Thailand customs do not mistakenly guess it is valuable -as it is not, except to me. My first and half paid for by my now deceased mum 38 years ago.

Kind regards, Dave

Edited September 19, 2007 by gdhm

[rexall]

g'morning Samran,

I hear ya.

Whatever the reasons though, the rough framework for who they want and don't want is there for all to see. All including those wanting to live here and start families here. Just because there are loopholes doesn't mean folks can take advantage of those loopholes and THEN complain when they are closed. At least they are *slowly* closing the loop holes instead of just putting up concrete barricades.

Wed 19 Sep 07, 11:32 a.m.

I continue to be surprised by those here who seem to prefer to side with the oft xenophobic and anal policies of the bureaucracy rather than supporting their peers in dealing with these difficult and stressful matters!

"putting up concrete barricades"

Where on earth is that coming from??? Why would they want to put up concrete barricades when the bureaucratic barricades are nearly as efficient? This sort of language and thinking is indicative of how threatened they apparently are of evil foreign influences. What is this obvious-but-rarely-acknowledged perception of threat that falang pose to the government, the people or the culture of Thailand??? Well, OK, so U.S. culture is crap, but that doesn't seem to stop people from demanding it, and paying top dollar to get it our stupid jeans, actions movies and hamburgers.

We pose no threat. Better, me thinks, to invest those resources in improving the lives of people in Thailand rather than propping up a xenophobic bureaucracy which serves no purpose other than to complicate a perfectly simple situation.

Aloha,

Rex

[jumnien]

Just picked up my 5th one year marriage visa a couple days ago - very easy, very transparent, very polite - I really don't see what all the fuss is about?

[backflip]

"Could it be a case of Thailand's famous inconsistency of application of its rules (some lucky, some not) "

Could be. On the other hand, I believe that the law was changed. Earlier, you could bring in household goods without duty, if you had a retirement visa. The law is now duty must be paid. I brough my stuff in 3 years ago, and I paid no duty, or bribes.

[Naam]

1) I am sure you are entirely accurate with your experience and reporting, and I have not tried anything to test the taxation myself. Could it be a case of Thailand's famous inconsistency of application of its rules (some lucky, some not)

2) When I initially made enquiries and asked around (including on this Forum) replies I got were "It ain't worth it about 5 or 6 different taxes Plus transport to Thailand" and you do not know what you will be asked until you try importing as you cannot find the value Thailand assumes for different items imported. I was also informed no receipts for many cheaper individual items may work against me when tax calculated.

3) I checked out the Customs & Import website showing example calculations. To me not at all clear but even so the sample calculation seemed to be be confirming it would be costly on tax. I sent them 2 emails to clarify an example (no reply)

1) it was not luck but some experience and a logical conclusion.

2) unfortunately in this very valuable forum not every but quite a bunch of Dicks, Toms and Harrys just love to add their own (mostly negative) views and opinions which amount in a lot of cases to nothing but pure rubbish because their opinions are not based on experience but hearsay.

3) wrong approach Dave, but you are excused based on your obvious lack of experience with bureaucracies similar to Thailand (which i possess). in my (our) case it was not only the value we brought in but the "nature" of our belongings. from the beginning on i knew i wouldn't be able to handle the case and only a highly experienced and "respected" company could do it. for us importing our belongings was conditio sine qua non, i.e. "we are not allowed do import this? we are not allowed to import that? thanks and good bye Thailand!" only after our container arrived, was cleared and our goods were in a safe storage we rented, i signed the contract for the land purchase and for the construction of our home.

[Naam]

If you shipped 58 cubes, your 60' (sic, ohmy.gif ) HC container wasn't what I'd call "stuffed", nor would a 40' HC or a 40' straight box container!

to the best of my knowledge a 40' HC has the volume of more than 60m3. correct me if i'm wrong and provide the inside measurements please. the container was indeed stuffed by professionals from bottom to ceiling and the volume was used up.

typo

Edited September 19, 2007 by Dr. Naam

[Naam]

If you shipped 58 cubes, your 60' (sic, ohmy.gif ) HC container wasn't what I'd call "stuffed", nor would a 40' HC or a 40' straight box container!

to the best of my knowledge a 40' HC has the volume of more than 60m3. correct me if i'm wrong and provide the inside measurements please. the container was indeed stuffed by professionals from bottom to ceiling and the volume was used up.

typo

volume of 60' HC = 76.6 cubic metres (that means i was wrong claiming i shipped 60m3 only and you are quite right)

http://www.freightraders.co.nz/containerspecs.html

[gdhm]

1) I am sure you are entirely accurate with your experience and reporting, and I have not tried anything to test the taxation myself. Could it be a case of Thailand's famous inconsistency of application of its rules (some lucky, some not)

2) When I initially made enquiries and asked around (including on this Forum) replies I got were "It ain't worth it about 5 or 6 different taxes Plus transport to Thailand" and you do not know what you will be asked until you try importing as you cannot find the value Thailand assumes for different items imported. I was also informed no receipts for many cheaper individual items may work against me when tax calculated.

3) I checked out the Customs & Import website showing example calculations. To me not at all clear but even so the sample calculation seemed to be be confirming it would be costly on tax. I sent them 2 emails to clarify an example (no reply)

1) it was not luck but some experience and a logical conclusion.

2) unfortunately in this very valuable forum not every but quite a bunch of Dicks, Toms and Harrys just love to add their own (mostly negative) views and opinions which amount in a lot of cases to nothing but pure rubbish because their opinions are not based on experience but hearsay.

3) wrong approach Dave, but you are excused based on your obvious lack of experience with bureaucracies similar to Thailand (which i possess). in my (our) case it was not only the value we brought in but the "nature" of our belongings. from the beginning on i knew i wouldn't be able to handle the case and only a highly experienced and "respected" company could do it. for us importing our belongings was conditio sine qua non, i.e. "we are not allowed do import this? we are not allowed to import that? thanks and good bye Thailand!" only after our container arrived, was cleared and our goods were in a safe storage we rented, i signed the contract for the land purchase and for the construction of our home.

Thanks Dr. Naam

1) Nothing beats experience and knowledge.

2) Agreed. Being a Forum it invites knowledge and views form all and it can be quite difficult sorting the "wood from the tree"

3) Very fair comment. I am a 'obey the black and white rules which I expect to be clearly laid down and understandable" man myself and as my wife says Thailand deals in "grey' not black and white, and seldom walks a straight line to get things done but "zig zags". I must admit after being here only 18 months, I can vouch for Zig zagging Thai style will reach the finish line much faster than Western style walking in a straight apparently logical (by Western culture) line to do something.

I am learning, but a lifetime mindset of dealing with UK and Spanish style of bureaucracy is hard to adjust from. Your comment about hiring someone respected and experienced in matter one does not understand is I feel a valuable piece of advice and should be a Golden" rule in Thailand. Many would save a lot of stress by following that concept, and probably at the end of the day save money too as several cheaper errors soon add up and become more costly.

Thank you for you input on my comments Dr. Naam. Much Appreciated.

Kindest regards,

Dave

[Heng]

"putting up concrete barricades"

Where on earth is that coming from??? Why would they want to put up concrete barricades when the bureaucratic barricades are nearly as efficient?

Well, OK, so U.S. culture is crap, but that doesn't seem to stop people from demanding it, and paying top dollar to get it our stupid jeans, actions movies and hamburgers.

We pose no threat.

If they really wanted foreigners out of here, it could be done. The LOS has a bloated police and army capable of little more than rounding up undesireables onto trucks Krakow style. We're nowhere near that point yet. We're at the politely closing the loopholes stage with thousands of foreigners of hundreds of nationalities perfectly welcome if they meet the requirements (and none of those requirements is wearing a guava armband).

As for stupid jeans, movies, and hamburgers,... as far as I know, these concepts can continue to be imported without the longstay/overstaying tourists. Not sure why some folks think their presence has anything to do with particular material imports.

And no one ever said you posed a threat. That part likely is just your own wounded ego trying to defend itself; it's a common notion on web forums regarding immigration to the LOS.

Edited September 19, 2007 by Heng

[asiaworld]

Hey all, nice to hear considerate post from Samran but Heng <deleted>.. sounds really Nazi . You see from some of my posts some may conclude, that i'm just grumbling stressing negative points of Thailand ( or showing my 'ignorance' pointing out local narrow'mindingness ) . All i do is just speak from my own experience, which includes a lot of neighboring countries as well. Thailand is so called homogenous society, and trying hard to remain one . Good for you Heng, that you got naturalised here, so you have it behind you. Now you may be disgrunted observing how 'bad' things are in your other homeland, which allows black'white'&'yellow etc. to get naturalised, and be integral part of the society ! i also agree, that this babel may get out of hand @ times, (United States of) Malaysia (or even S'pore) is the nearest example . And Thailand is still light years away from that situation, simply because no matter how lovely this country is, it's not THAT lovely, that it'll have hoards of poor farangs rushing here MX to US stile ! The only thing Thailand will achieve, by opening up is more respect from the world community , a SLIGH ! only slight increase in foreign residents , but THEY will have less grudge against Being used & abused by Thaiways !! So it'll produce more quality residents, more mentally healthy & willing & ABLE to contribute to the society ..

The other way yes keep it as it is , bigotland, but all the disadvantaged of the west will still be able to come here & get hitched in a few nights out in the bar , so it's either win-win, or lose-lose , for both thais & westerners IMHO

[rexall]

<snip>And no one ever said you posed a threat. That part likely is just your own wounded ego trying to defend itself; it's a common notion on web forums regarding immigration to the LOS.

This makes no sense at all. What is the point of continually ratcheting up the limitations on falang presence and activity if we are not perceived as a threat? Why would they even bother about us one way or the other?

Aloha,

Rex

[brahmburgers]

On the other hand, Thailand has never had a clear, unequivocal policy on retiree immigration. It has been blowing in the wind, now favorable, now unfavorable, subject to whim and whimsey, and the capricious decision-making process at the individual Immigration officer level. True, for a long time it was relatively easy, but now it is not.

The main thing to understand, if you didn't before, is that you are adrift in a sea of uncertainty if you think you can retire here. Those who are resourceful, and wary, will be able to pull it off, albeit at some considerable inconvenience. Those who want to 'play by the rules', and settle down in relative hassle-free security are swimming in the wrong pond. Sad, but true.

I am sincerely sorry for those who are only just now discovering the impermanent nature of all things Thai, and I hope things swing back the other way, but I fully understand why people feel the need to leave. In the end, we all need to belong somewhere, and if you go by recent, and, truth told, not-so-recent history, this is not it.

Sateev

I agree, Thailand does not have a policy on foreign retirees. This is a culture that unblinkingly looks to powerful people at the top of the pyramid for direction. Our current gang of power brokers are in disarray, and even when they have a semblence of policy, making foreign retirees comfortable is very very low on their list of priorities.

It will continue to be 'every man for himself' for the forseeable future. To ensure that, the rules will keep being mutable, and subjective interpretations of dictates (by bureaucrats) will reign.

[Heng]

Hey all, nice to hear considerate post from Samran but Heng &lt;deleted&gt;.. sounds really Nazi .

Good for you Heng, that you got naturalised here, so you have it behind you. Now you may be disgrunted observing how 'bad' things are in your other homeland, which allows black'white'&'yellow etc. to get naturalised, and be integral part of the society !

AW, I'm not saying it will or should come to that Nazi type example that I made. I was saying that it easily could be that way but it hasn't.

I've never had to go through a troubled immigration/naturalization situation so I haven't had the pleasure or displeasure of becoming disgruntled with anything like that. Mine is an unbiased observation without taking sides. I don't doubt though that I might be in the 'same boat' if I for whatever reason decided to move to Russia or Japan or wherever it might be difficult for me to become naturalized... but of course that would be because of my own choice, yes? I welcome foreigners (I'm talking about all foreigners, not separating out any particular group) who are legally allowed to live here and count many of them as some of my best tenants and customers of more than a few of my family businesses.

Edited September 20, 2007 by Heng

[Heng]

<snip>And no one ever said you posed a threat. That part likely is just your own wounded ego trying to defend itself; it's a common notion on web forums regarding immigration to the LOS.

This makes no sense at all. What is the point of continually ratcheting up the limitations on falang presence and activity if we are not perceived as a threat? Why would they even bother about us one way or the other?

Aloha,

Rex

aloha Rex,

The limitations are for ALL foreigners, and in fact falang treatment is in the middle ground in terms of stringency. Those from Laos, Burma, Kampuchea easily receive the most unfair and inhumane treatment (with illegal workers often robbed and sometimes raped by the police before being deported). Falangs have the middle treatment and some groups of Eastern and Southern Asians have a slightly easier time going about immigration, but likely just because they aren't as easy to track.

[rexall]

The limitations are for ALL foreigners, and in fact falang treatment is in the middle ground in terms of stringency. <snip>

Thu 20 Sep 07, 8:29 a.m.

We are not communicating very well here. Probably because I used the term "falang" too broadly and incorrectly to include all foreigners. Who cares if their is a tiered system of abuse? That is, unless you and your loved ones happen to be on the bottom tier. But that is off the point I was trying to make.

Other than xenophobia and racism, what rational explanation is there for mistreatment of "outsiders"?

Now, I suppose what constitutes "mistreatment" is debatable. However, if it remains your contention that falang (and other pernicious outsiders) pose no risk to the Thai government, Thai people or Thai culture, then what drives the need, the insistence, on this anal over-regulation? When does "regulation" stop serving a rational purpose and become harassment?

Again, if there is no threat, why bother about us? Leave your fingerprints, DNA, and data at the airport, pay your money, get issued a "smart card" to keep track of entries and exists, payment of fees, and then leave us the futz alone! If we commit crimes or infractions or create problems in some other way, deal with it, deal with it harshly if you want, but deal with it the same way you would a Thai who breaks the law.

I know this must sound pretty "out there" to people who still inhabit the Middle Ages, but why not? What's the big problem?

Aloha,

Rex

[Heng]

We are not communicating very well here. Probably because I used the term "falang" too broadly and incorrectly to include all foreigners. Who cares if their is a tiered system of abuse? That is, unless you and your loved ones happen to be on the bottom tier. But that is off the point I was trying to make.

Other than xenophobia and racism, what rational explanation is there for mistreatment of "outsiders"?

The point I was trying to make is that it's a broad brush immigration policy that affects all foreigners (and even some Thais who don't have roots here have to get yearly non immigration stamps), albeit in different ways. It doesn't matter who they are. It has nothing to do with racism or xenophobia, unless you think the gov't for some reason fears overseas Thais, citizens of the Cherokee nation, or surfers from Waikiki. They just happen to be caught in the same net.

So your question is really 'why is there an immigration policy?' Well, all countries have them, some more stringent than others. Thailand's is hardly the most stringent.

[gdhm]

.....We pose no threat.

....And no one ever said you posed a threat. That part likely is just your own wounded ego trying to defend itself; it's a common notion on web forums regarding immigration to the LOS...

Hi Heng,

I agree with almost ALL of your comment and observations above but I feel the second part of your last paragraph is a pity.

May I suggestion an alternative view with regard to Rexall's comment "we pose no threat".

When people or a particular group feel "rightly or wrongly" pressurised unreasonably or they feel they are earning disproportionate attention or rules and regulations, is it not a natural and reasonable reaction to ask why? and to try and take stream or concerns out of a situation with comments and reassurances similar to "one is not posing a threat or desire to in any way". Seems to me submissive, non confrontational, rather than motivated by "wounded ego".

Kind regards, Dave

[rexall]

We are not communicating very well here. Probably because I used the term "falang" too broadly and incorrectly to include all foreigners. Who cares if their is a tiered system of abuse? That is, unless you and your loved ones happen to be on the bottom tier. But that is off the point I was trying to make.

Other than xenophobia and racism, what rational explanation is there for mistreatment of "outsiders"?

The point I was trying to make is that it's a broad brush immigration policy that affects all foreigners (and even some Thais who don't have roots here have to get yearly non immigration stamps), albeit in different ways. It doesn't matter who they are. It has nothing to do with racism or xenophobia, unless you think the gov't for some reason fears overseas Thais, citizens of the Cherokee nation, or surfers from Waikiki. They just happen to be caught in the same net.

So your question is really 'why is there an immigration policy?' Well, all countries have them, some more stringent than others. Thailand's is hardly the most stringent.

Thu 20 Sep 07, 10:39 a.m.

Oh, horse feathers!

Yes, your point is well taken, as I acknowledged in my last reply, this bureaucracy seems hostile to "outsiders" of whatever stripe. Well, possibly not the rich ones providing that they spend their money and then go home! In any event, mistreatment of Thais "without roots here", as you put it, is hardly surprising nor is it an exception to what I was arguing. Thailand is not the only country that behaves xenophobically and racist toward it's "half breeds." Even in Hawaii, "hapa haole" ("half white") may have difficulty achieving acceptance in some segments of Hawaiian society. In China, my supervisor, a sophisticated, modern, OZ educated, Hong Kong Chinese, told me we would not hire a "banana" (yellow on the outside, white on the inside) to replace me in a teaching position. So, no, it is not at all surprising to me that those of "mixed race" or whatever term you prefer, often are the brunt of the same and sometimes more discrimination than others. Probably that has something to do with the mainstream culture feeling uncomfortably and unsure about how to characterize such people and how to deal with them. But that is possibly spilling over into another thread.

Finally, No, no, no! My question is NOT "Why is there an immigration policy?"

That's silly. Of course countries must have immigration policies. My questions is, what horrible things would result from the immigration policy I described last post about issuing expats a "smart card" at the airport which operates as I described, and after that, as long as they are behaving themselves, leave them the futz alone?

Of course, I recognize that as a rhetorical question. The answer is NOTHING would happen except that a lot of bureaucrats might be employed elsewhere, possibly even doing something useful.

Aloha,

Rex

[rogerdee123]

I came to Thailand first in the 70s. Back then it was extremely difficult to get long-term visas and work permits. Also in those days and also thru the mid-80s (I think) we had to get tax clearances everytime we departed the country to prove we were paying Thai Income taxes. Generally it was difficult to live and work in Thailand unless you were sponsored by a large Thai or Multinational company or were a diplomat or in the Peace Corps or whatever. There were no provisions for foreigners to retire in Thailand. Some things were easier, for instance life-time drivers' licenses. It was easy going in and out of the country on tourist visas and a number of foreigners lived (and worked) in Thailand on tourist visas and doing the visa runs. But only a fraction of the number today. Mainly because the Thai economy at that time was based mainly on tapioca and rice exports, tourism wasn't the big money earner then. Thailand was still not yet developed. No industry to speak of. Almost all foreigners were "rich" compared to the average middle class urban Thai.

Then in the 90s it seems that the powers to be realized that there was money to be made from foreign long-term residents, especially in the real estate market. So I think they loosened things up in order to develop the real estate market (or in other words .... influencial people wanted to make money on real estate). In the late 80s and early 90s, Thailand was just starting to "take off" economically. Income levels started rising and the economy boomed. This was the time when the general feeling was .... "attract the foreigners and the foreign money".

Now we have the situation where Thailand has move from the ranks of the "under-developed" to ALMOST Asian Tiger status. OK personally I have my own thoughts about the underlying factors of the Thai Economy which are not so positive. But Thai middle class income levels is up there almost on a par with farang. Basically unlike the 80's and 90's, people in power don't THINK that they need to attract foreigners like they used to. The income the average foreign retiree brings into the country isn't so much (comparatvely) any more. Thai's are competing with foreigners for apartments and condos. I mean that largely (with some exceptions) the real estate market has enough Thai customers and doesn't need foreigners any more to be sustainable.

So I think the negative trend that we see happening now in regard to encouraging foreigners to live in Thailand is logical considering the way people think at the top of Thai leadership. I don't like it any more than anyone else but I think it's kind of predictable. I think that Thai leadership doesn't think that our (farang retiree or farang husband) "contributions" to the Thai economy as it is now in 2007 are very significant.

If in Thailand they need cheap manual laborers to work on the roads and building construction, they are going to make it easy for Lao, Khmer, Burmese, etc to live and work in Thailand.

If the real estate market plunges and the economy heads downward, we will probably see more encouraging signs for foreign residents.

Anyway this is my take on the situation.

[LivinLOS]

So your question is really 'why is there an immigration policy?' Well, all countries have them, some more stringent than others. Thailand's is hardly the most stringent.

Its by far the most stringent of any I have encountered in the 3rd world..

And carrying the passport I do, its worse for me than any in Europe, when I asked to go to the USA I got a 10 year visa first request, its not difficult to go to NZ or OZ and easy to work there too..

So 'most stringent'.. Possibly not, but certainly WAY out of line with countries of comparable economic standing.

[Jingthing]

So your question is really 'why is there an immigration policy?' Well, all countries have them, some more stringent than others. Thailand's is hardly the most stringent.

Its by far the most stringent of any I have encountered in the 3rd world..

And carrying the passport I do, its worse for me than any in Europe, when I asked to go to the USA I got a 10 year visa first request, its not difficult to go to NZ or OZ and easy to work there too..

So 'most stringent'.. Possibly not, but certainly WAY out of line with countries of comparable economic standing.

Try retiring in Burma. I do agree the levels of hassle and stringency are out of line with the economic level of Thailand, so clearly other political factors are at play.

Edited September 20, 2007 by Jingthing

[Heng]

.....We pose no threat.

....And no one ever said you posed a threat. That part likely is just your own wounded ego trying to defend itself; it's a common notion on web forums regarding immigration to the LOS...

Hi Heng,

I agree with almost ALL of your comment and observations above but I feel the second part of your last paragraph is a pity.

May I suggestion an alternative view with regard to Rexall's comment "we pose no threat".

When people or a particular group feel "rightly or wrongly" pressurised unreasonably or they feel they are earning disproportionate attention or rules and regulations, is it not a natural and reasonable reaction to ask why? and to try and take stream or concerns out of a situation with comments and reassurances similar to "one is not posing a threat or desire to in any way". Seems to me submissive, non confrontational, rather than motivated by "wounded ego".

Kind regards, Dave

afternoon Dave,

It's perfectly natural and reasonable to ask why. Accusing the other party of racism is irrational in this instance though when it can be clearly demonstrated that the affected parties are from all races and nationalities (even Thai). It's similar to the way some groups of African Americans in the US accuse the NFL of being racist because of the fact that there are no black NFL team owners... choosing to totally ignore the possibility that no group of black investors or single investor has made a concerted effort to pool together $100-$300 million to purchase or form an expansion team (you'll note that the people who make this sort of complaint/accusation are far from the type who might be in a position to become a team owner).

[samran]

on the visa requirements vs level of economic status issue. An economists observation:

I tend not to look at it that way. Immigration tends to be about supply and demand. You raise prices if people want it more, you lower prices if they want it less. Cambo is a crap hole, hence visas are easy to get. Australia and the US are magnets, so the standard are higher. Just because Thailand is next door to Cambo and has a GDP similar to a central American country doesn't mean its visa rules shouldn't be more in line with the US, Australia or Western EU.

I have no doubt that many people would given their right arm and leg to live here. Hence why general levels of income level etc needed for retirment are out of whack to similar places on the GDP front. The RTG must be thinking that by rasing the bar, people will still be coming in their droves. I suspect they are right.

Supply and demand. Forget about levels of economic prosperity.

**usual disclaimer here about the injustice about not grandfathering and lack of proper family visas...

[Jingthing]

Samran, good point and I am sure thats a factor, but extremely simplistic to assert its the only factor.