Small Translation Of Some Changes In The New Rules

[ThaiLawOnline]

Isaan Lawyers is not a large Law firm and we don't have the staff to translate 17 pages quickly....

We are not specialized in visas as we mostly work in Isaan with

people living here for a long time. We do more property, family and corporate law.

But this is a small summary that might help some people.

============================================

http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/doc/RTP777_2551.pdf

This document is important and concern all foreigners with temporary stay visa. It replaces and cancelled the previous orders on Sept 8 2006, which are the rules of October 2006 and also the order signed on January 21, 2008.

It's the police order 777 year 2551.

It was signed on 25 Nov 2008 (2551).

The numbers are not the same as the previous order.

I had a small conversation with my assistant and we compare the 2 versions, the new and old one, quickly.

Here are some changes:

BUSINESS VISA: Under 7.1 (4) before, you had to:

"The business concerned must have duly submitted its audited balance sheet as at the end of the latest fiscal year."

Now, it's the 2 latest years. It seems to be in accordance with the new labour act which will allow work permits for 2 years. That's my personal opinion.

The clause 7.1 (5) seems to be deleted. Before, you had to show some profits and losses, audit, etc.

In case of visa for an investment, the Thai version was not mentionning 3 million baht. The English version was. Now, it's clearly an investment of not less than 3 million. That was 7.4 before.

For teachers, private and public school, it looks like it's the same. BUT BE CAREFUL. The previous police order was mentionning documents required...the new one DOES NOT MENTION DOCUMENTS REQUIRED...but only basis for consideration.

For family (like spouse, children) there are some modifications:

It looks like the 'support of a child visa' is still there, but there are financial requirements. 40,000 baht income per month for the mother or father, or 400,000 at the bank. But they added a paragraph mentionning that the immigration office has DISCRETION case by case to deliver this visa. No requirement about the age (before there was a requirement of 50 y-o, that was not always applied).

The HUSBAND married to a Thai lady (what about the wife married to a Thai???) now must show 40,000 baht income per month, or 400,000 baht at the bank 2 months in advance. Before, it was per couple. Now, it's for the foreign HUSBAND. But on the third page of this document, there is a mention on page 3 that the immigration will have discretion to apply this clause or not. Same as the previous one. I do believe it's to protect people living here for a long time, with children or a wife, who don't have the requirements. Personal opinion too.

For retirement visa, it's now SPECIFIED that you need 800,000 baht in a local bank account for the FIRST YEAR. Some people were able to get a one year retirement visa abroad without showing money and the second year, for their extension, had to put 800,000 baht 3 months in advance. The rest seems to be as before.

The annex at the end, (this annex is the salarial requirement for foreigners having an extension based on business) The amounts the same with some specifications. For the first category, the put an exception on Europe about RUSSIA (not included). Russia was in the third category and Europe was in one. No more confusion!

Second is the same.

The fourth, the specified that South Africa is excluded and is in the third category. (Same as Russia). But it was also before in the third...

We did NOT check all clauses and this is NOT a translation. Just some help to start with.

I do hope a big law firm or the immigration bureau will provide a FULL English translation soon.

Sebastian from Isaan Lawyers

Edited December 3, 2008 by Isaanlawyers

[Mario2008]

Nice work. Thanks.

[dereklev]

Thanks Isaan Lawyers.

I have a visa based support to/from a Thai child issued in Korat. They have, for the past 2 years, wanted to see money going through your bank account. Now they have formalised things.

Does anyone know what documents the British Embassy require for a "proof of income" letter?

I am over 50 but not yet retired. My income come from my business in England.

[torrenova]

If the 3m baht investment visa is reintroduced that would be good as long as the investment is not government bonds or something !

Supporting a child whilst removing the 50 year old age limit would be great news. Allowing to show 400k in the bank rather than income is would be even better.

Thanks Sebastian for your sterling efforts. I know it is early days but it may be that whilst they take with one hand and give back with the other.

[Thanyaburi Mac]

Isaan Lawyers is not a large Law firm and we don't have the staff to translate 17 pages quickly....

We are not specialized in visas as we mostly work in Isaan with

people living here for a long time. We do more property, family and corporate law.

But this is a small summary that might help some people.

============================================

http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/doc/RTP777_2551.pdf

This document is important and concern all foreigners with temporary stay visa. It replaces and cancelled the previous orders on Sept 8 2006, which are the rules of October 2006 and also the order signed on January 21, 2008.

It's the police order 777 year 2551.

It was signed on 25 Nov 2008 (2551).

The numbers are not the same as the previous order.

I had a small conversation with my assistant and we compare the 2 versions, the new and old one, quickly.

Here are some changes:

For retirement visa, it's now SPECIFIED that you need 800,000 baht in a local bank account for the FIRST YEAR. Some people were able to get a one year retirement visa abroad without showing money and the second year, for their extension, had to put 800,000 baht 3 months in advance. The rest seems to be as before.

We did NOT check all clauses and this is NOT a translation. Just some help to start with.

I do hope a big law firm or the immigration bureau will provide a FULL English translation soon.

Sebastian from Isaan Lawyers

Thanks for the prelim info.

No mention of it but do hope the grandfathering for those with "retirement" extensions prior to XX October 1998 is still in force.

Mac

[icequeen]

There is no mention of the 65,000b income per month option for retirement. Is this still available or does it have to be 800,000b in a local bank?

[AlexLah]

Hi Mac,

Just out of curiousity.

Why did you included the whole OP's message in your reply?

[ThaiLawOnline]

Thanks for the prelim info.

No mention of it but do hope the grandfathering for those with "retirement" extensions prior to XX October 1998 is still in force.

Mac

Yes, after a first quick look, retirement extensions are exactly the same, grandfathered, same as 2006, except the financial requirements for the first year... that was not mentionned in the old police order

Again, we did this "summary" very quickly. (Main reason is that I am sick, and spent most of the time today at home, and we are only 6 employees all included (4 lawyers (3 Thais), an accountant and an assistant). I hope that Sunbelt will be able to help and do a full translation.

Edited December 3, 2008 by Isaanlawyers

[bazookaa]

There is no mention of the 65,000b income per month option for retirement. Is this still available or does it have to be 800,000b in a local bank?

no same before except for first time or year

[Lite Beer]

Thanks for the prelim info.

No mention of it but do hope the grandfathering for those with "retirement" extensions prior to XX October 1998 is still in force.

Mac

Yes, after a first quick look, retirement extensions are exactly the same, grandfathered, same as 2006, except the financial requirements for the first year... that was not mentionned in the old police order

Again, we did this "summary" very quickly. (Main reason is that I am sick, and spent most of the time today at home, and we are only 6 employees all included (4 lawyers (3 Thais), an accountant and an assistant). I hope that Sunbelt will be able to help and do a full translation.

Thanks a lot Seb. Apreciated

It does look like good news for a man with a Thai Wife. He can now have 400,000 in the bank. Although it has to be his money not hers.

[Mario2008]

My first impression is that the local offices will have a lot of descretionary powers, for good or worse.

[JUDAS]

Thanks for the info. Much appreciated.

[Carib]

Thanks !

[gobs]

Thanks Isaanlawyers!

Great infos...

[Tafia]

A little confused over the first year extension.....is it on the first year we MUST have 800,000 in the bank and each year thereafter income or combination of income and funds are ok? or........

Is it still possible to have the 65000 income? .....and or income and bank funds amounting to 800,000? per annum

Edited December 3, 2008 by Tafia

[Lite Beer]

Is it still possible to have the 65000 income? and or income and bank funds amounting to 800,000? per annum

For retirement.Yes it would appear so.

[Tafia]

Is it still possible to have the 65000 income? and or income and bank funds amounting to 800,000? per annum

For retirement.Yes it would appear so.

Even on the first extension?

[Mosha]

So what happens if the husband and wife are involved in a joint enterprise i.e. rubber farm? Also is the Family support visa grandfathered? IE if we met the criteria this year will the allow the same criteria next time.

[Lite Beer]

So what happens if the husband and wife are involved in a joint enterprise i.e. rubber farm? Also is the Family support visa grandfathered? IE if we met the criteria this year will the allow the same criteria next time.

Wait for the official translation . We just do not know.

[Lite Beer]

Is it still possible to have the 65000 income? and or income and bank funds amounting to 800,000? per annum

For retirement.Yes it would appear so.

Even on the first extension?

Yes. Please wait for the official translation.

[opalhort]

It does look like good news for a man with a Thai Wife. He can now have 400,000 in the bank. Although it has to be his money not hers.

Thanks a lot to all of you who try to help clarify the new rules.

My question: I've been on the 400K extension for some years but the account is a combined (husband/wife) one. Do the new rules stipulate that the acccount has to be in my name only?

opalhort

[Lite Beer]

It does look like good news for a man with a Thai Wife. He can now have 400,000 in the bank. Although it has to be his money not hers.

Thanks a lot to all of you who try to help clarify the new rules.

My question: I've been on the 400K extension for some years but the account is a combined (husband/wife) one. Do the new rules stipulate that the acccount has to be in my name only?

opalhort

Until we have a proper translation we will have to wait.

When you think that these rules came into force on 25th November they could have given an English translation.

[simon43]

Well, the support of a Thai child could be a godsend for me if they no longer require one to be 50 years old. I'm 49.5 and juggling tourist visas right now

Simon

[Soutpeel]

they could have given an English translation.

Oh come one LB....thats applying common sense...

[Mario2008]

I agree with Lite Beer. The first impression from Sebastiaan is very nice. But we can only speculate on the new rules as we still don't have a complete translation. We will have to keep our heads cool till then.

[dingdongrb]

It does look like good news for a man with a Thai Wife. He can now have 400,000 in the bank. Although it has to be his money not hers.

Thanks a lot to all of you who try to help clarify the new rules.

My question: I've been on the 400K extension for some years but the account is a combined (husband/wife) one. Do the new rules stipulate that the acccount has to be in my name only?

opalhort

Until we have a proper translation we will have to wait.

When you think that these rules came into force on 25th November they could have given an English translation.

Yes, Thanks Isaan Lawyers for the quick overview, it was much appreciated.

400k in the bank and it has to be 'his' (man married to a Thai women).... That leaves us all out as I am sure if we asked our spouses they would say it was their money....

[opalhort]

Until we have a proper translation we will have to wait.

When you think that these rules came into force on 25th November they could have given an English translation.

Yes LB, you are correct.

Why do they have to come up with those rules right now (considering the current tourism situation)?

I feel sorry for the 30 days border runners. They had no warning at all.

Especially those who need at least 21 days for change of visa have now one more door closed for them.

Let's wait and see.

opalhort

[ThaiLawOnline]

I had no idea that would have so much impact and so many people would be interested. We are all concern as foreigners on visa, but more than 500 people read the first message in less than 5 hours. Beyond my expectation and I would feel uncomfortable to give false information.

So, I will ask a proper translation by our office tomorrow. Problem is that Friday is holiday in Thailand and our rule is staff do not work on weekends. But I think we should be able to translate the full document, 17 pages, tomorrow before 5pm, Bangkok time. (So, in the next 20 hours).

If Sunbelt or another law firm does it, great. We are not in the visa business and I would be happy. So, as lite beer said, wait another 24 hours, and it will be clearer (can Thailand Law be clear?) and comprehensive. Now, it's a summary, quickly done.

Seb.

[mojaco]

Being on a retirement extension myself with a foreign wife, I took the trouble to translate the following section from the new rules. It looks like to me there really is no significant change, except that if applying under the "bank account only" method, there is a 60 day seasoning period of the 800,000 Baht before applying THE FIRST YEAR. However there still is the option of 65,000 Baht per month or combination of bank account and the monthly income ("income" is the word used in the regulation, not the word "pension", so any sort of regular funds would be acceptable.)

Article 2.22 For retirement extensions not exceeding one year:

(1) The foreign person must already have a visa

(2) He must be of age 50 years or older

(3) He must have proof of having money in the amount of not less than 65,000 Baht per month, OR

(4) On the day he applies he has money IN A BANK IN THAILAND continuously for three months of not less than 800,000 Baht and especially in the FIRST YEAR he must show this amount in a bank deposit not less than 60 days, OR

(5) He is able to have money yearly and money deposited in the bank calculated together to be not less than 800,000 Baht counted to the day of application

(6) The foreign person that came into the Kingdom before 21 October 2541 and had received permission to stay in the Kingdom for purposes of retirement and has stayed continuously must meet the standard of:

(-a-) Being 60 years or older and have a certain (like guaranteed or fixed) income and have money deposited in the bank for a continuous preceding period of 3 months of not less than 200,000 Baht or have an income of not less than 20,000 Baht per month, and

(-b-) If having an age of at least 55 years but not yet reaching 60 years of age, he must have a bank account for a continuous preceding period of 3 months of not less than 500,000 Baht, or have an income of not less than 50,000 Baht per month.

===========================

Article 2:20 The situation of being a family menber of a Foreign Person that has received permission to stay in the Kingom for a temporary period persuant to Articles 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.10, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, 2.21, 2.22, 2.26, 6.29 according to this ordinance or Statue 34(7) (specifically for parents, married couples, children, adopted children, or children of a married couple) permission is given not to exceed one year (under the following conditions):

(1) The Foreign Person has been examined and has received a temporary visa

(2) There is proof showing the relationship (to the Foreign Person)

(3) For the situation of a married couple there must be a relationship both according to law and also in fact, or

(4) Regarding children, adopted children or children of a married couple or under guardianship, children, adopted children or those children of a married couple must still be unmarried and still living as a member of the household and must have age of not more than 20 years

Thanks for that translation.

I am merging this message with the others on the new rules.

Astral

Edited December 3, 2008 by astral

[bangkokrick]

I had no idea that would have so much impact and so many people would be interested. We are all concern as foreigners on visa, but more than 500 people read the first message in less than 5 hours. Beyond my expectation and I would feel uncomfortable to give false information.

So, I will ask a proper translation by our office tomorrow. Problem is that Friday is holiday in Thailand and our rule is staff do not work on weekends. But I think we should be able to translate the full document, 17 pages, tomorrow before 5pm, Bangkok time. (So, in the next 20 hours).

If Sunbelt or another law firm does it, great. We are not in the visa business and I would be happy. So, as lite beer said, wait another 24 hours, and it will be clearer (can Thailand Law be clear?) and comprehensive. Now, it's a summary, quickly done.

Seb.

Thanks for the information Seb. The interest is shown because it will affect the majority of foreigners staying in Thailand. The problem is that they change the rules but don't announce them so thanks again. I was caught out by the immediate changes in 2006 and i guess that many others were too.

Cheers, Rick