The New Rules For People Married To A Thai National. Are They Fair?

[monkfish]

I believe a Man, Wife & Family should have the unconditional right to live together irrespective of income.

[Arkady]

The rules are probably not fair but the Thais make the rules and don't care if they are fair to foreigners or not. The OP's point that foreign women married to Thais are treated differently than t'other way round is very valid. This discriminates directly against the rights of Thai women to marry whomever they like and, within reason, to have them live with them in the Kingdom. It is thus against the constitution but unfortunately that doesn't matter much either. The same can be said about the way that foreign women married to Thais can get Thai nationality fairly easily without having to be a PR first and with income and other requirements much lower. Foreign men married to Thai women are treated almost the same as foreign men not married to Thai women when applying for nationality. Every few years I see in the papers a women's group complaining that this in unconstitutional but no male politicians ever show any interest and the issue of discrimination against Thai women with foreign husbands will probably continue for another generation. There has been some progress. At least Thai women can now pass nationality to their offspring even if the father is foreign and they are no longer prohibited from buying land if they have a foreign husband.

[Mario2008]

Could you take care of a wife and raise a family on an average Thai salary. I'm sure there are those who do, but I couldn't. I think that's at least partially what it's all about.

Again, just my opinion.

A Thai husband with a foreign wife is to supposed to be doing that, so why can't a foreign husband with a Thai wife?

[Mario2008]

The question is why there are different income requirements between the 2 cases

Good question, IMO it is probably the same as "why is there a difference in incomes between a thai doing the same job as a foreigner & the foreigner earning double or more?" IMO until the rules of foreign pay scale are changed so that everyone earns the same as the thai person sitting next to them doing the exact same job can the visa requirements to be brought in line to match that. It's a long process that wont be changed overnight. But my first post was only to highlight a very real senario why foreign women may not be expected to show income requirement& foreign men are. Agree or not but it is valid. You can't be off work due to child birth or unemployable due to pregnancy can you?

Oh & to clarify, I am talking specifically about real reasons why the idea of bringing the rules in line so that a foreign wife has to provide income may not be implemented.

The difference is pay is created by the Thai goverment. As a westerner, you can't get a work permit and extensions of stay unless you earn 50,000 baht a month. The only exceptions are teachers and memebrs of the media, for them there is no minimum income requirement. Also, the income requirement depends on nationality.

The interest of the government is that families should be able to support themself. Your argument is that man are better able to do that, because woman might have to deal with pregnancies and raising children and so are not always able to do that. That is a valid argument and a good one! But it also means that a Thai woman cannot marry a foreign man who is sick/disabled and cannot provide for an income.

That raises the question why man only looks at the income of the foreign husband and not of the family as a whole.

[Mario2008]

The rules are probably not fair but the Thais make the rules and don't care if they are fair to foreigners or not. The OP's point that foreign women married to Thais are treated differently than t'other way round is very valid. This discriminates directly against the rights of Thai women to marry whomever they like and, within reason, to have them live with them in the Kingdom. It is thus against the constitution but unfortunately that doesn't matter much either. The same can be said about the way that foreign women married to Thais can get Thai nationality fairly easily without having to be a PR first and with income and other requirements much lower. Foreign men married to Thai women are treated almost the same as foreign men not married to Thai women when applying for nationality. Every few years I see in the papers a women's group complaining that this in unconstitutional but no male politicians ever show any interest and the issue of discrimination against Thai women with foreign husbands will probably continue for another generation. There has been some progress. At least Thai women can now pass nationality to their offspring even if the father is foreign and they are no longer prohibited from buying land if they have a foreign husband.

It should matter, as you state it is against Thai law. So why does the government make rules that are against it's own laws? Note that we are talking about the immigration rules, set by the commander of the immigration bureau, and not the immigration law itself.

When I see something that I don't disagree with I try to look at arguments for the other side. In the case of the immigration rules I must say I can find any arguments for the rules being as they are. Not when I try to apply consistency and logic to the rules.

[CosmicSurfer]

The question is why there are different income requirements between the 2 cases

Good question, IMO it is probably the same as "why is there a difference in incomes between a thai doing the same job as a foreigner & the foreigner earning double or more?" IMO until the rules of foreign pay scale are changed so that everyone earns the same as the thai person sitting next to them doing the exact same job can the visa requirements to be brought in line to match that. It's a long process that wont be changed overnight. But my first post was only to highlight a very real senario why foreign women may not be expected to show income requirement& foreign men are. Agree or not but it is valid. You can't be off work due to child birth or unemployable due to pregnancy can you?

Oh & to clarify, I am talking specifically about real reasons why the idea of bringing the rules in line so that a foreign wife has to provide income may not be implemented.

The difference is pay is created by the Thai goverment. As a westerner, you can't get a work permit and extensions of stay unless you earn 50,000 baht a month. The only exceptions are teachers and memebrs of the media, for them there is no minimum income requirement. Also, the income requirement depends on nationality.

The interest of the government is that families should be able to support themself. Your argument is that man are better able to do that, because woman might have to deal with pregnancies and raising children and so are not always able to do that. That is a valid argument and a good one! But it also means that a Thai woman cannot marry a foreign man who is sick/disabled and cannot provide for an income.

That raises the question why man only looks at the income of the foreign husband and not of the family as a whole.

Your point about sick/disabled farang husbands is a valid point.

Another one is that, while agreeing that pregnancy is strictly the domain of a female, isn't it sexist to stipulate that child-rearing is also a female only occupation... Are there no "Stay-at-Home" Dads in Thailand?

Strictly from an educational point of view.. a Farang stay-at-home Father "Home-Schooling" his children is far preferrable to the children's education than subjecting them to the dysfunctional Thai education system.

CS

[Mario2008]

As a teacher I see that the raising of children is often more a family thing then something the mother does. Many children have both parents working and are practically raised by their grandparents or aunt. But indeed, equality for man and woman also means fathers actively raising their children and the mother as bread winner.

But the issue of the children has so far not been mentioned in this discussion. Their family live is also at issue and the question is not only about the Thai wife with a foreign husband. Why should it matter if a childs father is a foreigner and his mother a Thai national or that his mother is a foreigner and his father a Thai?

[CosmicSurfer]

As a teacher I see that the raising of children is often more a family thing then something the mother does. Many children have both parents working and are practically raised by their grandparents or aunt. But indeed, equality for man and woman also means fathers actively raising their children and the mother as bread winner.

But the issue of the children has so far not been mentioned in this discussion. Their family live is also at issue and the question is not only about the Thai wife with a foreign husband. Why should it matter if a childs father is a foreigner and his mother a Thai national or that his mother is a foreigner and his father a Thai?

... and what about the Children..... maybe this is the motivation....

Growing up Fatherless... with a Long-distance relationship..

Maybe sending money back.. maybe not.... Maybe he will take the kid out of Thailand with him... maybe Not.

But with no ties to Thailand, and a weaker sense of responsibility brought on by the distance and hassles created by Thai Immigration....

Probably... NOT.

Tell me again about how "Moral" Thai culture is.

What was that bit about honoring and respecting your Parents...

Building 'Strong' Family relationships...

The Core of Thai Society and Culture....

The Family Unit.

Give me a Break !!!!!!!!!!!!

I feel like I'm euphemistically wading after a bunch of Buffalos with the 'Galloping Trots'.

CS

[Mario2008]

The problem is that the children were probably never taken into account, only the husband and wife. And of that mostly the foreign husband, with little or no consideration to the family as a whole.

Boo had an excellent point as to why rules are different for man and woman. It makes sense if you approach it as purely a gender issue, but not when you approach it as a family issue.

[samran]

Disclaimer: I personally think the rules are unfair, and should be applied equally, no matter the sex of the Thai national spouse.

Having said that.....

I personally think the income rule is a red-herring. 10K, 20K, 40K per month? Who knows what the correct level is? Personally, I think that 40K is the bare minimum you need to survive here, and provide your kids (if you have them) a good education etc. Others will disagree, of course.

Despite having said that....

I'm all for scrapping the minimum income rule, vesting the non-Thai spouse with automatic work rights, and letting the free market reign.

I'd dare say that you'll find most people not equipped with the right skills to land a useful job here, or will find that the going rates aren't enough to do more than "survive".

And then most of the same people who are complaining abou tthe current rules, will simply transfer their anger to something else which they deem to be preventing their ability to earn a decent crust here.

[Mario2008]

Disclaimer: I personally think the rules are unfair, and should be applied equally, no matter the sex of the Thai national spouse.

Having said that.....

I personally think the income rule is a red-herring. 10K, 20K, 40K per month? Who knows what the correct level is? Personally, I think that 40K is the bare minimum you need to survive here, and provide your kids (if you have them) a good education etc. Others will disagree, of course.

Despite having said that....

I'm all for scrapping the minimum income rule, vesting the non-Thai spouse with automatic work rights, and letting the free market reign.

I'd dare say that you'll find most people not equipped with the right skills to land a useful job here, or will find that the going rates aren't enough to do more than "survive".

And then most of the same people who are complaining abou tthe current rules, will simply transfer their anger to something else which they deem to be preventing their ability to earn a decent crust here.

I agree the income rule is a red herring. What is fair in that regard? However the income requirements for asian nationals to get a WP indicates that 25,000 a month is considered enough by the government. The supplement for low income that is proposed shows that an income below 15,000 is not considered enough.

Yes, marriage should come with an automatic right to work to help provide for a family income. Indeed many will not qualify, simply because of the language barrier alone. That is one of the chooises people make living in another country. A minmimum Thai language requirement for people wanting to stay in Thailand, like in many European countries, is also not unreasonable.

[abdulrahman]

Good points form Interested Observer and opalhort. But Thai law chooses for the protection of family live and they should make that possible. Indeed foreigners should not be a burden to the host state, but that is not the case when a family can provide for it's own income.

It also raises the question how high that income must be. 40,000 a month seems a bit on the high side.

Please explain how a foreigner can be a burden to the host state (Thailand) I would be interested in knowing.

I can't, as there are no social security benefits or health care benefits. Normaly that would be a reason.

I used the combined income for my Extension last year.Didn't need it,my income was more than enough,but I wanted to show,to my Thai wife too,that it's FAMILY income,we both contribute.So,I let her bring the Tax chits to immigration;the combined income was well over the minimum requested.

This year only my income is considered:has it any sense?

Another thing:as in every civilised country,the working spouse medical insurance covers the family,I have,and use,the right to the medical assistance provided by the Thai Government,I'm a burden for Thailand,don't pay the hospital,the medications,etc.

It's silly,really.

[Likenitstill]

Does this new rule apply for a foreign husband and Thai wife with child or is this an exception to that rule, as one stated a while back? What are the facts?

[CosmicSurfer]

Does this new rule apply for a foreign husband and Thai wife with child or is this an exception to that rule, as one stated a while back? What are the facts?

If the Child is legaly registered as yours... You are on the "Birth Certificate" as the biological Father, then different rules apply.

CS

[Likenitstill]

CS do we have some more info in reference to the different applicale rules. I mean ethically speaking it should be 50 up right? lol. No seriously does the 40 a month for Thai wife still apply?

[Lite Beer]

CS do we have some more info in reference to the different applicale rules. I mean ethically speaking it should be 50 up right? lol. No seriously does the 40 a month for Thai wife still apply?

These are the rules for all extensions.

[Duce]

The new immigration rules rules regarding yearly extension for foreign man* married to a Thai wife are as follows:- have an income of 40,000 baht a month

or

- show savings of at least 400,000 baht in a Thai bank account for at least 2 months prior to applying for the extension.*For foreign woman married to Thai husbands there are no rules in the regulations and they can get an extension of stay much easier. The reintroduction of the possibility of showing savings is a good thing, which should make it easier for a lot of couples to meet the immigration rules. However, with the new rules the possibility of a family income has disapeared. Now it has to be the sole income (or savings) of the foreign husbands. It is this rule that is causing a lot of problems for some foreign/Thai couples, as they don't know if they can meet this new requirement.

This raises the question if the new immigration rules are fair and necesarry. Is it fair to disregard the income of the Thai wife and only consider the income of the foreign husband? Is it fair that different rules apply to foreign man with a Thai wife than to foreign woman with a Thai husband? Is it fair to require an income of 40,000 baht when many, if not most, Thai nationals earn well below 10,000 baht? Anyone care to comment on this?

Don't forget we have the rights of the foreign husband, the Thai wife and the possible children against the legitimate interests of the Thai state. Peope have the right to get married and should be able to live together as a family. On the otherhand a state has to take the interest of the country into consideration and can therefor place limitations on foreigners coming to their country to live there.

[Martian]

I have to say that the new rule of husband income and not combined income is an unfair burden and a blatantly discriminatory rule that I personally cannot agree with nor should those already on the "combined" plan be required to adhere to.....forever (as long as continuously residing in Thailand).

However, I am pleased to see the "cash in the bank" option return because my only other choices would have been to stay on a B visa (gainfully employed, but have to leave immediately if job ends), continuous visitor visa runs, or in several months having to have double the amount of deposit at risk in the Thai banking system for a retirement visa and no legal way to work.

They should have both options available and based on combined income, not just foreign husband.

Regards,

Martian

[Duce]

Report this law change to your embassy and consulate, have them post this information on their web site to inform others.

Good luck everyone and remember your best behavior is crucial in diplomatic situations, obey laws regardless of indifference and compel understandings through effective methods. Thailand is no different than other country's to protect its lifestyle and freedoms importing the balance to fair and respected trade.

[tingting]

wow, why do they give a ruler like this!!!!

It's really not fair.

Also i heard that when the thai woman has married with foreigner, she will lose her thai nationality. Whether is it true?

[Lite Beer]

Also i heard that when the thai woman has married with foreigner, she will lose her thai nationality. Whether is it true?

Not true.

[CosmicSurfer]

Also i heard that when the thai woman has married with foreigner, she will lose her thai nationality. Whether is it true?

NO.. This is not true... She retains her Thai nationality, and her Children do also.

CS

[skippybangkok]

Do you ever get that feeling of deja-vu???

Class Action suit I say !

[Maestro]

…i heard that when the thai woman has married with foreigner, she will lose her thai nationality. Whether is it true?

It is definitely not true. She does not lose her Thai nationality nor any right of a Thai national.

--

Maestro

[Mario2008]

Also i heard that when the thai woman has married with foreigner, she will lose her thai nationality. Whether is it true?

In the past, up till the 1970's, this was the case in many countries around the world. The woman would lose her nationality and gain the nationality of her husband. Now a days that is no longer the case. Thailand is one of those countries that has abolished that rule.

It seems that the Thai law has, at least partly, been brought in line with the notion of gender equality. That makes it the more puzzeling that the immigration rules don't take equality at hearth whe it comes to the right to start a family.

[Mentors]

with to show 400'000 in a Thai Bank account it is much more fair than before.

[Mario2008]

with to show 400'000 in a Thai Bank account it is much more fair than before.

Yes it is. But at the same time one can no longer use the family income, it has to be the income (or money in the bank) of the foreign husband alone. There is no such requirement for a foreign wife to a Thai husband.

[Mario2008]

A small summary.

One can say that the new rules are fair for foreign woman married to a Thai national. Women can get pregnant and often are the once taking care of the children, making it difficult for them to earn a living. It is right that a Thai man is allowed to provide for his foreign wife.

But we also have the Thai wife married to a foreign husband. The argument that a woman can get pregnant is still valid, but not enough. The rules severely limit the choise a Thai woman can make with who she starts a family. She can only marry and form a family inside Thailand if the husband has a high enough income. An income requirement that is not placed on the Thai husband of a foreign wife and can prohibit starting a family with someone who is unable to work and doesn’t have any savings.

The question is why Thai woman aren’t allowed to supply the income for the family. In the past it was possible for the Thai wife to provide part or even all of the income required for the extension of stay of the foreign husband. The most reasonable explanation for this is that the possibility for Thai woman to declare an income at the tax office was in some cases abused to declare a false income to allow the husband to stay in Thailand. If this is indeed the reason why the Thai wife’s income isn’t taken in consideration anymore the measure seems hars. A fairer option would be to impose stricter controls on the declaration of income.

I think the above has been discussed enough, so let’s have a closer look at the possible children in a marriage.

If we take the child into consideration, there shouldn’t be any difference to which of the parents has Thai nationality. The child of a Thai mother and foreign father should have the same right on family live as the child of a Thai father and a foreign mother. Currently it maters a great deal which of the parents has Thai nationality, because of the rules regarding income.

Than we have the case of the child with a Thai and foreign parent, who divorce. If the child stays with the Thai parent, there are of course no problems. But if the child is to stay with the foreign parent, this parent will be burdend with the necessity to provide for a high income to be allowed to stay in Thailand. If the foreign parent can’t provide for this income the parent will have to leave Thailand, taking the child with him or her and severing the ties with the father and rest of the family.

Anyone care to comment on what would be the reasoning behind the current rules on this relating to children?

Edited January 24, 2009 by Mario2008

[ronz28]

I say the new rules are fair and necessary to keep out lazy people who would come to Thailand to live off of the state or its citizens. $1,150 a month income isn’t much to westerners so if I didn’t have it I would get back to work. There is no social security, etc. to take care of a destitute farang in Thailand and I can understand Thailand feels the farang should go back where they came from since its not their problem. I suppose they feel lazy farangs don’t deserve to move to Thailand and waste Thai resources that should be spent on Thai people.

[Maestro]

…Anyone care to comment on what would be the reasoning behind the current rules on this relating to children?

This brings us to the question of the procedure for drafting these rules. We know that the Director General of the Police Department signs them, but who initiates them? First I thought it might be the Immigration Commission, composed of

– Under Secretary of Ministry of Foreign Affairs

– Director general , Police Department

– Director General , labor Department

– Director General , public Prosecution Department

– Secretary General , Board of Investment Committee

– Secretary General , National Security Council

– Director , Tourist Organization of Thailand

– Commander of Immigration Division as member and secretary

However, the Immigration Act appears to limit the jurisdiction of the Immigration Commission to Residence Certificates (Permanent Residence) and deportations. I am therefore inclined to think that a committee or subcommittee at the Immigration Bureau cooks up the ideas and the Commander of the Immigration Division submits them to the Director General of the Police Department for consideration.

It is evident that some thought goes into the drafting of these rules. Police Order 606/2549 that took effect on 1 October 2006, for example, brought the interesting change form support of Thai wife and children to living with them. The revised requirements of evidence of financial means in the new Police Order 777/2551 bring back the previous notion of financial support by the foreign husband and foreign parent. The interlude of “living with”, without requirement of financial support, lasted exactly 25 months.

Therefore, I am led to think that the reasoning behind the current rules for the marriage and parent extensions are a return to the status quo ante, ie to the situation that was in effect before 1 October 2006.

--

Maestro