Thai Immigration Should Realise

[AndyPooots]

That it is possible to be UNDER 50 and be retired.

Why is there no visa for rich people who are under 50 who don't have to work but would like to live here?

I do not want to get married or start a business.

There is simply not a visa to suit me.

/Rant

(all be it quite civil)

[beano2274]

At my local Immigration office the main guy there has suggested that I go on a Retirement visa as he can grant it straight away and not have the documents sent to Chaeng Wattana. But they all know me at the office, as I have been going there for a long time for my Marriage extensions. Oh am 45.

Oh and try listing the visas that people can get to stay in your home country, it is not much different.

Edited July 17, 2011 by beano2274

[Lite Beer]

2.5 In the case of an investment:

Permission will be granted for a period of not more than 1 year at a time.

B. In case of an investment of not less than 10 million baht.

(1) The alien has obtained a temporary visa (NON-IM)

(2) Proof of money transfer to Thailand of not less than 10 million baht.

(3) Proof of investment to purchase or rent for a period not less than 3 years of unit in a condominium from an agency or government agency concerned at a price of not less than 10 million baht.

(4) Proof of investment in the form of a fixed deposit of not less than 10 million baht with a bank registered in Thailand with Thai shareholders comprising more than 50% of its shareholders.

(5) Proof of investment to purchase government or state enterprise bonds with a value of not less than 10 million baht or

(6) Proof of combined investments as set out in clauses (3),(4)

Or (5) having a total value of not less than 10 million baht.

[beano2274]

Checking the rules about living in a country before emigrating is a good idea, saves time and money.

[Richard4849]

Why didn't you snap up a Thailand Elite card while you had the chance?

[Darrel]

I wonder why they dont just have a pay-per-month visa for those who dont fall into any other category? This would put money directly into Thai government coffers instead of it going to fund the visa run companies and related Cambodian one-day visas.

After all, Immigration are only interested in two things: raising money and getting a look at all farangs every few months in case they want to deport them. A USD30 (for example) pay-per-month visa would satisfy both needs.

[AndyPooots]

Why didn't you snap up a Thailand Elite card while you had the chance?

I was not as wealthy back then. But maybe Thaksin will bring it back

[AndyPooots]

Checking the rules about living in a country before emigrating is a good idea, saves time and money.

you're cute.

Edited July 17, 2011 by AndyPooots

[AndyPooots]

@ MJCM and LB Thanks for the info! I was looking at buying some land and building a house within the next year or so anyway. Will study the post further.

I still think there should be a long stay yearly visa if you have x amount in the bank or whatever.

Edited July 17, 2011 by AndyPooots

[CharlieH]

If you dont want to start a business or get married you will NEVER own Land in Thailand. You can get a condo but that would be about it.

[AndyPooots]

If you dont want to start a business or get married you will NEVER own Land in Thailand. You can get a condo but that would be about it.

Well of course if i buy the land house thing, i would form a company and get a non im B then put the house up for sale once completed and try to turn a profit etc

However this is not what i was posting about imo there should be a retirement of variant there of for people who can afford to live here fulltime under the age of 50.

[Richard4849]

How did you get so wealthy while living in Thailand and not working?

[Atmos]

the number of under 50s (me included) wanting to live here long-term who are not married is I imagine very low and would not warrant a law change/new class of visa.

Doesn't worry me particularly, travel out of the country often enough and wherever possible on dates that suit visa requirements, double TVs from Phnom Penh give almost 6mths, handy for us as we're not far from a border crossing; keep an eye out for Air Asia sales too, last week bought flight tickets for May 2012.

[PoorSucker]

I wonder why they dont just have a pay-per-month visa for those who dont fall into any other category? This would put money directly into Thai government coffers instead of it going to fund the visa run companies and related Cambodian one-day visas.

After all, Immigration are only interested in two things: raising money and getting a look at all farangs every few months in case they want to deport them. A USD30 (for example) pay-per-month visa would satisfy both needs.

Good idea, I think Australia US and UK should go first to set an example.

[hagler]

I wonder why they dont just have a pay-per-month visa for those who dont fall into any other category? This would put money directly into Thai government coffers instead of it going to fund the visa run companies and related Cambodian one-day visas.

After all, Immigration are only interested in two things: raising money and getting a look at all farangs every few months in case they want to deport them. A USD30 (for example) pay-per-month visa would satisfy both needs.

$30 USD a month .ha ha ha ha.

If they made it at least $500 per month that would at least keep out some of the riff raff and only real, quality, financially independant people would be getting into the country.

[Pattaya46]

the number of under 50s (me included) wanting to live here long-term who are not married is I imagine very low and would not warrant a law change/new class of visa.

Very low??

I don't know what is "very low" for you but just amongst my friends I already know maybe 20 people in this case;

all 40-50 yo and no problem at all for immigration money requirement.

According to reactions on some discussion here, like the one on Hull changes this year, this number must not be so small...

BTW, I am 48 and in this category too...

[Jingthing]

Well the trend is lower anyway. The last change was from age 55 to age 50. I was in this class at age 48, ready to retire in Thailand but not yet eligible so I was very glad that the age had been lowered. Many people using (abusing?) the ED visa are in this under 50 class that wish they could use the retirement option. Some countries deal with this by having two financial levels (a higher one for the younger ones, lower for the older ones). The logic being if you retire at 30 you will live a long time and will need more wealth to sustain that.

[klikster]

Well of course if i buy the land house thing, i would form a company and get a non im B then put the house up for sale once completed and try to turn a profit etc

Forming a company for the purpose of buying land is against Thai law. Someone suggested doing some research .. good advice.

[klikster]

Well the trend is lower anyway. The last change was from age 55 to age 50. I was in this class at age 48, ready to retire in Thailand but not yet eligible so I was very glad that the age had been lowered. Many people using (abusing?) the ED visa are in this under 50 class that wish they could use the retirement option. Some countries deal with this by having two financial levels (a higher one for the younger ones, lower for the older ones). The logic being if you retire at 30 you will live a long time and will need more wealth to sustain that.

When I first tried (early '90's) the age requirement was 60.

[Jingthing]

So it's a good trend. But I think it may be hard for them to go under 50.

[lopburi3]

Actually normal retirement extension of stay age was 60 at 200k/20k and there was a 55-60 option at 500k/50k. The change then allowed age 50 retirement without a younger option; which is now 800k/65k.

[Darrel]

Good idea, I think Australia US and UK should go first to set an example.

Those countries dont want to encourage foreigners to move/live there. On the contrary, they want to discourage them.

Thailand actually wants foreigners to stay here and spend money. So you would think they would make it easier rather than making them jump through silly hoops that just put money in other countries' coffers.

[Darrel]

$30 USD a month .ha ha ha ha.

If they made it at least $500 per month that would at least keep out some of the riff raff and only real, quality, financially independant people would be getting into the country.

That's not what Thailand wants. They just want anyone who can support themselves. If they were bothered about the quality of farangs coming then they would make getting in as hard as getting in to the Maldives is, which it isnt.

If they made it USD500 a month for a visa hardly anyone would come here; they would all just clear off to Cambodia or Vietnam or somewhere else. I know I would.

[Darrel]

the number of under 50s (me included) wanting to live here long-term who are not married is I imagine very low and would not warrant a law change/new class of visa.

The huge number of people doing border runs every single day would seem to contradict that. There are loads of them.

Every single person doing a visa run, for whatever reason, is money lost to Thailand that they could retain by offering a suitable visa.

[Atmos]

Very low??

I don't know what is "very low" for you but just amongst my friends I already know maybe 20 people in this case;

all 40-50 yo and no problem at all for immigration money requirement.

According to reactions on some discussion here, like the one on Hull changes this year, this number must not be so small...

BTW, I am 48 and in this category too...

Well you know maybe twenty; I know two who are on UK army pensions under 50 but both are married so here on that non-O visa..

In a resident population of about 65 million, I still don't like the chances of a law change!

As I said it doesn't worry me in the slightest, I prefer not to have 800k baht earning next to nothing in a bank here, while still having to for 90 day reporting, form filling etc, when my perpetual tourist lifestyle suits, I love the travel - and I won't change when I'm 50.

[AndyPooots]

How did you get so wealthy while living in Thailand and not working?

Worked in Thailand for years on a WP. Have property in the uk which provides a nice residual income, have sold holding i had in a company in the UK plus a few other things.

[AndyPooots]

Well of course if i buy the land house thing, i would form a company and get a non im B then put the house up for sale once completed and try to turn a profit etc

Forming a company for the purpose of buying land is against Thai law. Someone suggested doing some research .. good advice.

Forming a construction company to buy land and build houses would not be illegal. It would be trading employing and paying tax. Doing what most do to buy and live in a house is the grey area for sure, still I dont see that changing for years to come and if it did it would prolly be beneficial to those people, the rumors about the government is going to 'crack down soon' has been going on for donkeys years.

[Richard4849]

How did you get so wealthy while living in Thailand and not working?

Worked in Thailand for years on a WP. Have property in the uk which provides a nice residual income, have sold holding i had in a company in the UK plus a few other things.

Then you had the opportunity to apply for Permanent Residency. See -- there is a solution for people like you!

[moe666]

Sorry if I make a few mad here. Because you have money doesn't mean the world revolves around you and that laws should be made to accomadate you or people of the same situation.

[emilyb]

Sorry if I make a few mad here. Because you have money doesn't mean the world revolves around you and that laws should be made to accomadate you or people of the same situation.

Sorry, mad, happy, unapologetic, I doubt anyone cares enough about your comment to be mad and emotion doesn't factor into the topic anyway. A couple of recent posters have offered a completely logical point, that loads of people cross in and out of the country every day to receive a new visa and this happens almost automatically for most. Given the travel costs incurred, the Thai government could make more money by charging the same fee - or some similar fee - to these same perpetual visa stayers. That's pretty unassailable from a purely logical point of view. Nothing is achieved by the current system that wouldn't be achieved by a new system as posited and, on the other side of the equation, the Thai government would make more money, which is a net positive.

Of course the reality is that there's no political gain in legitimizing the current revolving door system, in fact there's only the potential for political blowback (to the politicians and to foreigners), which is why it's a non-starter. Making the unofficial practice of permanent tourism official wouldn't be popular with anyone but a bunch of non-voting expats for the most part. If governments and people operated on the basic of logic, then, yeah, this would make sense.