Is this a scam at Phuket arrivals?

[tombkk]

OK, we had some funny remarks here (including the 5-year work permit LOL), but let's get back to the OP's question.

In theory you need a work permit to attend a meeting here. There is indeed a regulation that makes it possible to get such a temporary work permit (valid for 14 days) within 24 hours.

In practice, the government promotes Thailand for MICE (Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions) and I have never heard of a single case of foreigners being arrested, or even harassed in any way, for attending meetings.

I have also not heard of any company moving their regional or worldwide meetings to another country because the delegates would theoretically need a work permit, as one poster suggested.

Let's not get carried away: Even the Labour Department (correctly: Department of Employment) is aware that the laws are outdated. If they started to arrest people for attending meetings, all hell would break loose.

Edit: This is not a mod posting, this is my private self speaking.

[Arkady]

If you need a WP to attend a shareholders' meeting and sign forms, does it follow that you also need a WP to open an account with a broker and to place buy and sell orders in the market on your own account or even to deposit money with a bank?

If you are allowed to invest your own funds in Thailand or make a deposit in a bank without a WP, it should surely follow that you are allowed attend a shareholders' meeting. I don't believe the Labour Ministry would be able to achieve a conviction for this, even in a Thai court. Attending a board of directors' meeting would be a different matter.

The stuff about the 5-year WP is obviously nonsense and not worthy of any comment.

[Time Traveller]

A shareholder attending a shareholders meeting, is different from being a director or board member attending a board meeting. One is an owner, the other is an employee of the owner.

You do not not need a work permit for being a shareholder. If you did then you might also need a work permit to be a tourist

Edited September 2, 2012 by Time Traveller

[Soutpeel]

If you need a WP to attend a shareholders' meeting and sign forms, does it follow that you also need a WP to open an account with a broker and to place buy and sell orders in the market on your own account or even to deposit money with a bank?

If you are allowed to invest your own funds in Thailand or make a deposit in a bank without a WP, it should surely follow that you are allowed attend a shareholders' meeting. I don't believe the Labour Ministry would be able to achieve a conviction for this, even in a Thai court. Attending a board of directors' meeting would be a different matter.

The stuff about the 5-year WP is obviously nonsense and not worthy of any comment.

I think interpretation is taking an active role in Thailand running the business, not being a shareholder per se, you can be a share holder/owner but not take an active role in running a business, investing your money in business or opening a bank account is not taking an active role in running the business, it appears the OP has actually been told this by the DOL.

What The OP has been told seems to gel with something I heard at the beginning of the year, where in the current position that people coming to Thailand to attend business meeting only require a Non-Imm B is going to change and that if you attend any business meeting in Thailand you will require a temporary WP.

I will stress I havent heard anything about this new requirement since and at this point in time it sits in the heresay/speculation catagory.

[Arkady]

If you need a WP to attend a shareholders' meeting and sign forms, does it follow that you also need a WP to open an account with a broker and to place buy and sell orders in the market on your own account or even to deposit money with a bank?

If you are allowed to invest your own funds in Thailand or make a deposit in a bank without a WP, it should surely follow that you are allowed attend a shareholders' meeting. I don't believe the Labour Ministry would be able to achieve a conviction for this, even in a Thai court. Attending a board of directors' meeting would be a different matter.

The stuff about the 5-year WP is obviously nonsense and not worthy of any comment.

I think interpretation is taking an active role in Thailand running the business, not being a shareholder per se, you can be a share holder/owner but not take an active role in running a business, investing your money in business or opening a bank account is not taking an active role in running the business, it appears the OP has actually been told this by the DOL.

What The OP has been told seems to gel with something I heard at the beginning of the year, where in the current position that people coming to Thailand to attend business meeting only require a Non-Imm B is going to change and that if you attend any business meeting in Thailand you will require a temporary WP.

I will stress I havent heard anything about this new requirement since and at this point in time it sits in the heresay/speculation catagory.

Re-reading the OP I see that he was told that shareholders needed a WP to attend a board meeting, rather than a shareholders' meeting. Normally, shareholders are not invited to attend board meetings, unless they are also directors, and I agree that attending a board meeting would be construed as work but attending a shareholders' meeting on one's own behalf shouldn't be.

Technically they can easily interpret the Working of Aliens Act to mean that foreigners need a WP to attend a routine business meeting (and even that those who have WPs can only attend business meetings at the address in their WP), if they really wish to be so stupid. However, this would hardly be consistent with the government's stated desire to reverse the steady decline in market share of Asean's FDI or get exports closer up to their "white lie" target. Since this is Thailand, logic would not necessarily be employed in determining policy. A lot of multinationals would order their executives not to attend casual business meetings in Thailand without a WP, if this became a big thing, and the trouble of obtaining these would result a reduction of business visitors who generally generate the highest daily expenditures. So that would be another big win. I remember Indonesia doing this type BS in the early 80s. Any one carrying a brief case, specially hated Chinese from Singapore, was asked at immigration the purpose of their trip and, if they said business and didn't have a business visa, they were either denied entry or taken off to a back room and shaken down for a bribe. If they pretended to be tourists, their briefcases were sometimes searched and if they revealed details of meetings in Indonesia, then they were also threatened with a fine for lying to a government official and given an even bigger shake down, not to mention having anything printed in Chinese confiscated from their luggage as subversive communist literature..

Edited September 3, 2012 by Arkady

[Soutpeel]

Re-reading the OP I see that he was told that shareholders needed a WP to attend a board meeting, rather than a shareholders' meeting. Normally, shareholders are not invited to attend board meetings, unless they are also directors, and I agree that attending a board meeting would be construed as work but attending a shareholders' meeting on one's own behalf shouldn't be.

Technically they can easily interpret the Working of Aliens Act to mean that foreigners need a WP to attend a routine business meeting (and even that those who have WPs can only attend business meetings at the address in their WP), if they really wish to be so stupid. However, this would hardly be consistent with the government's stated desire to reverse the steady decline in market share of Asean's FDI or get exports closer up to their "white lie" target. Since this is Thailand, logic would not necessarily be employed in determining policy. A lot of multinationals would order their executives not to attend casual business meetings in Thailand without a WP, if this became a big thing, and the trouble of obtaining these would result a reduction of business visitors who generally generate the highest daily expenditures. So that would be another big win. I remember Indonesia doing this type BS in the early 80s. Any one carrying a brief case, specially hated Chinese from Singapore, was asked at immigration the purpose of their trip and, if they said business and didn't have a business visa, they were either denied entry or taken off to a back room and shaken down for a bribe. If they pretended to be tourists, their briefcases were sometimes searched and if they revealed details of meetings in Indonesia, then they were also threatened with a fine for lying to a government official and given an even bigger shake down, not to mention having anything printed in Chinese confiscated from their luggage as subversive communist literature..

Everything your saying is correct, but even if they did require a WP for business meetings, not such a big deal in itself as a temporary WP can be issued within 24 hours and is good for 14 days, although it would require an addtional step, in the scheme of things not really a biggie for MNC's etc

[IMA_FARANG]

A shareholder attending a shareholders meeting, is different from being a director or board member attending a board meeting. One is an owner, the other is an employee of the owner.

You do not not need a work permit for being a shareholder. If you did then you might also need a work permit to be a tourist

------------------

First I gave you a Unlike by mistake.

I really wanted to just quote your posting....but I accidently clicked on the Unlike box.

I didn't mean to, it was just a mistake....so remove one Unlike from your score....if there is such a thing.

Anyhow, the original question....do you need a WP to as a shareholder to attend a shaeholder;s meeting in Thailand is:

That all depends on your status as a shareholder.

As crazy as it seems...if you attend a shareholder's meeting in Thailand....and at that meeting you do something...such as signing a document or voting on a proposal that ends up giving either a profit or loss as a shareholder...by the Thai definition you have "done work" by that action.

Therefore you have "worked" in Thailand by that action...and "working" in Thailand requires a Work Permit.

I know that may sound silly, but that's how the officials could interpret that action.

Now WOULD they bother....probably not.

But they could interpret it that way if they wanted to.

On a similar note...sort of...I knew a man who joined the U.S. Army.

He said it was because he went to his 13 year old sister's birthday party, got drunk (there were aldults at the party), and woke up the next morning lieing naked in bed next to his 13 year old sister. (Note: SHE wasn't naked from what he said.)

He swore that it was his friends idea of a joke.

But out of caution...he joined the army.

Same situation as attending a shareholders meeting in Thailand I guess.

[Dork]

As an aside to this shareholder vs director / work permit debate, I once took legal advice regarding a non resident becoming a director of a Thai company (without having a work permit). The advice was that this would not contravene the labour law as long as any documents signed were dated on a day that the director was not in Thailand. I guess the theory being that the documents could have been (or really were) couriered out of Thailand for signing.

Getting back to the main point, though it may seem to be rather pedantic, there definitely are some MNC's that take the (WP for meetings) issue seriously. I know that for a fact. I think the problem is that however the law is interpreted, it is at best a gray area and nowadays as a rule MNC's (especially US ones) don't do gray.