Phuket Opinion: The 90-day hassle
Phuket Gazette -

Anywhere but here: our trimonthly diaspora. Image: Phuket Gazette

Having completed the bureaucratic rigmarole of obtaining a one-year work permit and a one-year non-immigrant B visa, I am soon to embark on my first quarterly “visa run” to have my passport stamped at the Ranong border control office. As a consequence, I have been mulling over the reasons why such a trip is necessary and I confess, I am at a loss.

How can requiring foreign workers to leave Thailand every three months for a literal “rubber stamp”, despite the fact that they hold the requisite documents, both with a one-year validity, be good for the Thai businesses that employ them, or, for that matter, the economy as a whole?

Who benefits from this seemingly illogical requirement? The visa-run companies that have sprung up to serve the needs of this market, obviously, and the large Andaman Club, said to be owned by Thai interests. People forced into regular visa runs create a steady supply of patrons to the casino, due to its convenient proximity to immigration.

What are the negative costs of creating a few more jobs in Thai visa-run companies and gathering a bit of money at the casino?

We often hear stories of these vans rushing up and down the roads to Penang and Ranong at dangerous speeds and of the inevitable, and regular, crashes involving them – it seems that they create more problems and grief then they solve – problems which could be reduced with the stroke of a pen by allowing in-country renewal of visa documents.

There are the working hours lost when foreigners take these visa runs on company time, and there is the cost of transport, either borne by the companies or the workers themselves.

From the point of view of investment, these all add up to a clear disincentive to establishing a small company requiring foreign expertise here in Thailand.

But most of all, quarterly visa renewals are an inconvenient and a baffling redundancy. Why not simply allow foreign workers to renew their documents at the local immigration office and pay an appropriate fee?

Or better yet, dismiss this requirement completely, and allow a “one year visa” and “one year work permit” to actually be what they purport to be – official permission to reside and work in Thailand for one year.

Source: http://www.phuketgazette.net/phuket_news/2013/Phuket-Opinion-The-90-day-hassle-22245.html

-- Phuket Gazette 2013-09-15

A one year extension of permission of stay for work fixes that. Been doing it for 20 years so not sure what the 90 day border run complaint is all about, or am I missing something.

Most professions require that you have a minimum income, if you don't meet that minimum income requirement you can get a work permit but will not get an extension of stay from immigration. Hence you have to leave the country every 90 days.

For most western nationalities that minimum income is 50,000 a month.

A one year extension of permission of stay for work fixes that. Been doing it for 20 years so not sure what the 90 day border run complaint is all about, or am I missing something.

Yes, you miss the point that to many "companies" don't have Thai staff, or don't pay their social security and taxes.

So the work permit holder is not getting a extension of stay.

That's why the 90 day border runs and hoping on a new visa somewhere abroad each year.

Complaining because they don't have their act together but It is never their fault.

If you are working on a Non-B visa and have a valid passport and work permit, I do not understand why you are doing a 90 day boarder run. Maybe you should pop along to the immigration office in Phuket and see what they actually want you to do. I used to live and work at a school in Si Sa Ket and never had to do a boarder run for the 90 day report.

If as a teacher they are not subject to the same rules - those working for private employers are subject to both company requirements and income by nationality requirements even after having obtained a work permit if they want an extension of stay. In most cases new company employment will mean more than a year of not being able to obtain extension and often much longer due requirement for last years tax paperwork..

If you are working on a Non-B visa and have a valid passport and work permit, I do not understand why you are doing a 90 day boarder run. Maybe you should pop along to the immigration office in Phuket and see what they actually want you to do. I used to live and work at a school in Si Sa Ket and never had to do a boarder run for the 90 day report.

There is no minimum income requirement for teachers and a few other jobs. However, for example a cook from the UK must for instance make at least 50,000 a month to get an extension of stay.

A cook from Singapore needs an income of 45,000 a month and a cook from Brasil 35,000 a month while a cook from Nigeria needs an income of 25,000 baht to get an extension of stay from immigration.

If as a teacher they are not subject to the same rules - those working for private employers are subject to both company requirements and income by nationality requirements even after having obtained a work permit if they want an extension of stay. In most cases new company employment will mean more than a year of not being able to obtain extension and often much longer due requirement for last years tax paperwork..

I'm married maybe that is the difference.

My wife set up a sole priority ship, we applied for TAT license, work permit and extension of stay. All done in 1 month after getting shop papers.

Immigration asked for 1 year tax papers and 3 months salary and social security for staff. Explained we not have due opening shop only 3 weeks ago, see shop papers and it was no problem.

We did this in July 2010, don't know if the rules are changed or the marriage was the benefit. I still have extension of stay based on my NON-B visa.

Rules have changed since then - now new company paperwork requires tax information which is not available for a year or more before they will issue an extension as strict requirement from reports here.

If as a teacher they are not subject to the same rules - those working for private employers are subject to both company requirements and income by nationality requirements even after having obtained a work permit if they want an extension of stay.  In most cases new company employment will mean more than a year of not being able to obtain extension and often much longer due requirement for last years tax paperwork..

 

I'm married maybe that is the difference.

My wife set up a sole priority ship, we applied for TAT license, work permit and extension of stay. All done in 1 month after getting shop papers.

Immigration asked for 1 year tax papers and 3 months salary and social security for staff. Explained we not have due opening shop only 3 weeks ago, see shop papers and it was no problem. 

We did this in July 2010, don't know if the rules are changed or the marriage was the benefit. I still have extension of stay based on my NON-B visa.

I suspect you have an extension of stay based upon marriage.

You would not be able to get an extension based upon working with a sole proprietorship business. Which you implied you have when you incorrectly called it a B visa.

If as a teacher they are not subject to the same rules - those working for private employers are subject to both company requirements and income by nationality requirements even after having obtained a work permit if they want an extension of stay. In most cases new company employment will mean more than a year of not being able to obtain extension and often much longer due requirement for last years tax paperwork..

I'm married maybe that is the difference.

My wife set up a sole priority ship, we applied for TAT license, work permit and extension of stay. All done in 1 month after getting shop papers.

Immigration asked for 1 year tax papers and 3 months salary and social security for staff. Explained we not have due opening shop only 3 weeks ago, see shop papers and it was no problem.

We did this in July 2010, don't know if the rules are changed or the marriage was the benefit. I still have extension of stay based on my NON-B visa.

I suspect you have an extension of stay based upon marriage.

You would not be able to get an extension based upon working with a sole proprietorship business. Which you implied you have when you incorrectly called it a B visa.

I attached my visa as you can see it is a NON=B

A visa only allows you to enter the country. Show me your extension of stay page that is what is important.

visa2013.pdf

New extension applied for 3 weeks ago, it is now under consideration and I will get coming week again 1 year extension of this NON-B visa.

Immigration asked me every year to change my visa extension to: based on marriage. When I ask why, he only smiles and tell me visa conversion cost money.

But extension based on marriage they can do in Krabi, you not have to wait 1 month for headquarters in Songkla.

I can wait the 1 month, Immigration is not that far away.

A visa only allows you to enter the country. Show me your extension of stay page that is what is important.

Is this what passes for journalism down in Phuket?

On the website of Phuket Gazette I wrote this letter to the editor:

Dear Editor,

Regarding today's story "Phuket Opinion: The 90-day hassle" by Mark Knowles you can do Mr Knowles a favour if you suggest to him that he should register on thaivisa.com and then read the topic http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/668000-the-90-day-hassle-why/#entry6826012. Employed by a small company in Thailand that requires his foreign expertise, Mr Knowles no doubt earns the required minimum of 50,000 Baht monthly to qualify him for annual extensions of stay at the local immigration office.

Best regards,

Maestro

My thinking is that if the service rendered by Mr Knowles are not worth at least 50,000 Baht per month it is difficult to imagine why the company was not able to find a Thai national to do this work.

"I used to live and work at a school in Si Sa Ket and never had to do a boarder run for the 90 day report."

Not the same as what is being talked about.

"New extension applied for 3 weeks ago, it is now under consideration and I will get coming week again 1 year extension of this NON-B visa."

You are not extending a visa. You are extending your permission to stay. Your original entry might have been on the B, but extensions can be for a variety of reasons.

In your case, it appears to be for marriage. That's why you have the 'under consideration' stamp.

Please correct me if I am wrong but having obtained a one-year work permit and a one-year non-immigrant B visa, why does Mark need to leave the country (or as he asserts, have his passport stamped at the Ranong border control office) every 90 days? My understanding is that you do not need to leave the country but only need report to the nearest immigration office. I have read that one may even do this by fax.

In the event that one does leave the country (having obtained a Thai re-entry permit first) upon return at Thai immigration control checkpoints one must state their address within the Kingdom on the immigration form and as such this acts as defacto 90 day reporting. The 90 day reporting clock then kicks off again from that moment.

Again please correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

Edited September 15, 201312 yr by JeezeLooeze

From the opening post of this topic:

...allow a “one year visa” and “one year work permit” to actually be what they purport to be – official permission to reside and work in Thailand for one year.

I have no idea where Mr Mark Knowles got the idea that his multiple-entry non-immigrant visa category B is "official permission to reside in Thailand." It certainly does not say so on the visa in his passport, nor on any web page on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) or of the Thai consulate where he got his visa. Any visa is for travelling to Thailand, for entering Thailand if so permitted by the immigration officer at the point of arrival, and in his case his visa allows him to enter Thailand for an unlimited number of times within one year from the visa's issue date, and on each arrival he will receive permission to stay for 90 days. That's the visa he applied for, and it is the visa he got.

Mr Knowles, if you are reading this please look at this web page of the MFA from which I quote the following text (highlighting in bold is mine):

2.1 Non-Immigrant Visa Category “B” (Business Visa) is issued to applicants who wish to enter the Kingdom to work or to conduct business.

(1) Foreigners who wish to work in Thailand must provide the following documents:

...

(5) Holder of this type of visa is entitled to stay in Thailand for a maximum period of 90 days. He or she may apply for an extension of stay at the Office of the Immigration Bureau and may be granted such extension for a period of one year from the date of first entry into Thailand.

I have removed two off-topic posts. Please let's limit discussion to the situation reported in the opening post of this topic. There are dozens of other topics discussing the many other visa and extension of stay situations. Thank you.

For someone who does not meet the requirements for extension of stay as described in Police Order 777/2551 but considers him/herself to have special circumstances, they should consider the following from that document:

5. In the case where an alien applicant does not meet the full qualifications stipulated by the criteria herein or in other cases not specified in this Order but a competent officer equivalent to or higher than inspector is of the opinion that the alien has legitimate reason for staying in the Kingdom of Thailand, the application shall be forwarded to the Commander of the Royal Thai Police Bureau or an authorized competent officer for further consideration of the alien’s application.

For someone who does not meet the requirements for extension of stay as described in Police Order 777/2551 but considers him/herself to have special circumstances, they should consider the following from that document:

5. In the case where an alien applicant does not meet the full qualifications stipulated by the criteria herein or in other cases not specified in this Order but a competent officer equivalent to or higher than inspector is of the opinion that the alien has legitimate reason for staying in the Kingdom of Thailand, the application shall be forwarded to the Commander of the Royal Thai Police Bureau or an authorized competent officer for further consideration of the alien’s application.

We don't know that the Mark Knowles who wrote what is posted in the OP does not meet the requirements for an extension of stay, do we? The way I read his rant, he does not even know about the possibility of applying for such extension. Lets give him a link to the rules:

Thai Police Order 777/2551 basis for extension of stay

Immigration Bureau Order 305/2551 documents for extension of stay

Clause 2.1 appears to be the one that applies to Mark Knowles.

IMPORTANT: this topic is not about the so-called 90-day address report, ie the notification of staying in Thailand longer than 90 days with the form TM.47. There are many recent topics on this subject where you can go and add your valuable thoughts. Therefore, please do not litter this topic with off-topic posts about the 90-day address report.

This topic is about a foreigner, Mark Knowles, who

1. got a multiple-entry non-B visa to take up employment at a Thai company,
2. apparently did not realise that this visa allows stays in Thailand of only 90 days at a time,
3. either does not know about the extension of stay for employment or does not qualify for it,
4. and now complains about the "hassle" of having to leave and re-enter Thailand every 90 days.

Off-topic posts and replies to them have been deleted and will continue to be deleted without further ado.

Is this what passes for journalism down in Phuket?

I'm not sure but it looks to me like a letter to the editor sent by Mark Knowles that the Phuket Gazette published.

P.S. Come to think of it, seeing that Phuket Gazette published it as an opinion pieces and created its own graphic with red arrows to go with it, it looks more like Mark Knowles is an employee of that esteemed publication.

Edited September 15, 201312 yr by Maestro
added postscript

Is this what passes for journalism down in Phuket?

I'm not sure but it looks to me like a letter to the editor sent by Mark Knowles that the Phuket Gazette published.

P.S. Come to think of it, seeing that Phuket Gazette published it as an opinion pieces and created its own graphic with red arrows to go with it, it looks more like Mark Knowles is an employee of that esteemed publication.

So, does he know the rules or not?

If he doesn't, it's just a pointless whinge and he only has himself to blame.

If he does, it's just a total fabrication and a piece of attention seeking.

Name in print eh..... is it really worth it.

So is the Phuket Gazette a 'small company'? It also appears that the Editor of the Gazette is a top investigative reporter for a newspaper in Thailand which will not here be mentioned.

Edited September 16, 201312 yr by JLCrab

A post discussing moderation has been removed per forum rules.

If you have questions about moderation, please contact the moderator in question by PM.

IMPORTANT: this topic is not about the so-called 90-day address report, ie the notification of staying in Thailand longer than 90 days with the form TM.47. There are many recent topics on this subject where you can go and add your valuable thoughts. Therefore, please do not litter this topic with off-topic posts about the 90-day address report.

This topic is about a foreigner, Mark Knowles, who

• got a multiple-entry non-B visa to take up employment at a Thai company,
• apparently did not realise that this visa allows stays in Thailand of only 90 days at a time,
• either does not know about the extension of stay for employment or does not qualify for it,
• and now complains about the "hassle" of having to leave and re-enter Thailand every 90 days.

Off-topic posts and replies to them have been deleted and will continue to be deleted without further ado.

one correction having seen the visa page it was a single entry non-B visa to take up employment at a Thai company,

If you are working on a Non-B visa and have a valid passport and work permit, I do not understand why you are doing a 90 day boarder run. Maybe you should pop along to the immigration office in Phuket and see what they actually want you to do. I used to live and work at a school in Si Sa Ket and never had to do a boarder run for the 90 day report.

There is no minimum income requirement for teachers and a few other jobs. However, for example a cook from the UK must for instance make at least 50,000 a month to get an extension of stay.

A cook from Singapore needs an income of 45,000 a month and a cook from Brasil 35,000 a month while a cook from Nigeria needs an income of 25,000 baht to get an extension of stay from immigration.

Typically Thai. Your country of origin should make no difference, the amount per month should be equal. They all live in Thailand after all.

I've lived in Thailand for three years. During the initial year I had to do the same, travelling eight hours to the nearest point in Mae Sai, into Burmah for 2 minutes to get passport stamped. A stay overnight and then another 8 hours home. A real pain and an expense I hadn't planned for.

Edited September 16, 201312 yr by Maestro
Removed off-topic part of post

one correction having seen the visa page it was a single entry non-B visa to take up employment at a Thai company,

Thank you for this very interesting information, which is in fact part of the usual chronological sequence of getting a work permit, which is a s follows:

1. Apply for the work permit.
2. With the receipt for the work permit application and the required company documents, go to a Thai consulate and get a single-entry non-B visa.
3. Go to Thailand and receive permission to stay for 90 days.
4. Pick up the work permit when it is ready.
5. Start working.
6. Any time during during the last 30 days of the permission to stay, go to the local immigration office and get a one-year extension of stay for the reason of employment, if meeting the requirements for it.

This new information now leaves me scratching my head what this "90-day hassle" mentioned by Mr Mark Knowles is all about. Does he go and get a new single-entry non-B visa every 90 days? If he does not qualify for the extension of stay, what is the reason? There would seem to be only two logical explanations: either his employer's company has not yet existed for at least two fiscal years or his monthly salary is below the minimum required for his nationality. From Police Order 777/2551: