Retirement visa extension restrictions for foreign married couples

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Unfortunately, given the way ThaiVisa operates, anyone reading the OP post in this thread would have to wade their way thru 200+ posts spread over 9 pages before finally discovering that what's reported in the OP hasn't actually occurred or been enacted for now.

There ought to be a better way of handing such miscues... than that.

[george]

UPDATE

Immigration vows strictness on retirement visa requirements

Full story: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/686783-immigration-vows-strictness-on-retirement-visa-requirements/

[zorroverde]

Immigration vows strictness on retirement visa requirements

Full story: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/686783-immigration-vows-strictness-on-retirement-visa-requirements/

I wonder to which regulation this high ranking immigration official is referring to.The only law which came into force at the date mentioned is

is the well-known Royal Thai Police Order nr.777/2551 of Nov.25 2008.

The only section dealing with the dependents of retirees is 2.20 where there is no trace of this mysterious ,allegedly often misinterpreted,

50% rule.In fact,there are no additional solvency requirements .The wording is totally clear and doesn't mention at all any further proof of solvency,whereas this same order or regulation,in all other cases where such proof is required ,says so explicitly.

I attach an excerpt of the relevant text in English.

Does any of forists with legal knowledge have a clue what law or regulation this gentleman is talking about?

[ubonjoe]

I certainly don't. I don't think there is one.

[DrTuner]

I haven't actually checked, but the police orders are not laws, are they ? Otherwise they would be published in the Royal Gazette.

The current immigration act is indeed a law: http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/en/doc/Immigration_Act.pdf

Edited December 5, 2013 by DrTuner

[Maestro]

The Immigration Act authorises the Director General of the Royal Thai Police to issue rules for extensions of stay, and he did.

[zorroverde]

The Immigration Act authorises the Director General of the Royal Thai Police to issue rules for extensions of stay, and he did.

Right,the last time he did so,as far as has been publicly known,was the often quoted Royal Thai Police Order no.777/2551 0f Nov.2008,still standing.

Do you know of any abrogation or modification of the same? Do you know where can be found the mysterious 50% clause the immigration official was

commenting in the above newspaper article?

[ubonjoe]

The Immigration Act authorises the Director General of the Royal Thai Police to issue rules for extensions of stay, and he did.

Right,the last time he did so,as far as has been publicly known,was the often quoted Royal Thai Police Order no.777/2551 0f Nov.2008,still standing.

 

Do you know of any abrogation or modification of the same? Do you know where can be found the mysterious 50% clause the immigration official was

commenting in the above newspaper article?

As far as we know there has not been a new police order issued.

As far as I know there is no 50% clause to be found.

[zorroverde]

I just checked the immigration website http://extranet.immigration.go.th/pibics/online/queue/EXTAction.do?cmd=term where under

"Reasons for Extension of Stay" said police oder 777/2551 is linked.

It remains there unchanged so far ,so one would think that it is still of application.

[ukbiker1]

As a thought, if a married couple have two bank accounts totalling 1.6 million baht and decide to leave Thailand and return home how much money can they take out of the country?

Edited December 6, 2013 by ukbiker1

[Jingthing]

As a thought, if a married couple have two bank accounts totalling 1.6 million baht and decide to leave Thailand and return home how much money can they take out of the country?

As much as their bank allows. I suggest getting paper receipts for all incoming transfers.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[david555]

But how would you separate the dates for the extensions. You cannot do one early or the other late enough. It means one person leaving and re-entering with a new visa and then the extension.

Yes , but that would only to be done one time , after that one time keep the dates seperate for never ending follow up , loopholes have their requirements but are working

.....Chinese proverd : "a house can have many doors , take the one who is open.."

Ps; side remark ; it shall cost their economy some money , as some couples who have money enough shall KEEP ita spare for following the rule & not spend it ...., only very bad habit is the suddenly no warning change of rules / laws in Thailand.... , we must alway be prepared for it

Edited December 6, 2013 by david555

[uptheos]

Do the retirement renewals separate and several months apart.

Take the money from one account and put it in the other, as long as it's seasoned for the required period of time.

[aveabeeror2]

How many people making the worthless comments will be affected by this new, and make sense, law?

No, sorry, you don't know what your talking about. If you think a couple now need 1.600,000 Bt to be worthy to live and spend money in Thailand

then ask for that. And if you are going to mess with peoples lives who have been living in Thailand for years by not grandfathering it in then be up front and say so.

It's the same old story... they came for my friend and I said nothing..... I guarentee you that however you are in Thailand you can be affected by the prescident of

not grandfathering in. Oh.... tomorrow, you need 3 million baht in the bank at 1% interest... so sorry it's policy now.

Ok, I guess we are clear, IMO who had the worthless comment.

The law is the law, if a person doesnt like it, they can always go back home. Thailand was never meant to be a retirement village.If you were back in your own country and some old age pensioners from another country who move there complained about govt. policy, what would you have to say about that?

"Thailand was never meant to be a retirement village" ...... and they introduced this Retirement Visa for people over 50 years old for what reason ...??? What purpose...??

I will explain simply for you. If you are over 50 and dont work, retired, that doesnt mean you go to l ive in a retirement village. "Retired from Work".

[aveabeeror2]

Do the retirement renewals separate and several months apart.

Take the money from one account and put it in the other, as long as it's seasoned for the required period of time.

And,of course, the thais dont have computor systems whereby the immigration can connect to bank account details, as my country does. (Or does it?)

[ubonjoe]

Do the retirement renewals separate and several months apart.

Take the money from one account and put it in the other, as long as it's seasoned for the required period of time.

And,of course, the thais dont have computor systems whereby the immigration can connect to bank account details, as my country does. (Or does it?)

They can call to check the balance of an account though.

[DrTuner]

Do the retirement renewals separate and several months apart.

Take the money from one account and put it in the other, as long as it's seasoned for the required period of time.

And,of course, the thais dont have computor systems whereby the immigration can connect to bank account details, as my country does. (Or does it?)

They can call to check the balance of an account though.

I've always had to show the original bank book when applying for extension, transactions spanning back about 2 years were there as my account sees only limited use. They could require a full set of bank books for at least one year, if they want, "supporting documents". But there aren't any rules what can be done with the money after the extension has been granted. It is after all private property, not bail money.

If the immigration gets really nasty, they might require in the future that the 800k will never be remitted back outside Thailand or even require 800k every year. It's supposed to cover the living expenses for one year, about 67k/month which is not a huge sum.

[Jingthing]

That is incorrect. It does not dictate spending levels in any way. If it did the levels would be lower for homeowners.

Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Arkady]

Always love the responses here you would think there are only Europeans, people from the United Kingdom, and the Americas who are retired here. Go back and read the OP one of the reasons was because of up coming changes in the Asean visa rules in 2 years. Yes and all free rides come to an end some day, sorry for the inconvenience.

Fair point but UK retirees do appear to be the largest single group, followed by farangs of other nationalities, and there seem to be very few from ASEAN or other Asian countries. What motivation would a married couple from Indonesia, Malaysia or the Philippines have to uproot themselves from home and move to Thailand in their old age?

While there is official excitement about the AEC in Thailland, unofficially there is paranoia and people are rushing around to fill loopholes to make it as hard as possible for ASEAN companies and professionals to come to Thailand and compete on an equal basis. Using the AEC as an excuse to tighten rules on retirees that will almost exclusively effect non-ASEAN nationals is either an example of this or just an excuse. ASEAN countries are anyway likely to agree on new visa rules on a reciprocal basis that will not affect others.

Having said all that I note that retirees who came before 1998 are grandfathered the rule of a lump sum or income of B200,000. Does that meant that the financial levels have not been increased since 1998? If so, they might be ready for an increase. Hopefully grandfathering would apply again.

[mikekim1219]

If each spouse can file for visa on desperate dates, who is to stop to make sure same fund is not used twice? Sounds like more regulation to come

[mikekim1219]

What if the one spouse is younger than 50 years old?

[ubonjoe]

What if the one spouse is younger than 50 years old?

No extension would be possible unless there was some exception allowed.

[Sceptict11]

What if the one spouse is younger than 50 years old?

No extension would be possible unless there was some exception allowed.

Joe

What happened to the concept of "dependency" ?

I have not seen/heard of any changes which would prevent an application

from a wife/child of a retiree for an extension based being a dependent.

[zorroverde]

What if the one spouse is younger than 50 years old?

No extension would be possible unless there was some exception allowed.

Joe

What happened to the concept of "dependency" ?

I have not seen/heard of any changes which would prevent an application

from a wife/child of a retiree for an extension based being a dependent.

Sceptic11,I totally agree.For under 50 yrs. dependents 777/2551 sect.2.20 would still be the way to go.OTH I can't see a reason why this same

clause could not be also used by dependents over 50 (spouses),avoiding thus the need for putting up another B 800K.There is nothing in the wording

forbidding it or limiting it to dependents under 50.

[ubonjoe]

 

What if the one spouse is younger than 50 years old?

No extension would be possible unless there was some exception allowed.

 

 

 

Joe 

 

What happened to the concept of "dependency" ?

 

 I have not seen/heard of any changes which would prevent  an application

 from a wife/child of a retiree for an extension  based being a dependent.  

Have you not read the other topic where it is stated they are eliminating dependent extensions for retirement.

[Sceptict11]

What if the one spouse is younger than 50 years old?

No extension would be possible unless there was some exception allowed.

Joe

What happened to the concept of "dependency" ?

I have not seen/heard of any changes which would prevent an application

from a wife/child of a retiree for an extension based being a dependent.

Have you not read the other topic where it is stated they are eliminating dependent extensions for retirement.

I have read the thread but have seen no "official" confirmation !

This I believe is what the "rules" say in relation to those granted extension for retirement.

"2.20 In the case of a family

member of an alien who has been permitted temporary

stay under clauses 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6,2.7, 2.10, 2.12, 2.13,2.4, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17,

2.21, 2.22,2.26,6.29 of this Order (applicable only to parents, spouse, child, adopted child or child of

his/her spouse):

Permission will be

granted for a period of

not more than 1 year at a time.

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

(2) Proof of family relationship;

(3) In the case of a spouse, the marital relationship shall be de

jure (legitimate) and de facto;

Edited December 6, 2013 by Sceptict11

[ubonjoe]

I agree but if they do it it 2.22 would be gone from that clause.

[Sceptict11]

I agree but if they do it it 2.22 would be gone from that clause.

Agreed !

But "BUT" in this case is a big word . There does not appear to be any evidence of a change.

[humph]

following my earlier comments and my concerns about my extention of stay (visa renewal?) i am pleased to say that my wife and i received our extention from jomtein today wthout any questions or queries. we are very pleased.

i have to remark that some of the comments on this site about this subject have been unhelpful and rather nasty. dont you like each other?

[Tywais]

i have to remark that some of the comments on this site about this subject have been unhelpful and rather nasty. dont you like each other?

You have to look at Thaivisa or other large forums like a large extended family. You have the favorite aunt/uncle, the grumpy grandparent, the mischievous brother/sister, the innocent and gullible niece/nephew and the cousin no one talks about. Multiply that by a few thousand and you get a forum. It's the nature of the beast with as many personalities as there are members. BTW, the mods are the parents so you can squeal report any issue that falls afoul of the forum rules.