Visa confusion, Non-O, O-A, Retd?

[asiaexpat]

One of the major reasons for apply for an O/A (Long Stay) visa is that it can be issued as a multi-entry visa. That allows you to leave Thailand anytime time you want to do so until the "Use By "date of the visa and on each re-entry to Thailand you will receive a new one year "permitted to stay"period. So, it is possible to get almost two years of "permitted to stay"in Thailand by leaving Thailand near the "Use by "date of the visa. If travel is in your future plans this is an advantage over the Non-O visa. However, if travel is not expected the single Non-O visa and extension of stay is the way to go as mentioned by others. Just get a re-entry permit if you must leave Thailand in order to maintain the validity of your "permitted to stay"stamp. A Non-O visa can be granted based on intent to retire in Thailand with evidence of funds as stated before.

[paulsr]

One of the major reasons for apply for an O/A (Long Stay) visa is that it can be issued as a multi-entry visa. That allows you to leave Thailand anytime time you want to do so until the "Use By "date of the visa and on each re-entry to Thailand you will receive a new one year "permitted to stay"period. So, it is possible to get almost two years of "permitted to stay"in Thailand by leaving Thailand near the "Use by "date of the visa. If travel is in your future plans this is an advantage over the Non-O visa. However, if travel is not expected the single Non-O visa and extension of stay is the way to go as mentioned by others. Just get a re-entry permit if you must leave Thailand in order to maintain the validity of your "permitted to stay"stamp. A Non-O visa can be granted based on intent to retire in Thailand with evidence of funds as stated before.

Hmm, that's an interesting benefit of the O/A Visa. But I don't expect to do much overseas travelling in the long-term, only during the next few months, so I think the 90 day plus one year extension would be the best.

[thepool]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

One of the major reasons for apply for an O/A (Long Stay) visa is that it can be issued as a multi-entry visa. That allows you to leave Thailand anytime time you want to do so until the "Use By "date of the visa and on each re-entry to Thailand you will receive a new one year "permitted to stay"period. So, it is possible to get almost two years of "permitted to stay"in Thailand by leaving Thailand near the "Use by "date of the visa. If travel is in your future plans this is an advantage over the Non-O visa. However, if travel is not expected the single Non-O visa and extension of stay is the way to go as mentioned by others. Just get a re-entry permit if you must leave Thailand in order to maintain the validity of your "permitted to stay"stamp. A Non-O visa can be granted based on intent to retire in Thailand with evidence of funds as stated before.

Somewhat confusing post .

A re-entry permit (single or multiple) is easily obtained by anyone staying in Thailand with an extension of stay thus allowing as much (or little) travel as is desired.

[lopburi3]

Why do people continue to try and make it harder - O/A is not an advantage for this traveler (who has the funds already in Thailand) as he already stated a two month delay for police clearance in Malaysia and medical would be additional cost. As extension in Thailand will only cost 1,900 baht yearly and re-entry 3,800 (which would be required even on O/A for second year) it seems get visa and extend is the best plan - simple.

There is a 90 day reporting of address to immigration for anyone staying longer than 90 days without exit but that would be due for anyone regardless of visa.

[Jingthing]

Yes! OP, your path is clear. Best of luck in Thailand.

[asiaexpat]

Some people like options and getting nearly two years with an extension is one.

[thepool]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Some people like options and getting nearly two years with an extension is one.

Two years WITH an extension is that so ?

[asiaexpat]

Why do people continue to try and make it harder - O/A is not an advantage for this traveler (who has the funds already in Thailand) as he already stated a two month delay for police clearance in Malaysia and medical would be additional cost. As extension in Thailand will only cost 1,900 baht yearly and re-entry 3,800 (which would be required even on O/A for second year) it seems get visa and extend is the best plan - simple.

There is a 90 day reporting of address to immigration for anyone staying longer than 90 days without exit but that would be due for anyone regardless of visa.

The cost must be spread over two years therefore it is 1900 TB X 2 and 3800 X 2 compared with 5000 TB if time right. I do agree that in the OP's case as he stated, that he is better off as you describe.

[thepool]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Why do people continue to try and make it harder - O/A is not an advantage for this traveler (who has the funds already in Thailand) as he already stated a two month delay for police clearance in Malaysia and medical would be additional cost. As extension in Thailand will only cost 1,900 baht yearly and re-entry 3,800 (which would be required even on O/A for second year) it seems get visa and extend is the best plan - simple.

There is a 90 day reporting of address to immigration for anyone staying longer than 90 days without exit but that would be due for anyone regardless of visa.

The cost must be spread over two years therefore it is 1900 TB X 2 and 3800 X 2 compared with 5000 TB if time right. I do agree that in the OP's case as he stated, that he is better off as you describe.

The 3800 is a red herring unless frequent travel is required /needed

[mahjongguy]

The multiple entry O-A visa obtained in one's home country really only has one strong advantage: it postpones entry into the extension system by a year or two. This would appeal to those who cannot or will not meet the financial requirements for retirement extensions. This could be due to a pension which hasn't started yet, a reluctance to deposit money in a Thai bank, or a number of other reasons.

If that isn't the case for an individual then there is little reason to start off with an O-A.

[ubonjoe]

The multiple entry O-A visa obtained in one's home country really only has one strong advantage: it postpones entry into the extension system by a year or two. This would appeal to those who cannot or will not meet the financial requirements for retirement extensions. This could be due to a pension which hasn't started yet, a reluctance to deposit money in a Thai bank, or a number of other reasons. If that isn't the case for an individual then there is little reason to start off with an O-A.

You still have to prove the equivalent of income of 65k baht or have 800K baht in the bank or a combination of the two. equal to 800k baht. The only real difference financially is that the money does not have to be in a Thai bank.

Having a pension or not makes no difference for either.

[mahjongguy]

"The only real difference financially is that the money does not have to be in a Thai bank."

For some folks postponing that day is a big thing.

"Having a pension or not makes no difference for either."

Having income might be necessary, and there are applicants who want to begin their time in Thailand after they stop working but before their pension kicks in. Such was the case in a recent thread.

I'm just saying there are cases where financial situations make the O-A look good. Otherwise, it's rarely the best choice.

[Jingthing]

Yes I agree there are cases where there are good reasons to go for the O-A.

But THIS isn't one of them ...

[ubonjoe]

"The only real difference financially is that the money does not have to be in a Thai bank."

For some folks postponing that day is a big thing.

"Having a pension or not makes no difference for either."

Having income might be necessary, and there are applicants who want to begin their time in Thailand after they stop working but before their pension kicks in. Such was the case in a recent thread.

I'm just saying there are cases where financial situations make the O-A look good. Otherwise, it's rarely the best choice.

My response to your post was because it appears to imply that not all the financial requirements are needed for the OA that are needed for the extension.

The same for having a pension or not. It appears that you were saying you had to have a pension to get an extension whereas a OA you don't.

[mahjongguy]

"It appears that you were saying you had to have a pension to get an extension whereas a OA you don't."

It wasn't what I was attempting to say. With either method one needs income and/or cash. There are those who don't have income at the time they are moving here; they do have cash but are unwilling (at first) to deposit it in Thailand. That person would prefer to start with an O-A.

[Maestro]

Oh, and does this "extension of stay" have a name? Is it one of the O, O-A, etc? And, can that extension then be extended every year?

Thanks.

The form TM.7 you use to apply for this extension of stay has the title APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY STAY IN THE KINGDOM. On the line "...for another period of _____ days" your write "365" to fill t"he blank. On the line "Reason (s) for extension" you write "Retirement". The extension stamp you get in the passport has no title but based on the application we might say that its official name is "365-day extension of temporary stay in the Kingdom for the reason of retirement" but for brevity it is commonly called "retirement extension"

Not all immigration offices use an extension stamp with the same text. Below is an example of a retirement extension issued by the Bangkok immigration office:

You can apply for a new 365-day extension every year, up to 30 days prior to the expiration of the current permission to stay.

[NancyL]

Unfortunately, many (actually probably most) people here long-term on retirement extensions consider themselves here on retirement visas and call the annual process of extended their permission to stay "renewing their visa". It doesn't help that the immigration officers themselves use incorrect terminology.

I witnesses the following interchange recently at the Chiang Mai office between an immigration officer and a customer:

officer: "what do you want"?

officer is shown passport, TM7 and related paperwork

officer: "oh you want to renew your retirement visa"

This was an officer who has been there forever and should know better. Is it no wonder that the average newcomer to Thailand is confused?