Denied Entry - Same As Blacklisting?

[oldthaihand99]

Showing money coming from outside the country would be proof that he was not working.

Specificly what would show this?

1. Cash? How much? 20,000 baht? Equivalent in other currency or in combination with traveller's checks? Who could prove these monies were not from working in Thailand?

2. Recent bank statements? How could anyone prove the funds shown there were not from working in Thailand?

3. Recent income tax returns showing income earned & the source?

4. Pension or annuity documents showing payments from a source outside of Siam?

5. ATM slips from withdrawals inside LOS?

Can no one here answer this?

[Timwin]

Showing money coming from outside the country would be proof that he was not working.

Specificly what would show this?

1. Cash? How much? 20,000 baht? Equivalent in other currency or in combination with traveller's checks? Who could prove these monies were not from working in Thailand?

2. Recent bank statements? How could anyone prove the funds shown there were not from working in Thailand?

3. Recent income tax returns showing income earned & the source?

4. Pension or annuity documents showing payments from a source outside of Siam?

5. ATM slips from withdrawals inside LOS?

Can no one here answer this?

Even having all of those with you might be not enough if an immigration official decides to deny access. He might not even look at those documents before making a decision! My guess is that best bet is to have 20000 Baht cash and Thai bank statement of last couple of months. That should be enough in most cases. The problem is are you "most cases" this time or the next time.

This is going to play really badly in real-estate markets. You are not going to buy that condo or house if there is a possibility to be denied access for five years. Even most retirees in Thailand are on tourist visas.

[oldthaihand99]

Showing money coming from outside the country would be proof that he was not working.

Specificly what would show this?

1. Cash? How much? 20,000 baht? Equivalent in other currency or in combination with traveller's checks? Who could prove these monies were not from working in Thailand?

2. Recent bank statements? How could anyone prove the funds shown there were not from working in Thailand?

3. Recent income tax returns showing income earned & the source?

4. Pension or annuity documents showing payments from a source outside of Siam?

5. ATM slips from withdrawals inside LOS?

Can no one here answer this?

Even having all of those with you might be not enough if an immigration official decides to deny access. He might not even look at those documents before making a decision! My guess is that best bet is to have 20000 Baht cash and Thai bank statement of last couple of months. That should be enough in most cases. The problem is are you "most cases" this time or the next time.

This is going to play really badly in real-estate markets. You are not going to buy that condo or house if there is a possibility to be denied access for five years. Even most retirees in Thailand are on tourist visas.

I can't imagine an official denying access with all 5 of those. Is there even a single such case like that in the history of Thailand? One that involves a normal law abiding polite person?

In my case i arrive by air, use tourist visas, spend under 60 days per visit & then leave for 2-3 months, & stay in LOS under 180 days per year. Will this be a problem?

[Timwin]

I can't imagine an official denying access with all 5 of those. Is there even a single such case like that in the history of Thailand? One that involves a normal law abiding polite person?

In my case i arrive by air, use tourist visas, spend under 60 days per visit & then leave for 2-3 months, & stay in LOS under 180 days per year. Will this be a problem?

Well, there are a few horror stories in this thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/726721-thai-immigration-is-determined-to-prevent-abuse-of-visa-exceptions/

Edited May 31, 2014 by Timwin

[ubonjoe]

I can't imagine an official denying access with all 5 of those. Is there even a single such case like that in the history of Thailand? One that involves a normal law abiding polite person?

In my case i arrive by air, use tourist visas, spend under 60 days per visit & then leave for 2-3 months, & stay in LOS under 180 days per year. Will this be a problem?

Well, there are a few horror stories in this thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/726721-thai-immigration-is-determined-to-prevent-abuse-of-visa-exceptions/

The question though are they all factual and with all information supplied. Most I have seen are questionable.

[Tomtomtom69]

I can't imagine an official denying access with all 5 of those. Is there even a single such case like that in the history of Thailand? One that involves a normal law abiding polite person?

In my case i arrive by air, use tourist visas, spend under 60 days per visit & then leave for 2-3 months, & stay in LOS under 180 days per year. Will this be a problem?

Well, there are a few horror stories in this thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/726721-thai-immigration-is-determined-to-prevent-abuse-of-visa-exceptions/

The question though are they all factual and with all information supplied. Most I have seen are questionable.

Exactly. There tend to be a lot of holes in those stories. Probably there's more to those stories than the posters would like to reveal. For example, did they really offer to supply proof of sufficient funds? Were they rude to the immigration officer? Was it somehow determined that they are working in violation of the no-working rule on a tourist visa or exemption? Did they previously overstay at anytime in the past? Etc.

[Tomtomtom69]

The point is that they only have to asses if you are a tourist or not. They do not have to asses if you are working in Thailand or not. Visa exempt entries and tourist visas are for tourism, not for prolonged stay in Thailand. For continous stay in Thailand you need a valid reason and the proper visa.

The OP had a ED Visa / Extension.. And was denied entry..

Secondly, many have been saying this wouldnt happen to anyone with a 'valid visa' and keep repeating the mantra, just go and get a tourist visa for a local country.. This clearly appears to not be the solution for some officers interpretations.

Yet we are still no closer to finding out more about the OP other than what has already been stated, which is not enough to know why he was denied. We could keep going in circles and speculate, but the questions I've posed still haven't been answered. The poster on the top of this page who is on an ED visa is also suspicious.

Sorry I meant to say that poster appears to be using his ED visa as it was intended, and is also suspicious of the OP's friend, who was denied.

[oldthaihand99]

The point is that they only have to asses if you are a tourist or not. They do not have to asses if you are working in Thailand or not. Visa exempt entries and tourist visas are for tourism, not for prolonged stay in Thailand. For continous stay in Thailand you need a valid reason and the proper visa.

If one is living in LOS up to 180 days per year, they can be tourists according to:

"Tourism is the travel for recreational, leisure,family or business purposes, usually of a limited duration. Tourism is commonly associated with trans-national travel, but may also refer to travel to another location within the same country. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism}

[oldthaihand99]

The point is that they only have to asses if you are a tourist or not. They do not have to asses if you are working in Thailand or not. Visa exempt entries and tourist visas are for tourism, not for prolonged stay in Thailand. For continous stay in Thailand you need a valid reason and the proper visa.

If one is living in LOS up to 180 days per year, they can be tourists according to:

"Tourism is the travel for recreational, leisure,family or business purposes, usually of a limited duration. Tourism is commonly associated with trans-national travel, but may also refer to travel to another location within the same country. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism}

I've been staying in LOS for almost 6 months every year since 2007. Last year when i applied for a single entry tourist visa in Canada, i was asked "only one?" which seemed to be encouraging me to get more than one. In Hanoi i obtained a double entry earlier this year & was asked why i don't apply for the retirement visa. Told her i like to spend time in different paces, though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.

[MikeandDow]

If one is living in LOS up to 180 days per year, they can be tourists according to:

"Tourism is the travel for recreational, leisure,family or business purposes, usually of a limited duration. Tourism is commonly associated with trans-national travel, but may also refer to travel to another location within the same country. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism}

I've been staying in LOS for almost 6 months every year since 2007. Last year when i applied for a single entry tourist visa in Canada, i was asked "only one?" which seemed to be encouraging me to get more than one. In Hanoi i obtained a double entry earlier this year & was asked why i don't apply for the retirement visa. Told her i like to spend time in different paces, though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.

I do not know where you get all this miss info from living in LOS up to 180 days is total rubbish you can live here as long as you like and this statement ( though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.) completely mind boggling rubbish.

[Soutpeel]

If one is living in LOS up to 180 days per year, they can be tourists according to:

"Tourism is the travel for recreational, leisure,family or business purposes, usually of a limited duration. Tourism is commonly associated with trans-national travel, but may also refer to travel to another location within the same country. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism}

I've been staying in LOS for almost 6 months every year since 2007. Last year when i applied for a single entry tourist visa in Canada, i was asked "only one?" which seemed to be encouraging me to get more than one. In Hanoi i obtained a double entry earlier this year & was asked why i don't apply for the retirement visa. Told her i like to spend time in different paces, though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.

I do not know where you get all this miss info from living in LOS up to 180 days is total rubbish you can live here as long as you like and this statement ( though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.) completely mind boggling rubbish.

could the subtext be the poster doesn't qualify for the retirement extension and that's the reason not the tax thing ?

[oldthaihand99]

If one is living in LOS up to 180 days per year, they can be tourists according to:

"Tourism is the travel for recreational, leisure,family or business purposes, usually of a limited duration. Tourism is commonly associated with trans-national travel, but may also refer to travel to another location within the same country. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism}

I've been staying in LOS for almost 6 months every year since 2007. Last year when i applied for a single entry tourist visa in Canada, i was asked "only one?" which seemed to be encouraging me to get more than one. In Hanoi i obtained a double entry earlier this year & was asked why i don't apply for the retirement visa. Told her i like to spend time in different paces, though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.

I do not know where you get all this miss info from living in LOS up to 180 days is total rubbish you can live here as long as you like and this statement ( though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.) completely mind boggling rubbish.

You evidently missed the point, as my post does not even address the subject of how long people "can" live in LOS, so i won't bother giving my opinion on that issue.

As for taxation, this has been discussed on the site before by myself & others, & it appears you could start with a search on those threads & reading this:

" Taxpayers are classified into “resident” and “non-resident”. “Resident” means any person residing in Thailand for a period or periods aggregating more than 180 days in any tax (calendar) year. A resident of Thailand is liable to pay tax on income from sources in Thailand as well as on the portion of income from foreign sources that is brought into Thailand. A non-resident is, however, subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand."

http://www.rd.go.th/publish/6045.0.html

[Cypress Hill]

OK bit of an update.

Mate went back to England, got a new passport, a double entry TR and is now back in BKK.

Asked how he didn't get pulled; he said "long story, Hill"

I thought it was because the tourist numbers are down but he said that had no bearing whatsoever.

Needless to say, I'm intrigued.

[MikeandDow]

If one is living in LOS up to 180 days per year, they can be tourists according to:

"Tourism is the travel for recreational, leisure,family or business purposes, usually of a limited duration. Tourism is commonly associated with trans-national travel, but may also refer to travel to another location within the same country. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes".^[1]

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism}

I've been staying in LOS for almost 6 months every year since 2007. Last year when i applied for a single entry tourist visa in Canada, i was asked "only one?" which seemed to be encouraging me to get more than one. In Hanoi i obtained a double entry earlier this year & was asked why i don't apply for the retirement visa. Told her i like to spend time in different paces, though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.

I do not know where you get all this miss info from living in LOS up to 180 days is total rubbish you can live here as long as you like and this statement ( though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.) completely mind boggling rubbish.

You evidently missed the point, as my post does not even address the subject of how long people "can" live in LOS, so i won't bother giving my opinion on that issue.

As for taxation, this has been discussed on the site before by myself & others, & it appears you could start with a search on those threads & reading this:

" Taxpayers are classified into “resident” and “non-resident”. “Resident” means any person residing in Thailand for a period or periods aggregating more than 180 days in any tax (calendar) year. A resident of Thailand is liable to pay tax on income from sources in Thailand as well as on the portion of income from foreign sources that is brought into Thailand. A non-resident is, however, subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand."

http://www.rd.go.th/publish/6045.0.html

total miss information lived in Thailand just short of 10yrs lived in Thailand more than 180day work in OZ bring money into Thailand do NOT have to pay tax this is old laws its rubbish

Edited June 9, 2014 by MikeandDow

[patyh]

OK bit of an update.

Mate went back to England, got a new passport, a double entry TR and is now back in BKK.

Asked how he didn't get pulled; he said "long story, Hill"

I thought it was because the tourist numbers are down but he said that had no bearing whatsoever.

Needless to say, I'm intrigued.

Just make sure he knows how to use that TR.

But the fact is, he's not a tourist and should not qualify for a TR visa.

If he's a father of a Thai Child, then he should have get it done and get his visa done the right way... Abusing the loopholes in the system will only result in the loopholes being close.

I've seen a lot of people complain on TV how hard it is to get a visa to stay in Thailand. The point here is, there's so many visas available to you depending on your visit purpose, there's no reason to use loopholes to get your visa.

If you're married to a Thai or has a Thai child, get a Non-"O" visa.

If you plan to work, find someone who will employ you and get a Non-"B" visa.

Seriously wish to study? Get an Ed Visa.

Finding a place to retire? There's the retirement visa.

Just passing by to enjoy Thailand, the Tourist Visa is available for you.

You, or any foreigner in this case, should always use the coorect visa.. There's no excuses for not doing so.. Other than the fact that you don't qualify. And if so, find out why and make yourself qualifiable and not just take the easy way out.

[Cypress Hill]

But the fact is, he's not a tourist and should not qualify for a TR visa.

If he's a father of a Thai Child, then he should have get it done and get his visa done the right way... Abusing the loopholes in the system will only result in the loopholes being close.

I've seen a lot of people complain on TV how hard it is to get a visa to stay in Thailand. The point here is, there's so many visas available to you depending on your visit purpose, there's no reason to use loopholes to get your visa.

Life isn't black or white, pal.

His name isn't registered on his daughter's birth certificate (she's 3 months old) and all the DNA stuff hasn't been done so he can't get a non-O based on being a guardian of a Thai child.

I think the ends (coming in on a TR) justify the means until he can get all that stuff sorted

[RHerberth]

Hello,

next year i want to come to thailand on a 3-entry tourist visa (issued in my home county) and stay for 8 Month. Then i stay 4 month in my home country and then i get back to thailand (again on a 3-entry tourist visa) and stay for another 8 month ? Can i get problems ? I only come for long holidays and i have enough funds in my bank but im not 50 years old.

[ubonjoe]

Hello,

next year i want to come to thailand on a 3-entry tourist visa (issued in my home county) and stay for 8 Month. Then i stay 4 month in my home country and then i get back to thailand (again on a 3-entry tourist visa) and stay for another 8 month ? Can i get problems ? I only come for long holidays and i have enough funds in my bank but im not 50 years old.

At the moment I can say you would not a have problem. But I can't predict anything for next year.

[RHerberth]

Yes i know nobody can know what happends in the future but when i stay 4 month in my home country this is not a back-to-back visa ?

[ubonjoe]

I don't think you will have a problem next year either because you will not be staying here full time. Those trips back home help a lot.

[OJAS]

I've been staying in LOS for almost 6 months every year since 2007. Last year when i applied for a single entry tourist visa in Canada, i was asked "only one?" which seemed to be encouraging me to get more than one. In Hanoi i obtained a double entry earlier this year & was asked why i don't apply for the retirement visa. Told her i like to spend time in different paces, though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.

I do not know where you get all this miss info from living in LOS up to 180 days is total rubbish you can live here as long as you like and this statement ( though really if i spend more than half the year in LOS i'll be subject to income taxation there.) completely mind boggling rubbish.

You evidently missed the point, as my post does not even address the subject of how long people "can" live in LOS, so i won't bother giving my opinion on that issue.

As for taxation, this has been discussed on the site before by myself & others, & it appears you could start with a search on those threads & reading this:

" Taxpayers are classified into “resident” and “non-resident”. “Resident” means any person residing in Thailand for a period or periods aggregating more than 180 days in any tax (calendar) year. A resident of Thailand is liable to pay tax on income from sources in Thailand as well as on the portion of income from foreign sources that is brought into Thailand. A non-resident is, however, subject to tax only on income from sources in Thailand."

http://www.rd.go.th/publish/6045.0.html

total miss information lived in Thailand just short of 10yrs lived in Thailand more than 180day work in OZ bring money into Thailand do NOT have to pay tax this is old laws its rubbish

Also worth noting that Thailand has entered into tax treaties with a number of countries including Canada, Australia and the UK

http://www.rd.go.th/publish/766.0.html

[patyh]

But the fact is, he's not a tourist and should not qualify for a TR visa.

If he's a father of a Thai Child, then he should have get it done and get his visa done the right way... Abusing the loopholes in the system will only result in the loopholes being close.

I've seen a lot of people complain on TV how hard it is to get a visa to stay in Thailand. The point here is, there's so many visas available to you depending on your visit purpose, there's no reason to use loopholes to get your visa.

Life isn't black or white, pal.

His name isn't registered on his daughter's birth certificate (she's 3 months old) and all the DNA stuff hasn't been done so he can't get a non-O based on being a guardian of a Thai child.

I think the ends (coming in on a TR) justify the means until he can get all that stuff sorted

Since you understood that theory. Then the next time round you or your friend encounter issues with your visa even though you meet all the requirements, I hope you remember that. Life isn't black or white.