Why do I have to leave the Kingdom to renew a tourist visa?

[iphad]

I think for OP to ask .... "Why do I have to leave the Kingdom to renew a tourist visa?" is a reasonable question on a forums.

Maybe many of us may have at 1 time(s) sat around thinking, on our way for another visa run to the border wondering this same question.

And as on many types of forums, posts will appear from people thinking they are more intelligent and that the answer is simple.

But I think the OP is looking for a deeper reason.... than it's the law or definitions between different visas,etc.

Do people have an insightful answer...it's like questioning gun laws or something simple like drinking when driving laws.

Yes it's the law...but why?..what's the reasoning?

I think...but can't speak for the OP but am guessing this what he is asking...

probably, he's not asking to be attacked for being such an idiot asking a question that has a simple answer.

And of course no one probably knows the answer since we weren't at the table when this law or policy was developed.

But maybe..as a forums...one can suggest a reasonable answer to his question that the OP was wondering or questioning.

So in my feeble attempt to guess the answer to the thread question..I would suggest....

The Thai government wants to keep long term tourists or whatever name you want to call them...

in check......so they make them go to the border ..leave the country...to get the paperwork...in a sense ...legal...

so that people just don't hang out in Thailand for a indefinite period of time.

So if people forget,don't have the funds, or keep coming back many times or whatever other reason...there's paperwork or lack of...for government agencies can proceed with whatever action they deem worthy.

I'm not saying this is the answer...or a good one...but what I think it is.

Edited June 9, 2014 by iphad

[hawker9000]

Many, including the OP, are overthinking this. A Tourist Visa is what it is. It's a 60-day visa which can be extended to 90 days. Then it's done. Used. Over. Finished. Those are simply the terms of the visa. Max 90 days (with the optional extension). If you have a MULTI-ENTRY visa, then you essentially have paid for multiple tourist visas - two or three. Multi-ENTRY. You can't ENTER unless you first EXIT! It's like have a second (and maybe a third) Tourist Visa. You were simply offered the convenience of a "package", saving you the trouble of having to undergo the application process multiple times. Essentially two/three separate tourist visas in a single package (subject to the "must enter by" date, which is the one thing that "ties them together", sort of). Stop thinking of a multiple-entry tourist visa as a single visa.

Many make the mistake of thinking of a double-entry tourist visa as a "180-day visa" (60+30+60+30), or a triple-entry as a 270-day visa (90+90+90). It's just not. Again, it's TWO (three) single-entry Tourist Visas provided to you in a single package. Each visa requires its own entry (and in the end an exit) through immigration. Thailand would actually be within its rights to require an absence interval between use of each one of these entries ('think India does this with its Tourist Visa), but so far as I know does not (the compressed validity date has pretty much the opposite effect).

[craigp]

I think for OP to ask .... "Why do I have to leave the Kingdom to renew a tourist visa?" is a reasonable question on a forums.

Maybe many of us may have at 1 time(s) sat around thinking, on our way for another visa run to the border wondering this same question.

And as on many types of forums, posts will appear from people thinking they are more intelligent and that the answer is simple.

But I think the OP is looking for a deeper reason.... than it's the law or definitions between different visas,etc.

Do people have an insightful answer...it's like questioning gun laws or something simple like drinking when driving laws.

Yes it's the law...but why?..what's the reasoning?

I think...but can't speak for the OP but am guessing this what he is asking...

probably, he's not asking to be attacked for being such an idiot asking a question that has a simple answer.

And of course no one probably knows the answer since we weren't at the table when this law or policy was developed.

But maybe..as a forums...one can suggest a reasonable answer to his question that the OP was wondering or questioning.

So in my feeble attempt to guess the answer to the thread question..I would suggest....

The Thai government wants to keep long term tourists or whatever name you want to call them...

in check......so they make them go to the border ..leave the country...to get the paperwork...in a sense ...legal...

so that people just don't hang out in Thailand for a indefinite period of time.

So if people forget,don't have the funds, or keep coming back many times or whatever other reason...there's paperwork or lack of...for government agencies can proceed with whatever action they deem worthy.

I'm not saying this is the answer...or a good one...but what I think it is.

At last, a fair answer to the OP question. Newbies, (such as me too, tend to ask daft questions, because we just don't know.) In all fairness he's been bashed a bit and Thailand does have some odd rules and laws regarding visas IMO

[NamKangMan]

Another simple reason is, visa runs are a big industry in Thailand. They turn over millions of baht, everyday, and employ, either directly, or indirectly, thousands of Thai people.

If they were to change the visa laws and just have "tourists" keep attending their local Immigration Office for extensions, many Thai's would be out of work - obviously, most of the visa run companies would go broke.

By creating visa runs, the Thai Governmnet still gets your money (cost of the visa at a nearby Thai Embassy and/or 800 baht airport exit tax for those that fly for 30 days) plus they create a lot of employment.

Thailand's visa laws are outdated and need reviewing, but with all the money and employment visa runs generate, why would they change the laws?

Some things in Thailand are not about common sense, but simply about money.

Edited June 9, 2014 by NamKangMan

[JB300]

Another simple reason is, visa runs are a big industry in Thailand. They turn over millions of baht, everyday, and employ, either directly, or indirectly, thousands of Thai people.

If they were to change the visa laws and just have "tourists" keep attending their local Immigration Office for extensions, many Thai's would be out of work - obviously, most of the visa run companies would go broke.

By creating visa runs, the Thai Governmnet still gets your money (cost of the visa at a nearby Thai Embassy and/or 800 baht airport exit tax for those that fly for 30 days) plus they create a lot of employment.

Thailand's visa laws are outdated and need reviewing, but with all the money and employment visa runs generate, why would they change the laws?

Some things in Thailand are not about common sense, but simply about money.

Think you hit the nail on the head with the outdated visa laws that need reviewing but to suggest it's about the money that visa runs generate flies in the face of the current crack down on "Out-In" Visa runs?

Then again, TiT...

Edited June 9, 2014 by JB300

[JLCrab]

Hundreds of times i have asked why.....never have i gotten an answer.

...that you liked.

The Immigration Act of Thailand 2522 or 1979 was enacted pre-Internet, pre-mobile phone, pre-ATM etc. If you wanted to make an international call back then you had to go in-person to the local phone office. Many of the Act's provision may be considered anachronistic for conditions in 2014.

However changing such an Act in the name of HM the King is not a simple procedure and not just because of all the entrenched interests that like it just the way it is. For those who want it changed, there would be no guarantee that the changes would be ones they would like.

http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/en/doc/Immigration_Act.pdf

[iphad]

Life should be perfect...but rarely is.

I am guessing...that probably 90% ... ( could be 75% I really don't know ) of all the tourists coming to Thailand fit within the 30 days free given at the airports upon landing for entry to Thailand.

Other countries like Laos & Cambodia charge to enter...so in that way Thailand is more progressive.

Then there are many that come to Thailand that decide or want to stay longer..have a g/f or wife, cheap to live whatever the reason....

So these other visas are in force.

Years ago I remember many so called tourists living here would give their passport to someone..or an agency to do the visa run for them...That stopped for obvious reasons...too many people were doing it I am guessing.

I also believe it used to be 30 days at the border now it's 14 days.

The recent crackdown on more than 3 Tourist visas appears to be be...but I not know the answer that Thai goverment ( meaning whatever agencies involved ) want proof of available funds to live here..Not an unreasonable request.

Recently in April in Vientiane I received a 2 month double entry that an official had written on the visa that this is the last time unless I provide proof of funds..actually not bad after 2 1/2 years of living here.

Visa runs to the border is a pain & a hassle but if one receives their desired visa it's still worth it.

There was a notice on the board at the Embassy in Vientiane about non Thai working illegally in Thailand...so maybe this is the reason for the recent policy change.

Luckily I fit the criteria for a retirement visa and now in the works so will find out in 2 weeks if my days of border runs is over but I kinda liked the adventure..Forced me out of living in Bangkok and made me do a road trip.

I don't really accept that the laws are antiquated here any more than laws in my home country are.

yes they might be different..they might adversely affect me..but I chose to live in Thailand for all the good reasons along with the bad.

If I considered living back home was better than Thailand I would go back home.

I'm a guest in a foreign country and appreciate being here.

If you'r expectations are too high you probably will be disappointed.

[Maestro]

The Immigration Act of Thailand 2522 or 1979 was enacted pre-Internet, pre-mobile phone, pre-ATM etc. If you wanted to make an international call back then you had to go in-person to the local phone office. Many of the Act's provision may be considered anachronistic for conditions in 2014.

However changing such an Act in the name of HM the King is not a simple procedure and not just because of all the entrenched interests that like it just the way it is. For those who want it changed, there would be no guarantee that the changes would be ones they would like.

http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/en/doc/Immigration_Act.pdf

The Immigration Act as it is written, and to which you kindly gave a link, does not prevent and has not prevented adaptation to modern times. For example:

1. The amount of money an applicant for a visa should have and in which form it should be is not mentioned in the Act. (Sections 34 and 35 of the Act)
2. Immigration has made arrangements enabling hotels and guest houses to submit the Notification Form for House Master, Owner, or the Possessor of The Residence Where Aliens Have Stay (TM.30) via the Internet. (Section 38 of the Act)
3. etc.

There is, of course, a lot more that immigration could do in adapting to the age of the Internet, but we should not forget that in many cases immigration may have a good reason for wanting to see the foreigner in person.

[JLCrab]

The Act is Parliamentary legislation with regulations promulgated by a succession of Police Orders which have changed through course of the Act's existence without any need to change the Act itself. Some of the 'improvements' as often mentioned here would be beyond the scope of the Police Order promulgations.

There may be a lot more Immigration could do given the Internet, but I wouldn't be so sure that those changes would be to make things easier for those who consider consider current regulations to be draconian or absurd.

Edited June 10, 2014 by JLCrab

[ubonjoe]

The Act is Parliamentary legislation with regulations promulgated by a succession of Police Orders which have changed through course of the Act's existence without any need to change the Act itself. Some of the 'improvements' as often mentioned here would be beyond the scope of the Police Order promulgations.

There may be a lot more Immigration could do given the Internet, but I wouldn't be so sure that those changes would be to make things easier for those who consider consider current regulations to be draconian or absurd.

Most of the current visa and extension of stay rules that exist are based upon ministerial regulations,

The police orders set the requirements for extension and etc.

[Bernard Flint]

I'm just asking, I'm not trying to start an argument. I understand it's the law. So what's the difference btwn a long staying tourist and a retired person living in the Kingdom?

A retired visa requires you show adequate finances, couldn't this be part of it? So, if a tourist can deposit the same amount as a retired farang, would that be OK?

If you stay long-term, you're not a tourist.

You beat me to it, i will respond to you, i will not feed the troll

[JLCrab]

Whether by Ministerial regulation or Police Order, the Act itself is intact since 1979. Those who want it changed think it will only be changed for the benefit of the non-Thai visitor. Not necessarily so.

[Tomtomtom69]

Many, including the OP, are overthinking this. A Tourist Visa is what it is. It's a 60-day visa which can be extended to 90 days. Then it's done. Used. Over. Finished. Those are simply the terms of the visa. Max 90 days (with the optional extension). If you have a MULTI-ENTRY visa, then you essentially have paid for multiple tourist visas - two or three. Multi-ENTRY. You can't ENTER unless you first EXIT! It's like have a second (and maybe a third) Tourist Visa. You were simply offered the convenience of a "package", saving you the trouble of having to undergo the application process multiple times. Essentially two/three separate tourist visas in a single package (subject to the "must enter by" date, which is the one thing that "ties them together", sort of). Stop thinking of a multiple-entry tourist visa as a single visa.

Many make the mistake of thinking of a double-entry tourist visa as a "180-day visa" (60+30+60+30), or a triple-entry as a 270-day visa (90+90+90). It's just not. Again, it's TWO (three) single-entry Tourist Visas provided to you in a single package. Each visa requires its own entry (and in the end an exit) through immigration. Thailand would actually be within its rights to require an absence interval between use of each one of these entries ('think India does this with its Tourist Visa), but so far as I know does not (the compressed validity date has pretty much the opposite effect).

India has stopped this requirement (previously a 2 month absence between visits was necessary) largely to help promote tourism and also, given that many travelers use India as a base to visit neighboring countries such as Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, not being allowed back in for 2 months made overland (or even travel by air) very difficult unless one were to structure an itinerary that avoided India (for example, Kolkata to Dhaka, Dhaka to Kathmandu directly, Kathmandu to Bangkok). However, for most nationalities traveling a few times into and out of India as a genuine tourist, within a short period of time is now OK.