No more Thai visa runs: Immigration will not let visa runners return after Aug 12

[JLCrab]

In the insurance forum you hear stories about how someone paid their premiums for years and when they finally have a big claim, it was denied for no reason. But you never get to hear the insurance company's side of the story.

The person above wrote about the horror story getting a 2-week visa for a film crew to work here in Thailand. There is no reason to doubt his story. But you only hear one side of the story. You don't hear the other side of the story and I will not speculate as to why the Thai government might comment differently on the case.

[KarenBravo]

Immigration is just a business. Like a Hotel. Five star hotels can charge a higher tariff than than two star hotels.

Thailand has a great climate, agreeable people, an almost reasonable infrastructure and a business environment that has potential, but wobbles a bit and is not particular easy to negotiate.

One can't blame a three star hotel for trying to get a four star tariff. If they can. But when demand tanks, even five star hotels have to slash their rates.

For good or ill, wisely or not, Thailand has decided to up their tariff. To make it more difficult, expensive and complicated for people to be here. Will they get away with it? Who knows, maybe they will able to attract five star clients, that will happily pay an increased premium to be here.

Will their be an exodus of well heeled people from Cannes, Cot d'Azur and Monaco to Pattaya? It's anyones guess.

Will entrepreneurs from Hong Kong relocate their business's to Thailand? Maybe.

World GDP is shrinking. The Baltic Dry Goods Index is off a cliff. World tourism is in the doldrums. Oil prices are set to hike. The middle classes of the US and Europe are being hammered. Unemployment is skyrocketing.

Is this the right time for Thailand to make it more difficult and expensive for people to be here and augment their economy?

I'm sure they have employed skilled economic planners, who have modelled the projected permutations of immigration policy. That they have calculated and thought through their plans with great care. Because they know, when you slam the door in a persons face, when you make their life more difficult, when you change the rules constantly, when you cause them financial loss and treat them with contempt - you kind of lose their loyalty exponentially. A difficult position to recover from - a renewed charm offensive, might not be enough.

Firstly, world tourism is not shrinking. It increased by 5% in 2013 and is forecast to increase in 2014 by 4.5% to 5%.

http://www2.unwto.org/

Secondly, in what way has Thailand "increased the tariff"? All they have done is stop abuse of visa exemption stamps and tourist visas.

In fact, visa exemption extensions have been increased from 7 days to 30 days. For the real tourist, they have made it easier and cheaper to stay as the 1900 Bt price for the 7 day extension hasn't been increased for the 30 day extension.

Thirdly, world unemployment figures are not increasing, they are decreasing, certainly in the USA and Europe.

Fourthly, the Baltic dry goods index is down, but shippers are confident of an increase and there are other reasons why the index is down.

http://www.ibtimes.com/low-baltic-dry-shipping-index-doesnt-necessarily-mean-deflation-1573304

You really need to get your facts straight before you post. The world economy is slowly improving which means increased international tourism.

[Christie Paul]

In the insurance forum you hear stories about how someone paid their premiums for years and when they finally have a big claim, it was denied for no reason. But you never get to hear the insurance company's side of the story.

The person above wrote about the horror story getting a 2-week visa for a film crew to work here in Thailand. There is no reason to doubt his story. But you only hear one side of the story. You don't hear the other side of the story and I will not speculate as to why the Thai government might comment differently on the case.

I stand corrected. It was our responsibility to properly estimate the time and costs for securing these temporary work permits. And we failed to do so. If placed in the same position again, we would simply need to add a few extra thousand dollars to the budget.

[JLCrab]

"If the film crew intends to stay for a period not exceeding 15 days, no work permit applications are necessary. "

http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/media-center/1720/25551-Rules-and-Regulations.html

As i remember it, your horror-story was for a two week shooting schedule.

Edited July 22, 2014 by JLCrab

[KarenBravo]

The ONLY way to judge economics is on numbers.

You mention the price of gold. It is well off it's highs of over US$1800 an ounce which was in 2011. so, that argument is moot.

Doesn't matter what arguments you put, the only question that is relevant to this subject, is "is global tourism increasing" and "is Thailand getting a percentage of it"?

Yes, it is, and yes they are.

Whether Joe Sixpack can now not afford a holiday to Thailand is irrelevant because for every Joe Sixpack and Joe Bloggs who can't afford it, there are ten Chinese, Russians, Indians, Brazilians that can.

Edited July 22, 2014 by KarenBravo

[Kitsune]

I wonder if people whinging about Thai work permits ever needed to get a work permit elsewhere? If it so good elsewhere should we introduce labour market testing where national adverts have to be run for weeks on end to show no local can do the job like in the UK? Should we place a cap on the number or work permits issued per year, like the US H1b visa? How about recognised qualification testing, like they do in Australia (long, slow and expensive).

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I have had work permits in Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei, Angola, Saudi, Kuwait, Egypt, Nigeria, India Ivory Coast and Thailand - the worst place is Angola followed by Thailand then India took our HR department months.

To be fair I had little to do apart from appear at immigration for a minute - but the complete process took 4 months. Angola takes 6 +

4 months? It's getting worse.

Here is the real issue.

If it was not so difficult long and expensive to get, there would be less abuse of other visas.

You may well be correct, I do not know how much the incompetent HR staff in our Bangkok office had to do with it. I have to say every single person I have dealt with here in immigration have been very professional and helpful. I also confess to having little contact but it has all been good.

I actually think the visa policies here are okay and will actually be clear and fair after Mothers day, I have no problem with complying with the rules - seems fair to me. If I work elsewhere next year I will just get a retirement visa for Thailand as I have passed the big 50 now.

Its not so much the farang employee who have problem with working visa.

It's all these companies that refuse to go through the all shabang and gamble lot of time and admin staff to get one employee.

Especially for small businesses, you need to have someone like a secretary on the case for four months, plus the visa cost, it's just not possible.

Many schools even international schools employ temporary supplement teachers without visas, it's just too complicated.

[Christie Paul]

"If the film crew intends to stay for a period not exceeding 15 days, no work permit applications are necessary. "

http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/media-center/1720/25551-Rules-and-Regulations.html

As i remember it, your horror-story was for a two week shooting schedule.

I don't remember if it was actual "work permits" per se, that where required. What I do remember was that organising the documentation so that the foreign camera operators, a director, talent and others, could legally perform in the country was truly epic. We retained a lawyer and two full time staff to manage this.

I did take a look at the link you kindly posted and it sent a cold shiver down my spine.

[JLCrab]

"If the film crew intends to stay for a period not exceeding 15 days, no work permit applications are necessary. "

http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/media-center/1720/25551-Rules-and-Regulations.html

As i remember it, your horror-story was for a two week shooting schedule.

I don't remember if it was actual "work permits" per se, that where required. What I do remember was that organising the documentation so that the foreign camera operators, a director, talent and others, could legally perform in the country was truly epic. We retained a lawyer and two full time staff to manage this.

I did take a look at the link you kindly posted and it sent a cold shiver down my spine.

It may be the kind of thing that, if you do it once, the succeeding times are easier but -- I would agree -- upon first look at that criteria I would say ' So how would a shoot go in Vanuatu?'

[Christie Paul]

The ONLY way to judge economics is on numbers.

You mention the price of gold. It is well off it's highs of over US$1800 an ounce which was in 2011. so, that argument is moot.

Doesn't matter what arguments you put, the only question that is relevant to this subject, is "is global tourism increasing" and "is Thailand getting a percentage of it"?

Yes, it is, and yes they are.

Whether Joe Sixpack can now not afford a holiday to Thailand is irrelevant because for every Joe Sixpack and Joe Bloggs who can't afford it, there are ten Chinese, Russians, Indians, Brazilians that can.

You are right, economics can only be measured by numbers, but they are not to be judged, merely to be understood. And this why one might do well to try and understand adjustments for inflation, value of money, velocity and numerous comparative ratios. I struggle with these these issues, as do many.

I'm not sure that I'd call the doubling of the price of gold in seven years a moot point.

And doubtless Thailand is certainly getting a share of tourism. But is it maintaining its economic value? Is it increasing or decreasing. I don't really know. Arrivals (which I am led to believe, are now below expectations) are only a partial indicator. The spend per capita also has to be factored in. For dull people like me, its a bit of mathematical quagmire.

I find the whole thing immensely puzzling and for some reason of great interest - particularly given Thailand's rather abrupt shift in policy, or at least its implementation. I am unsure if their current approach will yield a positive, negative or a neutral result.

At this time, I'm thinking it won't yield a positive result. But my opinion, based on past performance, would be safe one to bet against.

[KarenBravo]

The ONLY way to judge economics is on numbers.

You mention the price of gold. It is well off it's highs of over US$1800 an ounce which was in 2011. so, that argument is moot.

Doesn't matter what arguments you put, the only question that is relevant to this subject, is "is global tourism increasing" and "is Thailand getting a percentage of it"?

Yes, it is, and yes they are.

Whether Joe Sixpack can now not afford a holiday to Thailand is irrelevant because for every Joe Sixpack and Joe Bloggs who can't afford it, there are ten Chinese, Russians, Indians, Brazilians that can.

You are right, economics can only be measured by numbers, but they are not to be judged, merely to be understood. And this why one might do well to try and understand adjustments for inflation, value of money, velocity and numerous comparative ratios. I struggle with these these issues, as do many.

I'm not sure that I'd call the doubling of the price of gold in seven years a moot point.

And doubtless Thailand is certainly getting a share of tourism. But is it maintaining its economic value? Is it increasing or decreasing. I don't really know. Arrivals (which I am led to believe, are now below expectations) are only a partial indicator. The spend per capita also has to be factored in. For dull people like me, its a bit of mathematical quagmire.

I find the whole thing immensely puzzling and for some reason of great interest - particularly given Thailand's rather abrupt shift in policy, or at least its implementation. I am unsure if their current approach will yield a positive, negative or a neutral result.

At this time, I'm thinking it won't yield a positive result. But my opinion, based on past performance, would be safe one to bet against.

Seems to me, your post can be summarized into the following words:-

"I don't know".

There really has been too much scaremongering on this site over what is economically speaking, an insignificant matter (for Thailand as a whole). Enforcement of visa regulations.

[Christie Paul]

The ONLY way to judge economics is on numbers.

You mention the price of gold. It is well off it's highs of over US$1800 an ounce which was in 2011. so, that argument is moot.

Doesn't matter what arguments you put, the only question that is relevant to this subject, is "is global tourism increasing" and "is Thailand getting a percentage of it"?

Yes, it is, and yes they are.

Whether Joe Sixpack can now not afford a holiday to Thailand is irrelevant because for every Joe Sixpack and Joe Bloggs who can't afford it, there are ten Chinese, Russians, Indians, Brazilians that can.

You are right, economics can only be measured by numbers, but they are not to be judged, merely to be understood. And this why one might do well to try and understand adjustments for inflation, value of money, velocity and numerous comparative ratios. I struggle with these these issues, as do many.

I'm not sure that I'd call the doubling of the price of gold in seven years a moot point.

And doubtless Thailand is certainly getting a share of tourism. But is it maintaining its economic value? Is it increasing or decreasing. I don't really know. Arrivals (which I am led to believe, are now below expectations) are only a partial indicator. The spend per capita also has to be factored in. For dull people like me, its a bit of mathematical quagmire.

I find the whole thing immensely puzzling and for some reason of great interest - particularly given Thailand's rather abrupt shift in policy, or at least its implementation. I am unsure if their current approach will yield a positive, negative or a neutral result.

At this time, I'm thinking it won't yield a positive result. But my opinion, based on past performance, would be safe one to bet against.

Seems to me, your post can be summarized into the following words:-

"I don't know".

There really has been too much scaremongering on this site over what is economically speaking, an insignificant matter (for Thailand as a whole). Enforcement of visa regulations.

You distill my remarks very harshly, but thankfully bring to mind a quote from one of my favourites philosophers, good old Ebbinghaus.

"Ideas which have been developed simultaneously or in immediate succession in the same mind mutually reproduce each other, and do this with greater ease in the direction of the original succession and with a certainty proportional to the frequency with which they were together."

And for this I am grateful.

[Christie Paul]

The demise of Thailand's foreign film industry: With a government commission to provide direction, Thailand hosted 53 international film productions in 2012, a 45% increase over 2011 and an absolute record for the country.

http://www.boi.go.th/tir/issue/201401_24_1/42.htm

I won't dispute the numbers.

Still down from 2008 and that's without any adjustment for inflation.

Tanked in 2009 but recovering.

Just a few very large scale productions can change the numbers dramatically.

But for small production outfits, the local talent pool and the essential creative environment, which plays a significant role in making Thailand a "destination" for film production, the industry, as the numbers you have supplied would indicate, that it oscillated between progress and stagnation.

One cannot blame the success or the failure of an industry on any one thing. Thailand has some huge advantages going for it. Its bureaucracy and legalise are just not one of them.

[JLCrab]

302 foreign-based advertising film projects were able to wend their way through the bureaucracy in 2013. But the way you always describe things, the problem is with them. It would be interesting to hear what they would have to say as to why your production ran into such problems.

Edited July 22, 2014 by JLCrab

[Christie Paul]

302 advertising film projects were able to wend their way through the bureaucracy in 2013. But the way you always describe things, the problem is with them. It would be interesting to hear what they would have to say as to why your production ran into such problems.

I can't comment on the experience of others.

On the whole, our production was a success.

My point is that the bureaucratic hurdles are immense and that this discourages a good deal of small scale international talent. Something which I think that cultivating, instead of burying in red tape, would be of benefit to all concerned.

It does occur to me, that there is a view in which any criticism or questioning of the way things are done, is seen as being disloyal. And to prove one's loyalty, one must come down on anyone who points out areas in which perhaps improvements could be made.

You yourself posted the link outlining the regulations for film makers. Guidelines that only connoisseurs of bureaucracy could fully appreciate. Then you posted some financials, which clearly demonstrate that the industry is stagnating.

Do you think the two might be linked?

[LivinLOS]

It does occur to me, that there is a view in which any criticism or questioning of the way things are done, is seen as being disloyal. And to prove one's loyalty, one must come down on anyone who points out areas in which perhaps improvements could be made.

A very good observation..

[Christie Paul]

It does occur to me, that there is a view in which any criticism or questioning of the way things are done, is seen as being disloyal. And to prove one's loyalty, one must come down on anyone who points out areas in which perhaps improvements could be made.

A very good observation..

I know little but I know for sure that the topic of this thread is, "No more Thai visa runs: Immigration will not let visa runners return after Aug 12"

I'm assuming you don't mind me questioning the way you do things, so when did this thread's topic change to what you all are talking about? And what is the topic you are discussing now?

I hope you don't mind me pointing out an area in which perhaps improvements could be made.

I don't mind at all.

It started off with me having some reservations around the wisdom of making it generally more difficult to be in Thailand for extended periods - particularly given the state of the world economy.

There was some discussion/posts around the world economy, including some differing views and how it affects tourism. I cited some examples of how bureaucracy chokes potential. And this was confirmed with data that another person posted.

How does all this relate to "no more visa runs"?

On and off for over ten years, I made back to back visa runs. Now I'm now more settled with much more convenient arrangements. But I'm of the view that tightening regulations around people being in Thailand, at this point in time in particular, looks to me, to be an error. What concerns me even more is what is behind this so called "crackdown". Is it the thin edge of the wedge? Would this be the time to start a business, buy property or otherwise invest here? I and am sure, many others am now inclined to hesitate.

I apologise, if I've caused this thread to meander off topic. But at least to me, to get a balanced view, many separate and seemingly "off topic" posts may contribute to a better understanding.

I have noticed in the past, that when you disagree with some people, you are more likely to be cited for being off topic. In one instance, my remarks where firmly rebutted by a certain poster, who ended his tirade, with my post accused of being off topic. But only after he responded to it.

[JLCrab]

All I remember was the comment 'Never again'. Maybe Thailand has decided that the small scale independent talent is more trouble than what it is worth. You know the 80/20 rule that you spend 20% of your time on 80% of your work and then 80% of your time on 20% of your work.

I've read your posts how you and your friends think the effort is stay in Thailand is more trouble than it is worth. Maybe you are right. But maybe while the big projects and companies hire people with experience maneuvering the Thai bureaucracy, all you want to do is tell them: That's not how they do it in the Philippines or Hong Kong

Edited July 22, 2014 by JLCrab

[thailiketoo]

I know little but I know for sure that the topic of this thread is, "No more Thai visa runs: Immigration will not let visa runners return after Aug 12"

I'm assuming you don't mind me questioning the way you do things, so when did this thread's topic change to what you all are talking about? And what is the topic you are discussing now?

I hope you don't mind me pointing out an area in which perhaps improvements could be made.

I don't mind at all.

It started off with me having some reservations around the wisdom of making it generally more difficult to be in Thailand for extended periods - particularly given the state of the world economy.

There was some discussion/posts around the world economy, including some differing views and how it affects tourism. I cited some examples of how bureaucracy chokes potential. And this was confirmed with data that another person posted.

How does all this relate to "no more visa runs"?

On and off for over ten years, I made back to back visa runs. Now I'm now more settled with much more convenient arrangements. But I'm of the view that tightening regulations around people being in Thailand, at this point in time in particular, looks to me, to be an error. What concerns me even more is what is behind this so called "crackdown". Is it the thin edge of the wedge? Would this be the time to start a business, buy property or otherwise invest here? I and am sure, many others am now inclined to hesitate.

I apologise, if I've caused this thread to meander off topic. But at least to me, to get a balanced view, many separate and seemingly "off topic" posts may contribute to a better understanding.

I have noticed in the past, that when you disagree with some people, you are more likely to be cited for being off topic. In one instance, my remarks where firmly rebutted by a certain poster, who ended his tirade, with my post accused of being off topic. But only after he responded to it.

How much money do visa runners bring into Thailand yearly? Don't forget the new money effect x10 as opposed to money earned in Thailand.

See, the reason I ask is I think the media (in this case TV) has become the message and that the powers in Thailand intently read Thai Visa daily for a source of new policy ideas.

[Christie Paul]

All I remember was the comment 'Never again'. Maybe Thailand has decided that the small scale independent talent is more trouble than what it is worth. You know the 80/20 rule that you spend 20% of your time on 80% of your work and then 80% of your time on 20% of your work.

I've read your posts how you and your friends think the effort is stay in Thailand is more trouble than it is worth. Maybe you are right. But maybe while the big projects and companies hire people with experience maneuvering the Thai bureaucracy, all you want to do is tell them: That's not how they do it in the Philippines or Hong Kong

You cite Pareto's law of income distribution - a superb calculus - and one which authorities (from every country) would do well to consider, when making profound changes to policy, particular those which have up until now, served them very well.

[JLCrab]

All I remember was the comment 'Never again'. Maybe Thailand has decided that the small scale independent talent is more trouble than what it is worth. You know the 80/20 rule that you spend 20% of your time on 80% of your work and then 80% of your time on 20% of your work.

I've read your posts how you and your friends think the effort is stay in Thailand is more trouble than it is worth. Maybe you are right. But maybe while the big projects and companies hire people with experience maneuvering the Thai bureaucracy, all you want to do is tell them: That's not how they do it in the Philippines or Hong Kong

You cite Pareto's law of income distribution - a superb calculus - and one which authorities (from every country) would do well to consider, when making profound changes to policy, particular those which have up until now, served them very well.

What I cite is the Crab's law that some people can become a bigger pain-in-the-ass than they are worth and it stems from dealing with current international diplomacy in which I spend the bulk of my time.

... or as I put it once, things might move faster in multi-lateral diplomatic venues if decorum allowed one to say: The proposal from the esteemed delegate from Member State XYZ really sucks.

[Christie Paul]

I know little but I know for sure that the topic of this thread is, "No more Thai visa runs: Immigration will not let visa runners return after Aug 12"

I'm assuming you don't mind me questioning the way you do things, so when did this thread's topic change to what you all are talking about? And what is the topic you are discussing now?

I hope you don't mind me pointing out an area in which perhaps improvements could be made.

I don't mind at all.

It started off with me having some reservations around the wisdom of making it generally more difficult to be in Thailand for extended periods - particularly given the state of the world economy.

There was some discussion/posts around the world economy, including some differing views and how it affects tourism. I cited some examples of how bureaucracy chokes potential. And this was confirmed with data that another person posted.

How does all this relate to "no more visa runs"?

On and off for over ten years, I made back to back visa runs. Now I'm now more settled with much more convenient arrangements. But I'm of the view that tightening regulations around people being in Thailand, at this point in time in particular, looks to me, to be an error. What concerns me even more is what is behind this so called "crackdown". Is it the thin edge of the wedge? Would this be the time to start a business, buy property or otherwise invest here? I and am sure, many others am now inclined to hesitate.

I apologise, if I've caused this thread to meander off topic. But at least to me, to get a balanced view, many separate and seemingly "off topic" posts may contribute to a better understanding.

I have noticed in the past, that when you disagree with some people, you are more likely to be cited for being off topic. In one instance, my remarks where firmly rebutted by a certain poster, who ended his tirade, with my post accused of being off topic. But only after he responded to it.

How much money do visa runners bring into Thailand yearly? Don't forget the new money effect x10 as opposed to money earned in Thailand.

See, the reason I ask is I think the media (in this case TV) has become the message and that the powers in Thailand intently read Thai Visa daily for a source of new policy ideas.

I think its nearly impossible to estimate how much wealth, direct and indirect, has been generated by the up until now favourable (some would say lax) immigration regulations, which have served to make Thailand a preferred destination for so many diverse people.

The architects of immigration policy to date have if anything played a significant role in securing Thailand's lead in the area of tourism and economic growth.

Closely examining the actual reasons for its great success, should be very well understood, before making profound changes.

[JLCrab]

While many long-term stayers in Thailand may have an impact on providing a diverse culture, since the average stay for all visitors in Thailand (2012 data) is 10 days and those from Europe and USA 16 and 15 days respectively, I don't see how those taking advantage of the favorable / lax immigration policies up until now could have an large impact on the overall economy.

[takkatan in the land]

are you not afraid that one day an other crackdown can affect you?after all many illegal workers live in thailand with an ED vISA

I am not on ED visa anymore, i was for 3 years where i did start to get nervous, because after 3 years on ED visa is where this could give issues extending it.

Reason why i did when i suggested, recommend not to skip classes (which is 4 hours per week i think), is that you might have an immigration officer check up on you, or interview you at your 90 reporting at immigration office, to see if you can speak the language after studying it for a while.

But of course i am afraid that some kind of crackdown will make it difficult for me to stay here, because i got responsibilities here. And it is a shame that some people abusing the system is making it difficult for people who are not here on tourist visa and working.

it's very easy go to class and learn the language if you want to live here, I can not imagine myself living in a country without know the language

[takkatan in the land]

While many long-term stayers in Thailand may have an impact on providing a diverse culture, since the average stay for all visitors in Thailand (2012 data) is 10 days and those from Europe and USA 16 and 15 days respectively, I don't see how those taking advantage of the favorable / lax immigration policies up until now could have an large impact on the overall economomy.

many thais don't want diverse culture and dislike foreigners especially the richest ones, they accept us as a way of income but they would prefer being poorest but with no foreigners

[bitcoinman]

As you know the army is now enforcing the laws. I think it s time to get some orders in this country since the" departure" of their first minister . Example :they asked all minibus operators to register their business within 2 months.

Edited July 22, 2014 by bitcoinman

[Christie Paul]

While many long-term stayers in Thailand may have an impact on providing a diverse culture, since the average stay for all visitors in Thailand (2012 data) is 10 days and those from Europe and USA 16 and 15 days respectively, I don't see how those taking advantage of the favorable / lax immigration policies up until now could have an large impact on the overall economy.

With around 26 million visitors a year - several hundred thousand people could easily be staying here, semi-permanently on tourist visas without affecting the 10, day and 15 day averages very much.

But these several hundred thousand or even just say 50,000 (really not sure of the number) rent apartments, consume everything, probably at the rate anywhere between 500 and 3000 baht a day. A percentage buy property, invest, do business and generally add value. Some might come with a few thousand dollars only - they'd be lucky to survive - others bring in several hundred thousand dollars over time.

For arguments sake let's say there's 50,000 at any one time on extended tourist visa arrangements - and they spend on average 1500 baht a day. That's 75 million Baht a day - around 2.3 million dollars a day. In the total scheme of things its not much. But lets not forget big ticket purchases and investment - numbers could easily multiply. By the way, my numbers could be completely wrong.

Does anyone know how many long term tourist visa folks are here at any one time?

[Christie Paul]

While many long-term stayers in Thailand may have an impact on providing a diverse culture, since the average stay for all visitors in Thailand (2012 data) is 10 days and those from Europe and USA 16 and 15 days respectively, I don't see how those taking advantage of the favorable / lax immigration policies up until now could have an large impact on the overall economomy.

many thais don't want diverse culture and dislike foreigners especially the richest ones, they accept us as a way of income but they would prefer being poorest but with no foreigners

There's a bit of prejudice. But in comparison to many countries....even comparatively sophisticated ones, they could be a lot worse.

[beautifulthailand99]

While many long-term stayers in Thailand may have an impact on providing a diverse culture, since the average stay for all visitors in Thailand (2012 data) is 10 days and those from Europe and USA 16 and 15 days respectively, I don't see how those taking advantage of the favorable / lax immigration policies up until now could have an large impact on the overall economy.

With around 26 million visitors a year - several hundred thousand people could easily be staying here, semi-permanently on tourist visas without affecting the 10, day and 15 day averages very much.

But these several hundred thousand or even just say 50,000 (really not sure of the number) rent apartments, consume everything, probably at the rate anywhere between 500 and 3000 baht a day. A percentage buy property, invest, do business and generally add value. Some might come with a few thousand dollars only - they'd be lucky to survive - others bring in several hundred thousand dollars over time.

For arguments sake let's say there's 50,000 at any one time on extended tourist visa arrangements - and they spend on average 1500 baht a day. That's 75 million Baht a day - around 2.3 million dollars a day. In the total scheme of things its not much. But lets not forget big ticket purchases and investment - numbers could easily multiply. By the way, my numbers could be completely wrong.

Does anyone know how many long term tourist visa folks are here at any one time?

I ilke on the back of a fag packet calculations. Assuming your figures are in the right sort of ballpark there will be a local multiplier effect. The majority of these farangs will be concentrated in a small number of places . Bkk,Pattaya,Chiang Mai, Phuket etc - so lets spread your $15 million dollars a week around 10 locations so there could be a drop in spending of around $1 to 1.5 million dollars a week if all these visa runners don't manage to get legal and leave the country permanently. That's not huge in the scheme of things.

[The Man Who Sold the World]

In the evolution of this crackdown the Thai Administration has always stated that the purpose was to legitimatize the foreign residents visits. The unspoken reason is to stop the practice of foreigners (and businesses) using tourism as the means to avoid paying income taxes, business taxes and fees to the government.

Along with the increased “strictness” or scrutiny of a foreigners visit to Thailand we should expect a lessening of the bureaucratic hoops a business need to comply with to provide a foreigner with a work permit. Simplify the process of getting a work permit and the businesses employing foreigner workers will comply.

Only time will tell. This scrutiny may well pass completely. It will certainly be modified as the ramifications become apparent.

[RTH10260]

/* snip */

I'm sure they have employed skilled economic planners, who have modelled the projected permutations of immigration policy. That they have calculated and thought through their plans with great care. Because they know, when you slam the door in a persons face, when you make their life more difficult, when you change the rules constantly, when you cause them financial loss and treat them with contempt - you kind of lose their loyalty exponentially. A difficult position to recover from - a renewed charm offensive, might not be enough.

You may be correct about what economistd may have modelled, but now get politicians to understand the implications and implement the simpler change of rules within existing laws, as TH obvioudly takes long to adapt new laws. And currently TH is left without the body to implement laws.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app