Camerata's Guide To The Permanent Residence Process

[Lacrimas]

3 hours ago, cocoonclub said:

Re-entry permit question: 

Can someone confirm that the re-entry permit/endorsement is only required when leaving the country after having received PR? Ie., someone who applied for PR in the last round, had his interview and who currently is still waiting would not need a re-entry permit when leaving the country. 
 

is this correct?

AFAIK you always need a re-entry permit otherwise your PR will be cancelled 

[cocoonclub]

12 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

You would need a re-entry permit to keep you current permit to stay valid when you enter the country.

 

8 hours ago, Lacrimas said:

AFAIK you always need a re-entry permit otherwise your PR will be cancelled 

To avoid misunderstandings: I do not have PR. I am on a normal B visa for my work permit that get's extended/renewed every year. For this B visa I never needed a re-entry permit but could leave and re-enter the country as I like (unless the big stamp that I get into my passport every year is in fact a re-entry permit--what I mean is that I don't have to get a separate re-entry permit every time before I leave the country).

 

I want to know whether my PR application (which is still under consideration) changes any of this? Or whether I can just continue to leave the country as I used to before I submitted my PR application.

Edited September 5, 2022 by cocoonclub

[ubonjoe]

5 hours ago, cocoonclub said:

To avoid misunderstandings: I do not have PR. I am on a normal B visa for my work permit that get's extended/renewed every year. For this B visa I never needed a re-entry permit but could leave and re-enter the country as I like (unless the big stamp that I get into my passport every year is in fact a re-entry permit--what I mean is that I don't have to get a separate re-entry permit every time before I leave the country).

I think that big stamp is your re-entry permit and it is probably a multiple re-entry permit. If you did not have one your one year extension of stay (it is not a non-b visa) would end on the day you enter the country without it.

Applying  for PR does not eliminate the need for a re-entry permit.

[cocoonclub]

8 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

 

Applying  for PR does not eliminate the need for a re-entry permit.

That I know. I’m not worried about my B visa. My question was the other way round:

 

Will my PR application be cancelled/affected if I don’t get that “endorsement” (or anything else, whatever it may be) before leaving the country? 
 

The reason for my question: I read that when you have PR, you need to get some special endorsement or re-entry permit everytime before you leave the country, otherwise the PR would get cancelled. So my question is: does this already start with submission of the application, or only once I have obtained PR? 

[ubonjoe]

29 minutes ago, cocoonclub said:

Will my PR application be cancelled/affected if I don’t get that “endorsement” (or anything else, whatever it may be) before leaving the country? 

You would not need a endorsement before leaving the country. That is only needed after you get PR.

You do need to keep your current stay in the country valid by using a re-entry permit when you enter the country to keep your application for PR valid.

[Naiyana]

Can a spouse of PR get non-O? Immigration told me yes, but I do not find any into in embassy websites. Since it is rare, I wonder if any embassies would be willing to process it. Or is it possible to apply for Non-O for the spouse in Thailand?

Thank you.

[ubonjoe]

32 minutes ago, Naiyana said:

Can a spouse of PR get non-O? Immigration told me yes, but I do not find any into in embassy websites. Since it is rare, I wonder if any embassies would be willing to process it. Or is it possible to apply for Non-O for the spouse in Thailand?

Thank you.

They can get a non-o visa and then one year extension of stay at immigration.

Requirements for the non-o visa is here. https://www.immigration.go.th/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/8.A-PERSON-WHO-HAVING-RESIDENCY-IN-THAILAND-NON-O.pdf

Embassies and official consulates will issue them but the wording can be a bit vague.

 

[brianinbangkok]

On 8/17/2022 at 4:57 PM, brianinbangkok said:

CW says at airport imm. to hand in all PR books, and PP and go to CW with a letter they will give you at airport, because I arrive back in TH after the date in re-entry before date.

 

Also is there a penalty for this or is it just cancelation of PR?

I thought just PR gone.

 

How did this go when you arrived late in Thailand due to Covid , did you also have to hand in all PR docs @airport. Seem strange as how will I show ID if asked by police once in TH ?

 

Just be clear, I do not need a PR, I work and live in Europe, but it would be nice too get PR back for when I retire.

Well a last update.

The immigration officer at S airport let me into TH based on an expired PR (date just before the covid waiver came into effect) however next day at CW : PR was canceled, there is no fast route to re-apply as I am not working and staying in TH, they took all books back and made me sign a document that PR is canceled and that I had handed books in. As I did get a Thai Tourist Visa abroad, they told me to go back to the airport, after they looked up the officer who CW said should have refused entry on the expired PR. CW contacted the officer and gave me her mobile nr.  So I went back to the airport and the officer at the airport changed entry in my passporr to a Tourist Visa.

Ending 15 years of PR.

 

So PR's are not for life....

 

If you are in TH, married to a Thai and working here: skip the PR and go for a Thai Passport.

 

 

Edited September 20, 2022 by brianinbangkok

[onthemoon]

12 hours ago, brianinbangkok said:

Well a last update.

The immigration officer at S airport let me into TH based on an expired PR (date just before the covid waiver came into effect) however next day at CW : PR was canceled, there is no fast route to re-apply as I am not working and staying in TH, they took all books back and made me sign a document that PR is canceled and that I had handed books in. As I did get a Thai Tourist Visa abroad, they told me to go back to the airport, after they looked up the officer who CW said should have refused entry on the expired PR. CW contacted the officer and gave me her mobile nr.  So I went back to the airport and the officer at the airport changed entry in my passporr to a Tourist Visa.

Ending 15 years of PR.

 

So PR's are not for life....

 

If you are in TH, married to a Thai and working here: skip the PR and go for a Thai Passport.

 

 

Thanks for this report, proving that the "permanent" residency is not permanent. I feel for you.

[Arkady]

15 hours ago, brianinbangkok said:

Well a last update.

The immigration officer at S airport let me into TH based on an expired PR (date just before the covid waiver came into effect) however next day at CW : PR was canceled, there is no fast route to re-apply as I am not working and staying in TH, they took all books back and made me sign a document that PR is canceled and that I had handed books in. As I did get a Thai Tourist Visa abroad, they told me to go back to the airport, after they looked up the officer who CW said should have refused entry on the expired PR. CW contacted the officer and gave me her mobile nr.  So I went back to the airport and the officer at the airport changed entry in my passporr to a Tourist Visa.

Ending 15 years of PR.

 

So PR's are not for life....

 

If you are in TH, married to a Thai and working here: skip the PR and go for a Thai Passport.

 

 

My sympathies Brian.  Unfortunately the cancellation of PR for those who return with an expired re-entry visa is set in concrete in the Immigration Act.  Hence no flexibility on this without a cabinet resolution.  Yes, citizenship is a better option. Even it can be revoked after 5 years living abroad, this is rarely imposed and hasn't been for manyears. 

 

I guess they had their reasons for this which probably no one can remember today, since I believe it has been so since the original Immigration Act of 1927 or shortly thereafter. Similar to the provision for revocation of Thai citizenship for living abroad for 5 years, this must be to do with the large numbers of Chinese migrants who went back to China for lengthy periods for education or business. Without modern technology it would have been easy for those who didn't wish to return to Thailand to sell their Thai documents to another Chinese who wanted to immigrate.  PR was very useful to them because it gave them full residence rights without the obligation to military service or to pay the corve tax. Foreigners could own land more easily before the 1954 Land Code and restrictions on foreigners working and owning businesses only came in in the early 70s.

[onthemoon]

1 hour ago, Arkady said:

My sympathies Brian.  Unfortunately the cancellation of PR for those who return with an expired re-entry visa is set in concrete in the Immigration Act.  Hence no flexibility on this without a cabinet resolution.  Yes, citizenship is a better option. Even it can be revoked after 5 years living abroad, this is rarely imposed and hasn't been for manyears. 

 

I guess they had their reasons for this which probably no one can remember today, since I believe it has been so since the original Immigration Act of 1927 or shortly thereafter. Similar to the provision for revocation of Thai citizenship for living abroad for 5 years, this must be to do with the large numbers of Chinese migrants who went back to China for lengthy periods for education or business. Without modern technology it would have been easy for those who didn't wish to return to Thailand to sell their Thai documents to another Chinese who wanted to immigrate.  PR was very useful to them because it gave them full residence rights without the obligation to military service or to pay the corve tax. Foreigners could own land more easily before the 1954 Land Code and restrictions on foreigners working and owning businesses only came in in the early 70s.

Since not even the constitution is set in concrete, I don't think the Immigration Act is. The reason that we even need these visas and Endorsements (read: Re-Entry Permits) is probably the income for the government. What can we say to the Minister, why would it be of advantage for Thailand to do away with this requirement?

[jayboy]

This cancellation seems so very unfair since, as I understand it, Brian was unable to return to Thailand due to the pandemic and then missed out because he was a few days too late for the Covid waivers. Fortunately for the reasons set out by Brian it doesn't cause too much inconvenience in his case though it must be intensely annoying.

 

I'm wondering whether the highly unusual circumstances of this case make an appeal to the Ombudsman worthwhile, and yes I realize a cabinet resolution would be needed.

 

I'm not sure I buy the argument that citizenship would be 'safer'. Of course it is but the the unusual circumstances of Brian"s make a repeat occurrence highly unlikely.Losing PR would come through becoming an undesirable in the eyes of the Thai authorities or being ridiculously forgetful.

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

This cancellation seems so very unfair since, as I understand it, Brian was unable to return to Thailand due to the pandemic and then missed out because he was a few days too late for the Covid waivers. Fortunately for the reasons set out by Brian it doesn't cause too much inconvenience in his case though it must be intensely annoying.

 

I'm wondering whether the highly unusual circumstances of this case make an appeal to the Ombudsman worthwhile, and yes I realize a cabinet resolution would be needed.

 

I'm not sure I buy the argument that citizenship would be 'safer'. Of course it is but the the unusual circumstances of Brian"s make a repeat occurrence highly unlikely.Losing PR would come through becoming an undesirable in the eyes of the Thai authorities or being ridiculously forgetful.

As said, and remembering that to be able to apply for citizenship there's a need for several years of WPs etc., and on a WP at the date of application. 

 

I support the notion of appealing to the ombudsman. I'm also aware that (from the posts of folks more learned about PR) that the original legislation does not mention flexibility or the right, or avenues / processes of appeal and unfortunately this means an appeal in any form, is simply not  allowed. 

[Arkady]

2 hours ago, jayboy said:

This cancellation seems so very unfair since, as I understand it, Brian was unable to return to Thailand due to the pandemic and then missed out because he was a few days too late for the Covid waivers. Fortunately for the reasons set out by Brian it doesn't cause too much inconvenience in his case though it must be intensely annoying.

 

I'm wondering whether the highly unusual circumstances of this case make an appeal to the Ombudsman worthwhile, and yes I realize a cabinet resolution would be needed.

 

I'm not sure I buy the argument that citizenship would be 'safer'. Of course it is but the the unusual circumstances of Brian"s make a repeat occurrence highly unlikely.Losing PR would come through becoming an undesirable in the eyes of the Thai authorities or being ridiculously forgetful.

Yes, of course it was unfair and bad luck too. But nothing the low level cops at Immigration could do to avert it. I can't say, if it would be worth writing to the Ombudsman but clearly nothing to lose.

 

Why do they maintain these regulations about re-entry when they probably don't know why they were put there back in the mists of time anyway?  They just stick to the rules without thinking too much and yes, it does generate income and costs more than renewal of retirement and marriage extensions just to re-endorse a visa that has a high upfront cost and is supposed to be life. Once you have PR, you have to either pay up or not travel or get citizenship.

 

Is citizenship safer? Yes.

[jayboy]

26 minutes ago, Arkady said:

Yes, of course it was unfair and bad luck too. But nothing the low level cops at Immigration could do to avert it. I can't say, if it would be worth writing to the Ombudsman but clearly nothing to lose.

 

Why do they maintain these regulations about re-entry when they probably don't know why they were put there back in the mists of time anyway?  They just stick to the rules without thinking too much and yes, it does generate income and costs more than renewal of retirement and marriage extensions just to re-endorse a visa that has a high upfront cost and is supposed to be life. Once you have PR, you have to either pay up or not travel or get citizenship.

 

Is citizenship safer? Yes.

I'm beginning to change my mind on the merits of citizenship - up to now a sceptic for reasons I fully appreciate are weird.I still don't intend to apply for it - but probably would do if I was twenty years younger and in land purchasing mode..

 

But back to PR and your very on point comments, clearly the current system is ridiculously anachronistic but I can't see any change is likely soon.The trouble is that there is no PR constituency that has the energy/interest to lobby for change.No influential Thai politician is interested and even educated types usually have no idea the PR system exists.It's a matter of institutional sclerosis symbolized by the ancient - and in my case disintegrating - red Alien Book. I don't care about the expense involved and am grateful for the security provided.Best just leave it there.

 

 

[scorecard]

12 minutes ago, jayboy said:

I'm beginning to change my mind on the merits of citizenship - up to now a sceptic for reasons I fully appreciate are weird.I still don't intend to apply for it - but probably would do if I was twenty years younger and in land purchasing mode..

 

But back to PR and your very on point comments, clearly the current system is ridiculously anachronistic but I can't see any change is likely soon.The trouble is that there is no PR constituency that has the energy/interest to lobby for change.No influential Thai politician is interested and even educated types usually have no idea the PR system exists.It's a matter of institutional sclerosis symbolized by the ancient - and in my case disintegrating - red Alien Book. I don't care about the expense involved and am grateful for the security provided.Best just leave it there.

 

 

Well said. Quote: "No influential Thai politician is interested and even educated types usually have no idea the PR system exists".

 

Many years back I asked my then 19 year old Thai son to take the blue book for the family car to the Gov't office in Bkk and do the annual road tax renewal, and please transfer the ownership name from my name to your name.  Two seconds later he yelled 'my car'. I confirmed.

 

He took every document in existence with him, my passport, my PR book, family tabien baan book and all his docs.

 

His number was called, he went to the counter and encountered the dragon from hell.

 

He stated his purpose, dragon lady picked up my PR book and said 'i've never this book before, PR doesn't exist in Thailand, this is a fake book' and she made a motion of tearing up the book.

 

Son quickly snatched the PR book from her hand, quickly scoooped up the documents and fled. 

Edited September 21, 2022 by scorecard

[Arkady]

47 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Well said. Quote: "No influential Thai politician is interested and even educated types usually have no idea the PR system exists".

 

Many years back I asked my then 19 year old Thai son to take the blue book for the family car to the Gov't office in Bkk and do the annual road tax renewal, and please transfer the ownership name from my name to your name.  Two seconds later he yelled 'my car'. I confirmed.

 

He took every document in existence with him, my passport, my PR book, family tabien baan book and all his docs.

 

His number was called, he went to the counter and encountered the dragon from hell.

 

He stated his purpose, dragon lady picked up my PR book and said 'i've never this book before, PR doesn't exist in Thailand, this is a fake book' and she made a motion of tearing up the book.

 

Son quickly snatched the PR book from her hand, quickly scoooped up the documents and fled. 

Shocking but these things happen due to the ignorance of PR amongst officials. I got the fake red book treatment at the Phya Thai district office in Bangkok when I went there to register my marriage, an incident which somewhat spoiled what should have been a joyous occasion. The head of registrations first of all declared that there was no exemption from the freedom to marry affidavit for foreigners with PR.  When I argued with him he suddenly lost his rag and said my red book was fake because red books and ID numbers with 8 prefix were only given to Chinese foreigners. Muttering a few curses at the dolt we rushed to the Sathorn DO where they were all smiles and rushed to do the job before closing time.

 

Time was that there were thousands upon thousands of Chinese migrants with PR and everyone knew what a disintegrating red book was. Since PR was the only visa longer than three months and was easy to get, there must have been hundreds of farangs with red books too.  But then they made it hard to get and introduced a myriad of new visa choices. 

 

Personally I think PR makes a lot more sense than LTR visas, Elite cards and other nonsense they come up with from time to time. Because it is quite expensive it is already a potential money spinner, if they were to choose to broaden it out and they could charge more to the super wealthy who want to apply after one year or some such.  All they need to do is rejig the regulations a bit and get rid of the red books and blue/white books and replace them with a smart card.  They also need to let PRs  work without a WP in non-strategic industries, or at least restore the right to get a WP with no Thai staff, which used to be the case and which they are happy to give to LTRs who have a lesser claim to the privilege IMHO.  In spite of all of this PR is the one type of visa that has endured nearly 100 years already, while all other visa types come and go. 

[Misty]

4 hours ago, Arkady said:

Shocking but these things happen due to the ignorance of PR amongst officials. I got the fake red book treatment at the Phya Thai district office in Bangkok when I went there to register my marriage, an incident which somewhat spoiled what should have been a joyous occasion. The head of registrations first of all declared that there was no exemption from the freedom to marry affidavit for foreigners with PR.  When I argued with him he suddenly lost his rag and said my red book was fake because red books and ID numbers with 8 prefix were only given to Chinese foreigners. Muttering a few curses at the dolt we rushed to the Sathorn DO where they were all smiles and rushed to do the job before closing time.

 

Time was that there were thousands upon thousands of Chinese migrants with PR and everyone knew what a disintegrating red book was. Since PR was the only visa longer than three months and was easy to get, there must have been hundreds of farangs with red books too.  But then they made it hard to get and introduced a myriad of new visa choices. 

 

Personally I think PR makes a lot more sense than LTR visas, Elite cards and other nonsense they come up with from time to time. Because it is quite expensive it is already a potential money spinner, if they were to choose to broaden it out and they could charge more to the super wealthy who want to apply after one year or some such.  All they need to do is rejig the regulations a bit and get rid of the red books and blue/white books and replace them with a smart card.  They also need to let PRs  work without a WP in non-strategic industries, or at least restore the right to get a WP with no Thai staff, which used to be the case and which they are happy to give to LTRs who have a lesser claim to the privilege IMHO.  In spite of all of this PR is the one type of visa that has endured nearly 100 years already, while all other visa types come and go. 

Theoretically the PR should be a good program, but in practice it falls short of the mark. Many of the drawbacks Arkady mentions above make it so, as does the fact that the application process itself has become inherently corrupt in recent years. I qualified and put together a complete application only to have it refused, as we later found out because I didn't use an agent and didn't offer VIP fees.

 

That being the case, far from being nonsense the LTR program is a welcome new option. Run by the BoI, thus far the application process is straight forward and there's been nary a whisper of VIP fees. Frankly, the BoI has been a real pleasure to deal with in comparison.

[scorecard]

7 hours ago, Misty said:

Theoretically the PR should be a good program, but in practice it falls short of the mark. Many of the drawbacks Arkady mentions above make it so, as does the fact that the application process itself has become inherently corrupt in recent years. I qualified and put together a complete application only to have it refused, as we later found out because I didn't use an agent and didn't offer VIP fees.

 

That being the case, far from being nonsense the LTR program is a welcome new option. Run by the BoI, thus far the application process is straight forward and there's been nary a whisper of VIP fees. Frankly, the BoI has been a real pleasure to deal with in comparison.

QUOTE FROM ABOVE: "Many of the drawbacks Arkady mentions above make it so, as does the fact that the application process itself has become inherently corrupt in recent yers".

 

I got PR 25+ years ago, throughout the whole process myself or my agent never once hinted at paying a bribe and nobody from the immigration police office gave even the slightest hint re a bribe.

 

The process was well focused and pleasant, the 'interview' was conducted by one Immigration officer, a guy early/mid 40's, he spoke perfect English as did my agent. The interview was completed on the same day I lodged my application, it lasted about 1 hr, very pleasant / very focused, all in English (Imm. officer had completed high school and 2 degrees in Australia), not one word in Thai language. 

 

Things certainly change. Re the fees, when I applied/received PR all the fees were quite minimal (I forget exact amounts), this was quite a few years before the massive rise in the fee structure.   

[Dogmatix]

3 hours ago, scorecard said:

QUOTE FROM ABOVE: "Many of the drawbacks Arkady mentions above make it so, as does the fact that the application process itself has become inherently corrupt in recent yers".

 

I got PR 25+ years ago, throughout the whole process myself or my agent never once hinted at paying a bribe and nobody from the immigration police office gave even the slightest hint re a bribe.

 

The process was well focused and pleasant, the 'interview' was conducted by one Immigration officer, a guy early/mid 40's, he spoke perfect English as did my agent. The interview was completed on the same day I lodged my application, it lasted about 1 hr, very pleasant / very focused, all in English (Imm. officer had completed high school and 2 degrees in Australia), not one word in Thai language. 

 

Things certainly change. Re the fees, when I applied/received PR all the fees were quite minimal (I forget exact amounts), this was quite a few years before the massive rise in the fee structure.   

The Thai language requirement for PR was introduced by Thaksin’s first interior minister, the nasty and xenophobic Purachai. It is not in the Immigration Act. That is obviously off putting for many and may make it a less suitable alternative to LTR.

[Arkady]

On 9/21/2022 at 11:22 PM, Misty said:

Theoretically the PR should be a good program, but in practice it falls short of the mark. Many of the drawbacks Arkady mentions above make it so, as does the fact that the application process itself has become inherently corrupt in recent years. I qualified and put together a complete application only to have it refused, as we later found out because I didn't use an agent and didn't offer VIP fees.

 

That being the case, far from being nonsense the LTR program is a welcome new option. Run by the BoI, thus far the application process is straight forward and there's been nary a whisper of VIP fees. Frankly, the BoI has been a real pleasure to deal with in comparison.

I didn't realise the LTR visas were administered by the BOI. That is definitely a plus point compared to Immigration. When I was preparing to apply for PR there was an option to apply for PR through the BOI for which one of the requirements was to invest in special Bank of Thailand bonds. I made an appointment with the BOI to find out, if I would do better to apply to the BOI than to Immigration. I had already had a nasty experience with Immigration when they demanded B40k in "tax" when I went for my first locally issued NON-B visa. The tax assessment was made on the basis that they saw a number of entries to Thailand in my passport for a few days each in the preceding months and assumed I was working without any evidence.  They refused to issue the NON-B if I didn't pay.  I did get a receipt but it was just scrawled on a scrap of paper.  So I thought the BOI might be a better option, despite the need for the bonds and, strangely enough, an HIV test.  Immigration just demanded tests for leprosy, elephantiasis, alcoholism etc for PR as AIDS had not yet appeared on their radar.  

 

At the meeting with the BOI a couple of well education young Thais explained very politely that, despite being heavily promoted by the government, the BOI PR scheme was unfortunately non-functional because the Bank of Thailand had refused to issue the special bonds. (This is similar to what happened to the 1999 amendment to the Land Code allowing foreigners to buy a rai of land in exchange for a B40m investment - the special government bonds were never issued and the qualifying real estate funds were no longer issued by the time of the amendment.)  

 

It occurs to me that they could have easily set up another PR scheme with investment criteria  and no Thai language requirement to be administered by the BOI, as in the past, but make it functional.  But I guess the current thinking is that it is better to sell residence as a short term lease than a freehold.

 

[Misty]

1 hour ago, Arkady said:

I didn't realise the LTR visas were administered by the BOI. That is definitely a plus point compared to Immigration. When I was preparing to apply for PR there was an option to apply for PR through the BOI for which one of the requirements was to invest in special Bank of Thailand bonds. I made an appointment with the BOI to find out, if I would do better to apply to the BOI than to Immigration. I had already had a nasty experience with Immigration when they demanded B40k in "tax" when I went for my first locally issued NON-B visa. The tax assessment was made on the basis that they saw a number of entries to Thailand in my passport for a few days each in the preceding months and assumed I was working without any evidence.  They refused to issue the NON-B if I didn't pay.  I did get a receipt but it was just scrawled on a scrap of paper.  So I thought the BOI might be a better option, despite the need for the bonds and, strangely enough, an HIV test.  Immigration just demanded tests for leprosy, elephantiasis, alcoholism etc for PR as AIDS had not yet appeared on their radar.  

 

At the meeting with the BOI a couple of well education young Thais explained very politely that, despite being heavily promoted by the government, the BOI PR scheme was unfortunately non-functional because the Bank of Thailand had refused to issue the special bonds. (This is similar to what happened to the 1999 amendment to the Land Code allowing foreigners to buy a rai of land in exchange for a B40m investment - the special government bonds were never issued and the qualifying real estate funds were no longer issued by the time of the amendment.)  

 

It occurs to me that they could have easily set up another PR scheme with investment criteria  and no Thai language requirement to be administered by the BOI, as in the past, but make it functional.  But I guess the current thinking is that it is better to sell residence as a short term lease than a freehold.

 

Quote from above:  "It occurs to me that they could have easily set up another PR scheme with investment criteria  and no Thai language requirement to be administered by the BOI, as in the past, but make it functional.  But I guess the current thinking is that it is better to sell residence as a short term lease than a freehold."

 

It does seem like a PR scheme under the BoI would have been a good way to go. But hearing the background chatter about the difficulty in setting up the Long Term Residence (LTR) program, I’m not sure how easy the setting up would have been.  

   

It's clear the LTR is not perfect. However a 10 year visa/work permit, at a total cost of Bt50,000, isn’t really short-term. Several of the LTR options require no investment - just proof of income/assets - so it’s not exactly selling residence either.

 

There are other real benefits that come with LTR.  No “VIP service fees” is major, at least in my thinking. As a working small business owner, two five year work permits back-to-back is also major, and these without the outdated requirement of 4 Thai employees per LTR holder (in reality, small companies create Thai employment via outsourcing to Thai companies). LTR has no limit of 100 per year per country (or functionally fewer for many countries).  Details of other useful perk are on the BoI website.  

 

And while I’m not particularly attracted by the lack of a Thai language requirement, other applicants may appreciate this. 

 

All in all, I say kudos to whoever was involved in getting LTR up and running.  At this point I’ll take it over what was otherwise available.

 

 

[Dogmatix]

23 minutes ago, Misty said:

Quote from above:  "It occurs to me that they could have easily set up another PR scheme with investment criteria  and no Thai language requirement to be administered by the BOI, as in the past, but make it functional.  But I guess the current thinking is that it is better to sell residence as a short term lease than a freehold."

 

It does seem like a PR scheme under the BoI would have been a good way to go. But hearing the background chatter about the difficulty in setting up the Long Term Residence (LTR) program, I’m not sure how easy the setting up would have been.  

   

It's clear the LTR is not perfect. However a 10 year visa/work permit, at a total cost of Bt50,000, isn’t really short-term. Several of the LTR options require no investment - just proof of income/assets - so it’s not exactly selling residence either.

 

There are other real benefits that come with LTR.  No “VIP service fees” is major, at least in my thinking. As a working small business owner, two five year work permits back-to-back is also major, and these without the outdated requirement of 4 Thai employees per LTR holder (in reality, small companies create Thai employment via outsourcing to Thai companies). LTR has no limit of 100 per year per country (or functionally fewer for many countries).  Details of other useful perk are on the BoI website.  

 

And while I’m not particularly attracted by the lack of a Thai language requirement, other applicants may appreciate this. 

 

All in all, I say kudos to whoever was involved in getting LTR up and running.  At this point I’ll take it over what was otherwise available.

 

 

The guy who deserves the kudos for thinking up the LTR visa scheme is ML Chayotis, the investment banker who was CEO of JP Morgan Thailand and SCB Securities.  He is an advisor to the minister of energy and deputy PM, who is a former CEO of PTT.  Hence the connection.  He probably did a lot of pushing to coordinate with various agencies to get it done.  Obviously he realised it should not be given to Immigration police to handle the applications and that probably involved a fight with arguments about national security raised. Although most people in this thread are interested in PR, it is good to provide other options that may suit some people better.

 

The quota of 100 per nationality per annum for PR was introduced in the early 50s when they decided it was time to curb mass immigration from China due to fears of a communist fifth column. The fees were also raised four fold. To this day the quota has only consistently inconvenienced Chinese applicants, although India may have hit the ceiling a couple of times too. No other countries have ever hit the quota to my knowledge. 

 

One interesting question that comes up quite frequently now is, "Will LTR visa holders be eligible for PR and citizenship". Theoretically yes, if they are working and paying Thai taxes but the answer may not be that straightforward. Since there is no residence requirement for LTR,  there may be crossovers to PR and citizenship once LTR holders meet the residence requirements, if it is allowed. 

 

[scorecard]

40 minutes ago, Dogmatix said:

The guy who deserves the kudos for thinking up the LTR visa scheme is ML Chayotis, the investment banker who was CEO of JP Morgan Thailand and SCB Securities.  He is an advisor to the minister of energy and deputy PM, who is a former CEO of PTT.  Hence the connection.  He probably did a lot of pushing to coordinate with various agencies to get it done.  Obviously he realised it should not be given to Immigration police to handle the applications and that probably involved a fight with arguments about national security raised. Although most people in this thread are interested in PR, it is good to provide other options that may suit some people better.

 

The quota of 100 per nationality per annum for PR was introduced in the early 50s when they decided it was time to curb mass immigration from China due to fears of a communist fifth column. The fees were also raised four fold. To this day the quota has only consistently inconvenienced Chinese applicants, although India may have hit the ceiling a couple of times too. No other countries have ever hit the quota to my knowledge. 

 

One interesting question that comes up quite frequently now is, "Will LTR visa holders be eligible for PR and citizenship". Theoretically yes, if they are working and paying Thai taxes but the answer may not be that straightforward. Since there is no residence requirement for LTR,  there may be crossovers to PR and citizenship once LTR holders meet the residence requirements, if it is allowed. 

 

"No other countries have ever hit the quota to my knowledge."

 

I got PR 25+ years ago. When I got the approval letter I went to Soi Suan Plu (I don't remember why), In a casual conversation the Suan Plu Imm. officer mentioned for that year the total number of Australians approved for PR was 5 (incl. me), and not much higher for most western countries.  

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

On 9/21/2022 at 6:19 PM, jayboy said:

 

 

But back to PR and your very on point comments, clearly the current system is ridiculously anachronistic but I can't see any change is likely soon.The trouble is that there is no PR constituency that has the energy/interest to lobby for change.No influential Thai politician is interested and even educated types usually have no idea the PR system exists.It's a matter of institutional sclerosis symbolized by the ancient - and in my case disintegrating - red Alien Book. I don't care about the expense involved and am grateful for the security provided.Best just leave it there.

 

 

Yes, this is the crux of the problem.

 

I know for a fact that the foreign chambers of commerce have brought up the shortcomings of PR (need WP, need re-entry, re-entry only good for 12 months, etc.) to the Thai government a number of times along with suggestions for streamlining other issues involving immigration.  Despite platitudes and promises to look into it, nothing happens.

 

 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

16 minutes ago, scorecard said:

"No other countries have ever hit the quota to my knowledge."

 

I got PR 25+ years ago. When I got the approval letter I went to Soi Suan Plu (I don't remember why), In a casual conversation the Suan Plu Imm. officer mentioned for that year the total number of Australians approved for PR was 5 (incl. me), and not much higher for most western countries.  

I received PR probably close to the same year you did and heard similar when I asked the officer if the quota for Americans would be reached.

[onthemoon]

11 hours ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

Yes, this is the crux of the problem.

 

I know for a fact that the foreign chambers of commerce have brought up the shortcomings of PR (need WP, need re-entry, re-entry only good for 12 months, etc.) to the Thai government a number of times along with suggestions for streamlining other issues involving immigration.  Despite platitudes and promises to look into it, nothing happens.

Let's keep pushing.  I already mentioned to the Secretary of State of the Ministry of Industry when he proudly presented the LTR to one of the foreign chambers of commerce earlier this year that it's all fine and good, but why do PR holders need a work permit? Obviously, it is not really necessary as LTR holders - who are a lot less vetted than us - don't. He said that they never thought of that, because there are so few PR holders, so it's easy to forget.... He promised to bring it up in the next meeting with the minister. I am not holding my breath.

[Dogmatix]

12 hours ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

I received PR probably close to the same year you did and heard similar when I asked the officer if the quota for Americans would be reached.

I don't think Brits and Americans, the largest providers of farang applicants, have ever had more than about 40 applicants in a year.

[Arkady]

1 hour ago, onthemoon said:

Let's keep pushing.  I already mentioned to the Secretary of State of the Ministry of Industry when he proudly presented the LTR to one of the foreign chambers of commerce earlier this year that it's all fine and good, but why do PR holders need a work permit? Obviously, it is not really necessary as LTR holders - who are a lot less vetted than us - don't. He said that they never thought of that, because there are so few PR holders, so it's easy to forget.... He promised to bring it up in the next meeting with the minister. I am not holding my breath.

It is a good point. They have now demonstrated clearly that WPs are not regarded as absolutely essential.  When WPs were first introduced in the early 70s,  PRs who were working were given life time WPs as long as they remained in the same profession, as part of the transitional provisions of the first Working of Aliens Act.  It would seem reasonable now to reintroduce that.

 

Also the exemption from having 4 Thai staff was never applied to PRs until fairly recently.  I got WPs with zero Thai staff.  Then Immigration insisted that the Labour Ministry should close the loop and insist on 4 Thai staff, the same as they did. A Labour Ministry official seemed quite embarrassed about it when I enquired and pointed to some wording in the the second Working of Aliens Act that was scrapped by the junta, that rambled on about the need to protect jobs for Thai citizens but didn't mention PRs as justification. When I pointed out that PRs have been given life long visas and should be expected to allowed to work, he just shrugged. 

 

Since they have also demonstrated that 4 Thai employees are unnecessary and used to find them unnecessary for PRs, there should be pressure to reinstate this privilege for PRs.  If LTRs can convert to PR, they will have problems if the higher grade visa has less privilege.  Surely the people they want to apply for LTRs are also the very people they want to apply for PR.  What contradictory nonsense!

[scorecard]

12 minutes ago, Dogmatix said:

I don't think Brits and Americans, the largest providers of farang applicants, have ever had more than about 40 applicants in a year.

From a couple of discussions with the Imm. officers 25 years ago, over 90% of applicantions were rejected. Is it the same today?