Camerata's Guide To The Permanent Residence Process

[Morakot]

On 12/5/2021 at 9:27 AM, Arkady said:

Yes, copies of documents certified via the FCO's service are acceptable to Thai MoFA but still need to be further legalised by the Thai embassy in London as far as I know.  If you can get the copies certified by a solicitor or notary, it will be a lot quicker and you have more control over the process and much less loss of original document loss.  HMG is extremely careless about other people's documents. In addition to losing my birth certificate, they once lost the passports of an entire batch of applicants (hundreds of people) for indefinite leave to remain (PR) in the UK with no compensation or apology.  I think I saw something a service to get this done which used to include taking the documents to the Thai embassy but this can no longer be done as they only accept documents by mail.  The Thai embassy is also very good at losing documents. 

 

Immigration does allow you to submit certain documents after the deadline. This includes the more difficult to obtain ones like educational certificates and home country police clearance.

 

Thanks @Arkady for the heads up. I'm trying to avoid sending originals.

 

If I understand this correctly, the FCO does accept copies of UK degrees (for the purpose of legalising them) that are certified by an officer of the British Council. This would avoid having to use a solicitor or notary in the UK. I'm waiting to hear back from the BC in Bangkok whether they offer this service;  not all BC offices offer this. 

 

Apparently the legalisation on the Thai site of the FOC's document can be done by the Thai MFA's Department of Consular Affairs on CW in BKK.

[onthemoon]

8 hours ago, jayboy said:

He also inaccurately describes the multiple re-entry stamp as a "renewal" which it obviously isn't.

Semantics. If I don't have the yearly stamp, I'll lose the PR upon return. That's the point I'm making. Anyway, we are going in circles. All has been said.

 

I have another rant about the blue (or white) book, if you'd like to hear it... ????

 

8 hours ago, jayboy said:

I'm also not sure getting the necessary stamp represents a restriction on freedom of movement: it took me half an hour last time.

Good to hear that you live in the Immigration building and don't have travel time. It costs me at least half a day each time. As I said, I wouldn't mind so much if this is only about the fees, and I would be happy to do it online.

[DrJoy]

On 12/5/2021 at 4:17 PM, Arkady said:

In recent times I doubt it very much.  But going back to the origin of PR in the 1920s it was issued to Chinese immigrants coming off the boat, if they could prove they had a profession they could support themselves with.  There was no income tax at that time.

Whats the minimum salary for those married to Thai, for P.R ?

[blackprince]

On 12/4/2021 at 8:04 PM, EricTh said:

Are PR allowed to buy landed property (not condo) in his name in Thailand?

Yes they can buy land and the buildings on the land if their PR is based on investment. They can co-buy with a Thai citizen and both names appear on the chanote.

[Dogmatix]

21 hours ago, DrJoy said:

Whats the minimum salary for those married to Thai, for P.R ?

Others who applied recently probably have more up-to-date info but, as far as I know there is externally published guideline for minimum salaries for PR. However, they obviously have some undisclosed internal guidelines and historically we were given to belief at least 80k was required but 100k+ to be safe.   I have never heard of a lower salary hurdle for those married to Thais but, of course, the fees are discounted for those with a Thai spouse, if you are successful.  

[Arkady]

2 hours ago, blackprince said:

Yes they can buy land and the buildings on the land if their PR is based on investment. They can co-buy with a Thai citizen and both names appear on the chanote.

Nothing in the Land Code that provides for this, so I don't see how it could be done.  BOI promoted companies are allowed to own land needed for the business and for a residence for manager but the right expires when the BOI privileges expire or are cancelled for any reason. So not all that useful.  When the Land Code was promulgated in 1954 PR was the only visa longer than 3 months and was given to virtually everyone coming to work including Chinese coolies. So it wasn't considered a special status then and giving special land ownership rights to PRs in the Land Code would have been tantamount to saying just about all foreigners not on tourist visas can buy land. The Land Code has hardly ever been amended apart from the important early amendment to annul the provision preventing anyone from owning more than 50 rai of land with no exception whatsoever even based on rank.  A lot of important people were unhappy with this but it took a coup to amend it.  

[blackprince]

4 minutes ago, Arkady said:

Nothing in the Land Code that provides for this, so I don't see how it could be done.  BOI promoted companies are allowed to own land needed for the business and for a residence for manager but the right expires when the BOI privileges expire or are cancelled for any reason. So not all that useful.  When the Land Code was promulgated in 1954 PR was the only visa longer than 3 months and was given to virtually everyone coming to work including Chinese coolies. So it wasn't considered a special status then and giving special land ownership rights to PRs in the Land Code would have been tantamount to saying just about all foreigners not on tourist visas can buy land. The Land Code has hardly ever been amended apart from the important early amendment to annul the provision preventing anyone from owning more than 50 rai of land with no exception whatsoever even based on rank.  A lot of important people were unhappy with this but it took a coup to amend it.  

I am not talking about the Board of Investment or the Land Code 1954.

 

I note that very few if any posters here have PR based on investment, I couldn't find a single one when I checked,

[scorecard]

24 minutes ago, blackprince said:

I am not talking about the Board of Investment or the Land Code 1954.

 

I note that very few if any posters here have PR based on investment, I couldn't find a single one when I checked,

Not surprising; read Arkady's post 3 messages above, lines 3 and 4.

[blackprince]

16 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Not surprising; read Arkady's post 3 messages above, lines 3 and 4.

Yes I have read it, both before I made my post above, and after you asked me to read it again.

 

Again I note that very few if any posters here have PR based on investment, I couldn't find a single one when I checked.

 

 

[Arkady]

36 minutes ago, blackprince said:

Yes I have read it, both before I made my post above, and after you asked me to read it again.

 

Again I note that very few if any posters here have PR based on investment, I couldn't find a single one when I checked.

At least one person applied for PR under the investment category and reported that earlier in this thread. He said that, if he had to do it all again, he would apply under the regular business category.  He got no privileges but attracted a lot more scrutiny and had to submit far more documents. You still need a WP, so it is hard to see any advantage.

 

I am still confused as to how it could be possible for PRs who applied under the investment category to buy land either alone or jointly with a Thai citizen.  Can you cite the law or regulation that provides for this?

[blackprince]

1 minute ago, Arkady said:

At least one person applied for PR under the investment category and reported that earlier in this thread. He said that, if he had to do it all again, he would apply under the regular business category.  He got no privileges but attracted a lot more scrutiny and had to submit far more documents. You still need a WP, so it is hard to see any advantage.

 

I am still confused as to how it could be possible for PRs who applied under the investment category to buy land either alone or jointly with a Thai citizen.  Can you cite the law or regulation that provides for this?

Why would I want to cite a law? This isn't a trial.

 

I have answered Ericth's question. I'm sorry if it doesn't conform to your understanding.

 

Again I note that very few if any posters here have PR based on investment, I couldn't find a single one when I checked. But thanks for pointing out there was at least 1.

 

Given that the thread has been runnning for around 15 years I wouldn't say that the single example you refer to can be typical of anything except himself. No disrespect to him or you.

[Neeranam]

23 hours ago, DrJoy said:

Whats the minimum salary for those married to Thai, for P.R ?

Why would those married to Thai want PR instead of the cheaper, better, and easier Thai citizenship?

 

[Neeranam]

32 minutes ago, blackprince said:

Why would I want to cite a law? This isn't a trial

What you are saying is hard to believe.

 

[blackprince]

3 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

What you are saying is hard to believe.

 

I'm sure the person in question would not allow scans of the chanotes in question to be posted here, for fairly obvious reasons.

 

That person's lawyer might work out quite expensive for legal advice for those people here who demand to know what laws were applicable.

 

I'm sorry for your incredulity, but there we are. Have a nice evening.

[Dogmatix]

The applicable law relating to foreign ownership of land is the 1954 Land Code which has a detailed section on the rights of foreigners to buy land under the bilateral treaties that Thailand had with major Western countries, Japan and Indonesia at the time.  Since every one of those treaties was revoked by the mid 1970s, none of the original provisions for foreigners to buy land still applies. Foreign entities that bought land while the treaties were still in force were allowed to retain it. There used to be quite a few foreign entities owning land on this basis, including HSBC, Standard Chartered, East Asiatic Company and the British Embassy but nearly all have sold their land. The only one I know of today is the British Club in Silom Road.  

 

There is a clause added in 1999 that allows foreigners to buy a rai of residential land by permission of the minister under certain stringent conditions that had become impossible by the time the ministerial regulations pursuant to the amendment were issued because none of the qualifying investments were available any more. This redundant provision doesn't require PR.  Since there is no law that provides for PRs under the investment category to buy land in their own names, I don't believe this has been done.  If there were a law to this effect, I am that it would have attracted a fair bit of interest. 

[jayboy]

11 hours ago, blackprince said:

Why would I want to cite a law? This isn't a trial.

 

In answer to your own question,you would want to cite a law to persuade members of the forum - particularly those who are very familiar with PR - that you are not talking complete cobblers.There is no need to scan title deeds, merely identify the relevant part of Thai laws or regulations.

 

Like many with PR I looked into the investment approach but it soon became clear in consultation with my very experienced lawyer that it was sub-optimal and in practice almost never feasible.However if you are able to identify the relevant enabling regulations, I should be glad to seek my lawyer's opinion and share it with the forum.

 

However if you have no response or just a flippant dismissal, we can safely draw our own conclusions on the matter.

 

 

[blackprince]

34 minutes ago, jayboy said:

In answer to your own question,you would want to cite a law to persuade members of the forum - particularly those who are very familiar with PR - that you are not talking complete cobblers.There is no need to scan title deeds, merely identify the relevant part of Thai laws or regulations.

 

Like many with PR I looked into the investment approach but it soon became clear in consultation with my very experienced lawyer that it was sub-optimal and in practice almost never feasible.However if you are able to identify the relevant enabling regulations, I should be glad to seek my lawyer's opinion and share it with the forum.

 

However if you have no response or just a flippant dismissal, we can safely draw our own conclusions on the matter.

 

My question was what is known as a rhetorical question.

 

"particularly those who are very familiar with PR" yes there is a lot of knowledge here of the normal PR route, but zero of the investment route. As someone else mentioned earlier, to his knowledge only one poster had tried that route in the 15 years or so the thread has been running.

 

One of the big differences between the normal route and the investment route is that the investment route is obviously much more dependent upon personal and private confidential information, rather than the normal route which is based primarily on income/tax paid - usually by working as an employee of a large company.

 

Perhaps that's why none of the people who have obtained PR via the investment route post about their experience here.

 

PR was suggested by the authorities to the person I am referring after founding and operating for several years a valuable community service business here.

 

Your conclusions are your own affair, good day.

 

 

 

 

[jayboy]

13 minutes ago, blackprince said:

My question was what is known as a rhetorical question.

 

"particularly those who are very familiar with PR" yes there is a lot of knowledge here of the normal PR route, but zero of the investment route. As someone else mentioned earlier, to his knowledge only one poster had tried that route in the 15 years or so the thread has been running.

 

One of the big differences between the normal route and the investment route is that the investment route is obviously much more dependent upon personal and private confidential information, rather than the normal route which is based primarily on income/tax paid - usually by working as an employee of a large company.

 

Perhaps that's why none of the people who have obtained PR via the investment route post about their experience here.

 

PR was suggested by the authorities to the person I am referring after founding and operating for several years a valuable community service business here.

 

Your conclusions are your own affair, good day.

 

 

 

 

Many successful PR have considered the investment route and discarded it for reasons outlined several times.The issue however is not whether the investment route is feasible (for all I know it may have happened occasionally and it's certainly covered in the rules) but the property rights it is supposed to convey.These could not be granted at the whim of some government official but would need in a country like Thailand to be enshrined in law or some kind of statutory regulation.This seems not to be the case or at least there has been a failure to produce them.In the circumstances, though I'm happy to reconsider if convincing evidence is provided, we must I'm afraid conclude you are mistaken.

[marquess]

On 12/8/2021 at 5:31 PM, Dogmatix said:

Others who applied recently probably have more up-to-date info but, as far as I know there is externally published guideline for minimum salaries for PR. However, they obviously have some undisclosed internal guidelines and historically we were given to belief at least 80k was required but 100k+ to be safe.   I have never heard of a lower salary hurdle for those married to Thais but, of course, the fees are discounted for those with a Thai spouse, if you are successful.  

I was told on Wednesday that if married to a Thai then it is 30k and has to be steady the 3 years prior. My application was rejected because I had a few months where I did not meet this requirement.  After 21 years I think I have finally given up on this place (married for 20 years too)

[DrJoy]

23 hours ago, Neeranam said:

Why would those married to Thai want PR instead of the cheaper, better, and easier Thai citizenship?

 

Coz my friend is Japanese.

Japanese Govt. does not allow dual citizenship, thats why.

`Cheaper and easier` does not apply in his case.

[cocoonclub]

“I wish to apply for permanent residence in the Kingdom for the following reason(s)”

 

— what would you fill in there? Any dos/donts? It’s just three lines of space so I’m not sure what to put there other than that I intend to stay her long-term because of my career, relationship and liking it here. 

[DrJoy]

@ubonjoe There was an order from the Immigration department about the extension of re-entry for all PR holders, who were stuck abroad due to covid.

 

What was the last date? has it been extended?

[scorecard]

3 hours ago, DrJoy said:

@ubonjoe There was an order from the Immigration department about the extension of re-entry for all PR holders, who were stuck abroad due to covid.

 

What was the last date? has it been extended?

The original order on this subject (signed by the PM and the Interior minister) stated that foreigners holding PR could wait to return past the re-entry date in their passport and PR book, the order also mentioned that the Thai Immigration Bureau would eventually announce a final deadline date to return.

 

I've held PR for 24 years. Because of more complex health issues I was delaying my return. I was following this matter regularly, until recently, by asking Thai Immigration Division 1 (by e.mail) to confirm that the bureau had not made such announcement.

 

The most recent response I've had was on 21 Nov 2021, confirming that the Imm. Bureau had not yet made the deadline date announcement. In a couple of their responses to my mails there was mention that the deadline date was postponed indefinitely, but that could of course be countermanded at any time.

 

With a 'Thailand Pass' (TP) I returned to Thailand Suvarnabhumi, on the 9th of December 2021. As follows:

 

- I arrived at Suvarnabhumi, joined the queue for the final check of all the TP documents. All checked OK within a few minutes.

 

- Then to the Passport desk (Thai line). No other passengers present. The Imm. officer took my passport and PR white book and then quickly looked at me with concern and pointed to the re-entry stamp and said 'this has expired'.

 

- His buddy quickly looked at my docs and said in Thai and English 'this is all OK' and at the same time he was calling a snr. officer to come.

 

- Snr. guy, pleasant, arrived quickly, had a quick look and said to me in perfect English and also in Thai 'you can enter, there's no problem at all, I just need to get a code number' and at the same time he was on the phone. 

 

- Two seconds later he said 'I've got the number' and he quickly told his officer to use his 'Admitted' stamp and under the stamp he slowly dictated what to write. All done in 1 minute. 

 

- Officer returned the books to me and asked "where is your home in Thailand?" I responded Chiang Mai.

 

- A little later I sent my Thai son a smartphone photo of the two (identical) stamps and the hand written comments.  His translation was 'entered under xxxxx waiver'.

 

How long it will remain open I don't know of course. Easy enough to find the e.mail address of Thai Immigration DIvision 1. My e.mails to them all in English, they responded within a few days to my several mails. 

 

Hope that helps.

 

 

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

The original order on this subject (signed by the PM and the Interior minister) stated that foreigners holding PR could wait to return past the re-entry date in their passport and PR book, the order also mentioned that the Thai Immigration Bureau would eventually announce a final deadline date to return.

 

I've held PR for 24 years. Because of more complex health issues I was delaying my return. I was following this matter regularly, until recently, by asking Thai Immigration Division 1 (by e.mail) to confirm that the bureau had not made such announcement.

 

The most recent response I've had was on 21 Nov 2021, confirming that the Imm. Bureau had not yet made the deadline date announcement. In a couple of their responses to my mails there was mention that the deadline date was postponed indefinitely, but that could of course be countermanded at any time.

 

With a 'Thailand Pass' (TP) I returned to Thailand Suvarnabhumi, on the 9th of December 2021. As follows:

 

- I arrived at Suvarnabhumi, joined the queue for the final check of all the TP documents. All checked OK within a few minutes.

 

- Then to the Passport desk (Thai line). No other passengers present. The Imm. officer took my passport and PR white book and then quickly looked at me with concern and pointed to the re-entry stamp and said 'this has expired'.

 

- His buddy quickly looked at my docs and said in Thai and English 'this is all OK' and at the same time he was calling a snr. officer to come.

 

- Snr. guy, pleasant, arrived quickly, had a quick look and said to me in perfect English and also in Thai 'you can enter, there's no problem at all, I just need to get a code number' and at the same time he was on the phone. 

 

- Two seconds later he said 'I've got the number' and he quickly told his officer to use his 'Admitted' stamp and under the stamp he slowly dictated what to write. All done in 1 minute. 

 

- Officer returned the books to me and asked "where is your home in Thailand?" I responded Chiang Mai.

 

- A little later I sent my Thai son a smartphone photo of the two (identical) stamps and the hand written comments.  His translation was 'entered under xxxxx waiver'.

 

How long it will remain open I don't know of course. Easy enough to find the e.mail address of Thai Immigration DIvision 1. My e.mails to them all in English, they responded within a few days to my several mails. 

 

Hope that helps.

 

 

The e.mail address is:

 

[email protected]

[DrJoy]

What happens if a PR holder works without a Work Permit?

 

Anyone? Any clue?

[Dogmatix]

2 hours ago, DrJoy said:

What happens if a PR holder works without a Work Permit?

 

Anyone? Any clue?

The labour law doesn’t distinguish between PRs and run of the mill foreigners. So the same penalties would apply.

[scorecard]

11 hours ago, DrJoy said:

What happens if a PR holder works without a Work Permit?

 

Anyone? Any clue?

By the appropriate regulations PR holders still require/need a WP to work legally. 

 

What would happen if a PR holder is caught working without a WP I don't know and I've never seen any recorded case on this point. Maybe other members have.

 

As a PR holder personally I wouldn't do anything which might 'rock the boat' in terms of continuing to hold my PR status (now 24 years). But that's just my personal feeling. 

 

It's pretty well documented that gaining a criminal conviction (any country) automatically cancels PR. Whether proven guilty of working without a WP is classsified as a criminal conviction I don't know. 

 

 

[DrJoy]

10 hours ago, scorecard said:

By the appropriate regulations PR holders still require/need a WP to work legally. 

 

What would happen if a PR holder is caught working without a WP I don't know and I've never seen any recorded case on this point. Maybe other members have.

 

As a PR holder personally I wouldn't do anything which might 'rock the boat' in terms of continuing to hold my PR status (now 24 years). But that's just my personal feeling. 

 

It's pretty well documented that gaining a criminal conviction (any country) automatically cancels PR. Whether proven guilty of working without a WP is classsified as a criminal conviction I don't know. 

 

 

Almost all developed countries include work rights in their PR.

Its only the uber corrupt LOS that PR holders need Work Permit.

 

Actually there is no such thing as a PR in Thailand, its called `Non Quota Immigrant Visa` or `Residents Visa`

 

https://bangkok.immigration.go.th/en/non-quota-immigrant-visa/

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, DrJoy said:

Almost all developed countries include work rights in their PR.

Its only the uber corrupt LOS that PR holders need Work Permit.

 

Actually there is no such thing as a PR in Thailand, its called `Non Quota Immigrant Visa` or `Residents Visa`

 

https://bangkok.immigration.go.th/en/non-quota-immigrant-visa/

The webite you mentioned seems to have/use multiple terms on this item.

 

Perhaps the actual official words are 'Certificate of Residence'.

[thedemon]

22 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

The labour law doesn’t distinguish between PRs and run of the mill foreigners. So the same penalties would apply.

It is true that the labour laws do not distinguish between a PR and a non-immigrant however in 2018 violating those laws as an employee was largely decriminalised. Whereas previously the maximum penalty was 100K fine and 5 years imprisonment it is now a maximum of 50K fine and there is no imprisonment.

 

https://home.kpmg/th/en/home/insights/2018/08/tax-news-flash-issue-44.html

 

https://www.tilleke.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/IC-May-2018-Relaxation-of-Work-Permit-Requirements-in-Thailand.pdf

 

 

On the other hand section 37 (1), Chapter 4 of the 1979 Immigration Act says the following;

 

Section 37 : An alien having received a temporary entry permit into the Kingdom
must comply with the following :
1. Shall not engage in the occupation or temporary or employment
unless authorized by the Director General. or competent official deputized by the
Director General . If , in any case , there is a law concerning alien employment
provided hereafter , the granting of work privileges must comply with the law
concerned.

 

The maximum penalty listed in Section 75, Chapter 7 is;

 

Section 75 : Any alien, who fails to comply with the provisions of Section 37(1)
shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding 1 year or a fine not exceeding
10,000Baht or both.

 

Chapter 4 of the Immigration Act covers aliens granted temporary permission to remain (non-immigrants). Permanent residence is covered in Chapter 5 and makes no reference to employment at all.

 

Therefore I believe that a non-immigrant caught working without a work permit violates both the labour and immigration laws so can potentially be fined and sent to jail whereas a PR can only be fined.