"Back to Back" -- please define

[bangkoklasse]

Seems to me that the Government/Junta is focused on illegal workers and not the semantics of how many days stay or what manner of accommodation used constitutes a bona fide tourist.

 

To that end the only definitive litmus test is to 'follow the money', a de facto tourist will be funded wholly by income from out-with Thailand, an imitation teacher, timeshare scamster, bar renter, etc etc will subsist on monies from within Thailand. The practicalities of readily checking all would appear daunting but insufficient funds from outside the Kingdom would be far more realistic and just barometer than any arbitrary 'quick fix' days in/out maxima

 

 

 

 

. 

Yes, but they also like people to have non immigrant--12 month extension o stay or other long stay visas when they live/stay long time in Thailand

[bangkoklasse]

double post

 

 

 

 

 

. 

Edited August 7, 2014 by bangkoklasse

[Suradit69]

 

 

 

Since you are entering on a tourist visa you don't don't need to be concerned about the back to back thing. Immigration is only concerned about in/out visa exempt entries.

 

How long before they start on the "in/out" 60 day Tourist Visas from the Thai Embassies?  I think it's only a matter of time. 

 

There was a story recently about a dozen or so people with 60 day Tourist Visas being refused entry at the Malaysian boarder.

 

All the people that were turned back had passports full of in/out visa exempt entries. That was an anomaly at the Malaysian border only,

They may start questioning people that have several tourist visa entries but I don't expect they will be turning people back.

 

 

 

I disagree with you ubonjoe. 

 

I think the next logical step (yes - I know many things defy logic here) would then be to stop back to back 60 day Tourist Visas. 

 

If what you say is correct, all the visa crack down has done is push the users of the free 30 day visa exemption stamps onto the paid 60 day Tourist Visas from the various Thai Embassies. 

 

Sure, Thailand would be happy with the extra revenue, but it negates the whole purpose of the "visa crack down" - does it not?  The same people are still in the country, just paying a small amount of money for a 60 day Tourist Visa.

 

It's only a matter of time before the Thai Embassies start refusing to issue 60 day Tourist Visas because someone's passpart is already full of them, in the way they used to be full of 30 day visa exemption stamps, otherwise, the visa crach down has achieved nothing but raise some more revenue. 

 

That said, maybe that's all the visa crack down was disigned to do - push people from free, to pay. 

 

 

 

Contrary to what some people seem to think, the government of the day has other things on their plate beside  catering to or worrying about tourists.

 

They already have addressed or are in the process of addressing the most egregious problems. While the government is doing a good job of ignoring self-serving special interest groups, they still must be mindful of the totally legitimate interests of the tourist industry and all the derivative industries that pay taxes and employ a fair number of people, as will any successive civilian governments.

 

As always, and possibly more importantly going forward, assessing individual cases where it appears people are misusing the tourist visas will be the responsibility of immigrations officers and embassies/consulates issuing tourist visas. If someone is clearly using tourist visas to spend most of the year, year after year, in country, then there is no need for new laws to figure out he/she is not what most people would consider a tourist.

 

Aside from independently wealthy layabouts under 50 who are not married to a Thai, pretty much everyone who has a reasonable need/desire to stay in Thailand can do so. But once again, not everyone on the planet has some inalienable right to spend as much time as he wishes here.

 

Defining a tourist, like defining pornography, is an inexact exercise, but most reasonable people can still recognize one/it when they see one/it (emphasis on "reasonable," which I realize takes a fair number of TV regulars out of the equation).

Edited August 7, 2014 by Suradit69

[duanebigsby]

 

Since you are entering on a tourist visa you don't don't need to be concerned about the back to back thing. Immigration is only concerned about in/out visa exempt entries.

 

Thank you. Good to hear that tourists won't wind up dolphins amongst the TEFL tunas.  

 

Living here 9 months a year every year, not sure but some immigration officer might call you on it.

 

And the jab against English teachers?

 

There are enough a$$holes on this site taking the piss out of us already. Do you really want to be another one?

[duanebigsby]

We can debate what the meaning of "tourist" or "resident" is all day long on this site.

 

Bottom line is some immigration officer will decide for himself.

 

I wouldn't want to be someone who "lives here" for 9 months a year and takes periodic trips outside Thailand, considering myself a "tourist" any more.

 

Someone may call you on it.

 

And for the first time ever, I disagree with ubonjoe.

[aTomsLife]

 

 

Since you are entering on a tourist visa you don't don't need to be concerned about the back to back thing. Immigration is only concerned about in/out visa exempt entries.

 

Thank you. Good to hear that tourists won't wind up dolphins amongst the TEFL tunas.  

 

Living here 9 months a year every year, not sure but some immigration officer might call you on it.

 

And the jab against English teachers?

 

There are enough a$$holes on this site taking the piss out of us already. Do you really want to be another one?

 

 

It's not a jab at teachers, as I already explained in post #35: 

 

"Your interpretation of my analogy is off base. Tuna is not meant to be a condescending jab (they're actually majestic animals, a top predator and a delicacy in many cultures). Again, it's a question of being able to grasp the plot: the analogy is about a hunted animal (tuna as illegally working teacher) leading to the capture of another (dolphin as tourist), not species hierarchy. lol." 

 

Now quit your whining.   And worry about yourself. 

 

Whether I'm allowed to continue staying here 8 months a year, or I have to cut it down to 6, I'll be just fine. The more I think about it, escaping to an island somewhere instead of spending the smoke and hot season in Chiang Mai is worth considering regardless of what new visas rules are enforced.  Then I'd be here Dec through Feb, and June through August.  Works for me.   

 

 

Edit: Emphasized that I'm talking about illegally working teachers, not teachers in general, because some people can't follow a simple analogy. 

Edited August 7, 2014 by aTomsLife

[duanebigsby]

 

 

 

Since you are entering on a tourist visa you don't don't need to be concerned about the back to back thing. Immigration is only concerned about in/out visa exempt entries.

 

Thank you. Good to hear that tourists won't wind up dolphins amongst the TEFL tunas.  

 

Living here 9 months a year every year, not sure but some immigration officer might call you on it.

 

And the jab against English teachers?

 

There are enough a$$holes on this site taking the piss out of us already. Do you really want to be another one?

 

 

It's not a jab at teachers, as I already explained in post #35: 

 

"Your interpretation of my analogy is off base. Tuna is not meant to be a condescending jab (they're actually majestic animals, a top predator and a delicacy in many cultures). Again, it's a question of being able to grasp the plot: the analogy is about a hunted animal (tuna as teacher) leading to the capture of another (dolphin as tourist), not species hierarchy. lol." 

 

Now quit your whining.   And worry about yourself. 

 

Whether I'm allowed to continue staying here 8 months a year, or I have to cut it down to 6, I'll be just fine. The more I think about it, escaping to an island somewhere instead of spending the smoke and hot season in Chiang Mai is worth considering regardless of what new visas rules are enforced.  Then I'd be here Dec through Feb, and June through August.  Works for me.   

 

ok, I took it to mean tuna (which are being harvested at an alarming rate)  are  easy bait while tourists, like dolphins, should be off target.

 

I wasn't whining and I don't need to worry about myself. Simply pointing out living here more months of the year than home may cause some officer

some concern.

 

 I do hope that you don't have any issues with immigration and can stay here the months you'd like.

[khunerik]

 

Since you are entering on a tourist visa you don't don't need to be concerned about the back to back thing. Immigration is only concerned about in/out visa exempt entries.

 

How long before they start on the "in/out" 60 day Tourist Visas from the Thai Embassies?  I think it's only a matter of time. 

 

There was a story recently about a dozen or so people with 60 day Tourist Visas being refused entry at the Malaysian boarder.

 

 

Maybe very soon. Read here  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/No-more-visa-runs-30238504.html

[NamKangMan]

 

 

Since you are entering on a tourist visa you don't don't need to be concerned about the back to back thing. Immigration is only concerned about in/out visa exempt entries.

 

How long before they start on the "in/out" 60 day Tourist Visas from the Thai Embassies?  I think it's only a matter of time. 

 

There was a story recently about a dozen or so people with 60 day Tourist Visas being refused entry at the Malaysian boarder.

 

 

Maybe very soon. Read here  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/No-more-visa-runs-30238504.html

 

 

It was quite obvious that all the 30 day visa exemption stamp runners were going to go for 60 day tourist visas from the various Thai Embassies. 

 

The next step in the visa crack down was always going to have to be the 60 day tourist visa. 

[eldragon]

It seems like this is clearly a financial move. You push all the exemption runners to the embassies and get an extra 2,000+ THB per head, whilst boosting tourism as a whole via hotel stays, bus trips, plane rides, etc. throughout the country, and abroad. I wouldn't be surprised if Thailand was getting kick-backs from hotels near the embassies in neighboring countries...

 

I've never understood why anyone would make the exemption run every 30 days. Just seems easier- and equally affordable- to get a double-entry tourist visa (and extend the entries) twice a year.