A succession of Tourist Visas

[lannalad]

I've been living here in Thailand for over 19 years. When my last teaching contract expired in September, as I am getting on in years, I was advised to get a Tourist Visa to allow me to continue living here (without working). I am now on my second 60-day Tourist Visa. When the uproar over visa runs started, it first seemed to be against people who were here without visas, simply taking advantage of free 30-day entries. Then it seemed to morph into stopping people from getting repeat Tourist Visas, as I have done. Yesterday while getting my final extension on this Tourist Visa in Chiangmai, a terribly overworked officer did take half a minute to speak to me. She said all I had to do was apply for a new 60-day Tourist Visa at the Embassy in Phnom Penh (where I had mentioned I might be heading). Is this the general understanding now? Will Tourist Visas continue to be issued as before? My savings are paltry and my SS check from the States meagre so a "retirement" visa, is well beyond my means. Thailand has become my effective home and the thought of pulling up roots is disheartening. Thank you anyone who can clarify the Tourist Visa regulations for me.

[ubonjoe]

You might eventually reach a limit in tourist visas from certain consulates. But for now there is no official restriction on getting and using them.

To avoid getting another one so soon I suggest you get a 2 entry tourist visa from Vientiane or Savannakhet.

For a retirement extension there is also the combination of annual income and money in the bank totaling 800k baht.

[FT1]

Be careful of repeated tourist visas. Within the past few days I have 3 confirmed cases of people with valid tourist visas being given only 7 days leave to stay when they did visa runs to Had Lek on the Cambodian border. Admittedly they all had passports with many Thai tourist visas but one of these people stays in Swirtzerland for 6 months of every year. As the interpretation of the law is up to the immigration officer it is very difficult to predict with any certainty, what will happen at any immigration office.

[lannalad]

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe I'll explore Cambodia a bit and apply for a new 2-entry Tourist Visa when I get to Phnom Penh, although I see you suggest Vientiane (which I have used both times) and Savannaket, presumably because they are closer(?).

[larsjohnsson]

You will not be able to live here with tourist visas for years. Sooner or later they will stop you. Or tell you to get another long stay visa. Like Joe wrote, with the combination method you don't need that much money in the bank.

[ubonjoe]

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe I'll explore Cambodia a bit and apply for a new 2-entry Tourist Visa when I get to Phnom Penh, although I see you suggest Vientiane (which I have used both times) and Savannaket, presumably because they are closer(?).

You will only get a single entry visa in PP and it will take up to 4 days to get unless you use an agent.

[lannalad]

Whoops. Thanks for the input Newbie. You got in just as I was confidently digesting Ubon Joe's more optimistic scenario. This is the kind of static that has had me worried for a long time now. Which chamber has the bullet--The Chamber of Secrets!?

[Strangebrew]

The best advice here is to listen to Unbonjoe The rest of us knucklehead are grasping at straws.

[jspill]

You will not be able to live here with tourist visas for years. Sooner or later they will stop you. Or tell you to get another long stay visa.

Then simply change your passport if you're under 50. It'll be nearly full anyway.

[kriswillems]

I don't like loopholes in the law, but for people like you, that stay here already 19 years and have contributed to Thai society by teaching there should be a way out.

Even in European countries foreigners can apply for citizenship after they have been a number of years legally in the country.

For now, just try to get tourist visas or if that doesn't work an ED-visas and start saving to get enough money to be allowed to stay on the combination of income and savings.

Edited August 20, 2014 by kriswillems

[camsouth]

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe I'll explore Cambodia a bit and apply for a new 2-entry Tourist Visa when I get to Phnom Penh, although I see you suggest Vientiane (which I have used both times) and Savannaket, presumably because they are closer(?).

You will only get a single entry visa in PP and it will take up to 4 days to get unless you use an agent.

well joe i tried the retirement visa yesterday in phuket, had all the docs i needed so i was told, bt lawyers and im . was turning mt tr 60 day to a non o for i am 61. been retired for 2 yrs .in usa. waited hours go up there and i wanted to do the whole thing no o to retirement and add a multi entry my income is well over what was needed . was asked for a house book ,lol i have been staying in hotel for 2 months . they had no record of me there?? so i was given a form for them to fill out . was never told i needed that, my wife who is under 50 needs to go out and and get an o and i need to go with her with marriage doc to add her as depended .

[NamKangMan]

You might eventually reach a limit in tourist visas from certain consulates. But for now there is no official restriction on getting and using them.

To avoid getting another one so soon I suggest you get a 2 entry tourist visa from Vientiane or Savannakhet.

For a retirement extension there is also the combination of annual income and money in the bank totaling 800k baht.

"You might eventually reach a limit in tourist visas from certain consulates. But for now there is no official restriction on getting and using them." - I truly believe an "official restriction" is imminent for the use of the 60 day tourist visas.

A member in this thread has already mentioned of some reported cases of problems with back to back 60 day tourist visas.

There are hundreds of thousands of foreigners here that had been using the free 30 day visa exemption stamps, and 60 day tourist visas - I am one of them.

I'm sure these people can afford around $40US for a 60 day tourist visa, and the 1900 baht 1 month extension.

I suspect the Thai authorities will be happy to gain the extra revenue, but will eventually realise their visa crack down has achieved nothing, other than raise some more revenue, at the expense of out of work visa run companies, as these hundreds of thousands of people now only have to leave the country 4 times a year, instead of 12 times a year, and most likely, many will chose to fly.

Let's be real, someone living here on back to back 60 day tourist visas is not a genuine tourist, in the same way as those living here on back to back 30 day visa exemption stamps are also not genuine tourists. There is very little difference between the demographic of the two different visa runners. One could still work here illegally, on the 60 day tourist visa, should that be their intention.

In my opinion, it's only a matter of time before there is the same official restrictions placed on the back to back 60 day tourist visas.

That said, maybe the real motivation for the visa crack down is make all the 30 day visa runners have to pay their $40US, and their 800 baht flight exit tax, should they chose to fly, and for that reason, they will raise considerble revenue, and possibly leave the 60 day tourist visas alone.

If so, the real winners will be the cities where the various Thai Embassies are located. As waiting times increase for the return of your passport, extra hotels nights needed, more food and beverage sold, some of their tourist attractions gain more customers etc etc. It will be good for their tourism industry.

Only time will tell.

Edited August 20, 2014 by NamKangMan

[larsjohnsson]

You will not be able to live here with tourist visas for years. Sooner or later they will stop you. Or tell you to get another long stay visa.

Then simply change your passport if you're under 50. It'll be nearly full anyway.

And you belive that would help? They would still know that you have been here on 5 or 10 tourist visas before Edited August 20, 2014 by larsjohnsson

[JonboyBKK]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Be careful of repeated tourist visas. Within the past few days I have 3 confirmed cases of people with valid tourist visas being given only 7 days leave to stay when they did visa runs to Had Lek on the Cambodian border. Admittedly they all had passports with many Thai tourist visas but one of these people stays in Swirtzerland for 6 months of every year. As the interpretation of the law is up to the immigration officer it is very difficult to predict with any certainty, what will happen at any immigration office.

This is an important point to me but I can't understand the wording "7 days leave to stay". Are you saying they were shot down flying into BKK with a fresh tourist visa? or are you saying when they tried to extend it they were only given 7 days? And what nationality were they as this is also very important.

[hawker9000]

I presume from your original post that your passport has a fair number of both 30-day stamps with some tourist visas now more recently, and so I think you're asking a good question and have valid concerns. It's not just a question of being able to get a Tourist Visa from one embassy or consulate or another; that's only half the battle. Then the Immigration Officer at the airport or border has the final say on whether you can actually enter Thailand or not; visa in hand notwithstanding. (BIG debate in various threads around here for months now on the justice & wisdom of IO "discretion"...) IF he concludes, based on whatever subjective suspicion or documentation or lack thereof (or time of the month or who knows what...), that you're not in fact a "tourist", he can turn you back. No one can say it isn't a crapshoot just now. This regimen might subside in the near future; or it might not. I don't know how anyone can say with any assurance one way or the other. But many members here will positively excoriate those who, in their judgment, are using Tourist Visas to "live" in Thailand, thereby "breaking the law", and regard accounts of people being turned back by Immigration as no more than what one would expect.

The advice most frequently heard I think around here is for visitors with histories of 30d stamps & tourist visas, particularly back-to-back ones. having documentation with them "proving" that they are in fact "tourists". E.g., Return or onward air tickets, hotel reservation confirmations, trip itineraries, even bank statements from back home showing that your income is not derived from sources within Thailand. Also cash-on-hand (I think it's 10K baht for a single person; might be 20K, not sure...) Hope for the best, but have a plan in case of the worst. In your case, some combination of income and money in a Thai bank meeting the minimum reqts, and then a "retirement visa", would be preferable to trying to keep subsisting on tourist visas I think. Unless and until the current situation lifts, anyway.

Best of luck. Let us know how it goes.

[icare999]

i don't know if they still do it but USA embassy did not ask for proof to supply letter confirming 65,000 baht income a month. I was told by several Americans they simply had to swear it was true.

It used to really annoy me since once i thought ill use income method just to see and British embassy wanted detailed proof before doing letter.

But then us Brits play fairly unlike some other countries

[slipperylobster]

You might eventually reach a limit in tourist visas from certain consulates. But for now there is no official restriction on getting and using them.

To avoid getting another one so soon I suggest you get a 2 entry tourist visa from Vientiane or Savannakhet.

For a retirement extension there is also the combination of annual income and money in the bank totaling 800k baht.

Not sure if it helps...but just a Certification of Income from the US Consulate? Anyways, this is what I have been told.

[FT1]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Be careful of repeated tourist visas. Within the past few days I have 3 confirmed cases of people with valid tourist visas being given only 7 days leave to stay when they did visa runs to Had Lek on the Cambodian border. Admittedly they all had passports with many Thai tourist visas but one of these people stays in Swirtzerland for 6 months of every year. As the interpretation of the law is up to the immigration officer it is very difficult to predict with any certainty, what will happen at any immigration office.

This is an important point to me but I can't understand the wording "7 days leave to stay". Are you saying they were shot down flying into BKK with a fresh tourist visa? or are you saying when they tried to extend it they were only given 7 days? And what nationality were they as this is also very important.

One Swiss and two Germans. The length of time they are allowed to stay in Thailand from the day they crossed back into Thailand at Had Lek (on the border with Cambodia)is 7 days and not 60 days as their tourist visa should allow. They are only allowed to stay 7 days despite having paid for tourist visas.

[ubonjoe]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Be careful of repeated tourist visas. Within the past few days I have 3 confirmed cases of people with valid tourist visas being given only 7 days leave to stay when they did visa runs to Had Lek on the Cambodian border. Admittedly they all had passports with many Thai tourist visas but one of these people stays in Swirtzerland for 6 months of every year. As the interpretation of the law is up to the immigration officer it is very difficult to predict with any certainty, what will happen at any immigration office.

This is an important point to me but I can't understand the wording "7 days leave to stay". Are you saying they were shot down flying into BKK with a fresh tourist visa? or are you saying when they tried to extend it they were only given 7 days? And what nationality were they as this is also very important.

One Swiss and two Germans. The length of time they are allowed to stay in Thailand from the day they crossed back into Thailand at Had Lek (on the border with Cambodia)is 7 days and not 60 days as their tourist visa should allow. They are only allowed to stay 7 days despite having paid for tourist visas.

I think there may be more to the story.

Were they using an entry from an existing tourist visa or were they returning after getting one while in Cambodia?

If a new tourist visa had they done a bunch visa exempt entries before.There were some people turned back in the south for this and ertry told to fly in.

[notmyself]

I think there may be more to the story.

Were they using an entry from an existing tourist visa or were they returning after getting one while in Cambodia?

If a new tourist visa had they done a bunch visa exempt entries before.There were some people turned back in the south for this and ertry told to fly in.

From the Liverpool Thai consulate website.

You must leave Thailand for a period of 48 hours at the end of each visa but the final entry can be extended by a further 30 days in Thailand, without leaving the country, at the discretion of Immigration officials.

http://www.royalthaiconsul.com/visas.htm

Lots of chatter around regarding 48 hours outside of Thailand which I do anyway but not heard of only being able to extend the final entry.

[ubonjoe]

There is absolutely no official requirement to be out of the country for 48 hours. That rubbish on the Liverpool consulate website has been reported before.

There have been many people dong the usual leave, turnaround and re-enter the country without a problem.

As I said more info is needed about this purported denial of entry. I suspect they were new visas to get around a denial of entry because they a had mess of exempt entries.

[notmyself]

There is absolutely no official requirement to be out of the country for 48 hours. That rubbish on the Liverpool consulate website has been reported before.

There have been many people dong the usual leave, turnaround and re-enter the country without a problem.

As I said more info is needed about this purported denial of entry. I suspect they were new visas to get around a denial of entry because they a had mess of exempt entries.

Aye, I only mention Liverpool as I'm pretty sure it was not there a month or so ago when I last looked. I'll be applying for a triple there in a couple of weeks time so it could be that all this unfounded chatter has made its way to the Liverpool consulate too. I used to use Hull for years (post Thursday afternoon, receive Saturday Morning and fly out Tuesday (easy 270 days out of it)) but now they want Postal Orders I figured I'd try out the Liverpool consulate as it's only over the river. Appointment only at 10 quid a pop but no postage costs or transport costs because I'm registered disabled and get free public transport.

To get back to things. I've been holidaymaking for near 10 months a year on Samui using a triple entry followed by a 30 day visa exempt at the end of it for the last 6 years. With the possible exception of the visa exempt entry I don't see that anything has changed for me really.

I have a new passport too though that means nothing as it's digital and you have to give previous dates of entering Thailand on a tourist visa application form. I wonder if this is the issue in the OP.

So anyway, is there anything particularly pertinent you would like me to ask?

[lannalad]

Thanks for all the input, everyone. It seems a soup of maybes, with some ifs and buts for spice.

In reply to Hawker 9000, my brand new passport is hardly likely to inspire confidence in some guy sitting on a bridge. I first entered Thailand on a 1994 passport, with my teaching visa pre-arranged from Boston. I got a new passport at the Chiangmai Consulate in 2004 and proceeded to fill that with my one year teaching visas. Finally out of contract in October 2013 I needed a new passport, again from the Consulate in 2014. So my current passport only contains the second of 2 Tourist Visas (with whatever notations to verify that I was legally in country while changing passports) and a bunch of stamps from such venues as Tachileik and Nong Kai. Habeas Corpus comes to mind.

It seems there is no reliable way for me to continue living here legally so I'm thinking of backpacking to Cambodia to see how the other half lives. One year visas there are apparently available for under $300. As a former Peace Corps Volunteer (50 years ago) I may actually feel more useful. I hate being "retired."

Thanks again for your counsel.

[NamKangMan]

There is absolutely no official requirement to be out of the country for 48 hours. That rubbish on the Liverpool consulate website has been reported before.

There have been many people dong the usual leave, turnaround and re-enter the country without a problem.

As I said more info is needed about this purported denial of entry. I suspect they were new visas to get around a denial of entry because they a had mess of exempt entries.

"I suspect they were new visas to get around a denial of entry because they a had mess of exempt entries." - possibly.

How long before people with "a mess of 60 day tourist visas" are also denied entry?

[NamKangMan]

Thanks for all the input, everyone. It seems a soup of maybes, with some ifs and buts for spice.

In reply to Hawker 9000, my brand new passport is hardly likely to inspire confidence in some guy sitting on a bridge. I first entered Thailand on a 1994 passport, with my teaching visa pre-arranged from Boston. I got a new passport at the Chiangmai Consulate in 2004 and proceeded to fill that with my one year teaching visas. Finally out of contract in October 2013 I needed a new passport, again from the Consulate in 2014. So my current passport only contains the second of 2 Tourist Visas (with whatever notations to verify that I was legally in country while changing passports) and a bunch of stamps from such venues as Tachileik and Nong Kai. Habeas Corpus comes to mind.

It seems there is no reliable way for me to continue living here legally so I'm thinking of backpacking to Cambodia to see how the other half lives. One year visas there are apparently available for under $300. As a former Peace Corps Volunteer (50 years ago) I may actually feel more useful. I hate being "retired."

Thanks again for your counsel.

I can confirm for you a 1 year multi-enty business visa (yes - you can do any work you like on it) is around $290USD for Cambodia.

There's probably no need to leave Thailand completely, just the amount of time considered that your visas for Thailand are not "back to back."

The problem is, there has been no official answer to this question, to date, particularly in relation to the 30 day visa exemption stamps. Many members have speculated - anything from 1 day, to 1 week, to 2 weeks to 1 month.

I posted this question to be asked of the Immigration Commander during a TV interview with him. It's the question many need answered.

Anyway, I have the same idea as you. If Thai Immigration release a statement, "If you spend 3 months in Thailand on a 60 day tourist visa (with extension) - you have to leave Thailand for 3 months." I will accept this and go to one, or several, of many great places in South East Asia for 6 months of the year.

In typical Thai style, they like to leave it up to the "discretion" of individual officers, which unfortunately means, no one really knows where they stand in Thai Immigration Law at the moment in relation to what is "back to back" and whether the crack down is officially incorporating the 60 day tourist visas as well.

Edited August 21, 2014 by NamKangMan