Crackdown? Actually the contrary

[paz]

Every so often someone asks if "with the new rules" there is a problem coming or staying in Thailand, because they have heard so. But in fact many of the recent "new rules" are in favor of the foreigner, while the restrictions, although inconvenient, have been taken as a measure against abuse, and do have remedies. So here I'm summarizing some of these official changes, (I may have forgot some).

Positive changes:

• Since 11/08: no more limit of 90 days each 180 for visa exempt entries: http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/doc/temporarystay/policy778-2551_en.pdf
• Since 11/13: 30 days visa exempt to citizens of G7 countries entering via land: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679721-good-news-for-holders-of-uk-usa-japan-germany-france-canada-and-italy/
• Since 9/14: updates to extension of stay regulations, as commented by ubonjoe: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/749918-thai-immigration-issues-new-police-order-3272557-effective-august-29-2014, In summary:
  30 days extension for visa exempt entries.
  Teachers do not need to leave country when changing jobs.
  Can be dependent of those having an Annual visa like O-A.
  Citizen of certain countries do not need a visa for medical extension.
  Provision for athletes and coaches.
• Since (unknown) 2014: Thai Elite members receive one year stay each entry. It was 90 days before.

Restrictive changes:

• Since 8/13: Extensions are granted only until passport validity. Before it was possible to reinstate full duration when a new passport was obtained.
• Since 5/14: Back to back visa exempt entries are not allowed anymore. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/725053-final-crackdown-for-border-runners-new-strict-immigration-regulation-in-force-from-today/
• Since 7/14: Blacklisting announced for serious overstay violations. Not yet effective as of of today. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/744965-thailand-immigration-confirms-new-overstay-rules-are-now-official/
• Since 9/14: Updates to extension of stay regulation, as per link above:
  No further applications allowed after denial (7 days extension).
  No more than one year in country for students of private schools.
  Other minor restrictions.
• Since 10/14: Some local offices that were doing conversion to a non-imm. visa for the purpose of obtaining an extension have been stripped of the authority. Will now need to use division's HQ office.
• Date unknown and unpublished: Various consulates in Europe raised restrictions to obtain tourist and ED visa.

So, this is not to say that all is good and great, but only to document changes.

Also please note, even at the peak time of the so called crackdown, there have been virtually no reports of anyone not being allowed in country or denied an extension without a valid reason.

Edited October 26, 2014 by paz

[David48]

paz ... have ran out likes for the moment so ...

Nice to see a balanced analysis of the Visa changes over the years.

.

[Crossy]

Thanks Paz, it certainly does bring the recent changes into perspective.

[Thai Visa Service]

Nice to see a refreshing post with balanced information.

[Sharp]

Spot on paz

[ubonjoe]

I take exception to this line in the topic.

"Since 9/14: Updates to extension of stay regulation, as per link above:

No further applications allowed after denial (7 days extension)."

There nothing in the new rules that state that. Only the right to appeal was taken out.

That is only your interpretation of it. And perhaps one time by an immigration officer.

I have only seen one report of a person being denied an extension after having a 7 day extension and that was shortly after the new order came into effect.

I suggest that a person should try for the 7 day extension and ask immigration about getting an extension afterwards.

[l3fty]

No more than one year in country for students of private schools.

Source? This includes language schools?

Edited October 27, 2014 by l3fty

[paz]

I take exception to this line in the topic.

"Since 9/14: Updates to extension of stay regulation, as per link above:

No further applications allowed after denial (7 days extension)."

There nothing in the new rules that state that. Only the right to appeal was taken out.

That is only your interpretation of it. And perhaps one time by an immigration officer.

I have only seen one report of a person being denied an extension after having a 7 day extension and that was shortly after the new order came into effect.

I suggest that a person should try for the 7 day extension and ask immigration about getting an extension afterwards.

I'm afraid immigration is considering "right of appeal" any new application made after one has been denied. That is, case 2. in their announcement below.

Edited October 27, 2014 by paz

[paz]

Source? This includes language schools?

Exactly language schools. Source is Thailand Bureau of Immigration. See case 3. in image above.

Edited October 27, 2014 by paz

[l3fty]

Source? This includes language schools?

Exactly language schools. Source is Thailand Bureau of Immigration. See case 3. in image above.

Thanks, that's what I was looking for.

What it doesn't make clear is if this is dependant on per visa or overall? Eg: You can't extend your ED visa over a year, thus needing to recieve a new visa for another full year of extensions?

Edited October 27, 2014 by l3fty

[paz]

What it doesn't make clear is if this is dependant on per visa or overall? Eg: You can't extend your ED visa over a year, thus needing to recieve a new visa for another full year of extensions?

Per visa. You obtain a new visa and continue with extensions as long the study course allows.

Edited October 27, 2014 by paz

[l3fty]

What it doesn't make clear is if this is dependant on per visa or overall? Eg: You can't extend your ED visa over a year, thus needing to recieve a new visa for another full year of extensions?

Per visa. You obtain a new visa and continue with extensions as long the study course allows.

Okay, thanks for the info paz.

[Colabamumbai]

People with valid visas have been denied entry from Malaysia. Others have been refused visas from Thai Consulates.

[paz]

People with valid visas have been denied entry from Malaysia. Others have been refused visas from Thai Consulates.

You must be referring to Dannok where occasionally some officers insist on having the person showing funds, as regulations allow them to. However as of today there are no continued reports and that border post is still normally used by thousand of people daily.

I have mentioned the increased visa requirements in Europe. No much change in other places

[wilcopops]

Whether or not teachers needed to leave the country was a moot point.

What about 2 year visas for teachers?

[ubonjoe]

Whether or not teachers needed to leave the country was a moot point.

What about 2 year visas for teachers?

That will not happen any time soon. It cannot be done by just a new immigration order.

At the minimum it would require a ministerial regulation but more than likely it would mean a change to the immigration act or a new law covering extensions for teachers.

[Sophon]

Some of the things you mention as positive changes are just partial roll-back of earlier restrictions:

• Since 11/08: no more limit of 90 days each 180 for visa exempt entries

You fail to mention as a negative change the implementation of the "90 days in 180" rule. You also don't mention that this rule was replaced by limiting visa exempt entries to 15 days at land borders.

• Since 11/13: 30 days visa exempt to citizens of G7 countries entering via land

As mentioned above, this is just a partial roll-back of the rule that restricted visa exempt entries to 15 days at land borders.

While there has been some general positive (and welcome) changes such as the 30 day extension of visa exempt entries, most of the other positive changes are targeting specific limited groups. Personally, I don't find it positive that the rules more and more discriminate based on where you come from. What is the justification for only people from G7 countries to get 30 days visa exempt at land borders, and why only give medical extensions without a visa to people from certain countries? I know that the visa exempt rule in it self can be seen as discriminatory, but it is based on an evaluation that tourists from the chosen countries are not likely to overstay (and, of course, on the benefit it brings to the Thai tourist industry). So I don't agree with your overall conclusion (as per your headline) that the positive changes outweigh the restrictive, I think the general trend is still clearly towards more restrictions.

That said, I personally have no problems with enforcing existing rules or implementing new rules to stop the blatant abuse of the rules that have been going on for years (decades). It was never going to be allowed to go on for ever, and I am frankly surprised that it has taken this long. I know some people find it unfair, that they are no longer allowed to do what they have been doing for a long time (with silent acceptance from the authorities), but we all just have to accept the new reality and just be happy that the good run lasted as long as it did.

Sophon

[JThai]

You answered your own question.

What is the justification for only people from G7 countries to get 30 days visa exempt at land borders, and why only give medical extensions without a visa to people from certain countries?

I know that the visa exempt rule in it self can be seen as discriminatory, but it is based on an evaluation that tourists from the chosen countries are not likely to overstay (and, of course, on the benefit it brings to the Thai tourist industry).

Edited October 28, 2014 by JThai

[oldthaihand99]

While there has been some general positive (and welcome) changes such as the 30 day extension of visa exempt entries, most of the other positive changes are targeting specific limited groups.

This is quite a significant change. It allows those arriving without a visa & getting 30 days to extend another 30 days for a total of 60 days, the same length of time that a tourist visa gives.

Moreover it can be done in one trip rather than the two trips to an office required for tourist visas (unless an agent does it for you).

It took me all of 30 minutes from the time i arrived at immigration to recieving my passport back with the extension stamp. Some places for tourist visas you'll be waiting in line for hours being eaten alive by flying creatures.

Additionally a tourist visa takes up an entire page in your passport, while my extension stamp covers only about half of that.

Also there are many reports of requests for tourist visas being rejected in various locations, so even getting one is a crapshoot. Once rejected you'ld have to go to another city or country with the possibility of rejection there too.

So i am considering to enter Thailand in the future without the bother of getting any tourist visas. Unless it is at least a double entry that i can obtain easily & comfortably without too many hassles, i may not even attempt it.

Though one very important positive is that those with tourist visas can also extend for 30 days, giving a total of 90 days per entry. Is this something new or old?

Edited October 28, 2014 by oldthaihand99

[eTiMaGo]

One thing I also noticed, which is positive for the country, I suppose:

The border-hopping "Visa Run" crowd, how much did Thailand receive per entry? Nothing. Now I'm quite sure a very large portion of these people are getting 60 day tourist visas + 30 days extension from Laos, Penang, etc. Which means 1,000 per entry in the country's coffers, plus the extension fee (not sure how much that is now?)

Case in point, I was in Vientiane late last month for my own visa, and there were nearly 500 people queued. 500 people paying 1,000 baht minimum each, 5 days a week, I'd say that's a pretty good turnover!

So will immigration ever *truly* crack down on visa abusers? Maybe the worst offenders, but overall I'd say it's same-same but different...

[dotpoom]

I noticed a lot of empty rooms that would normally have been rented by now, I asked an agent was this because of the Martial Law....not that he said....it was because of the crackdown on the back to back visas. Normally by now people would have come and booked a room for up to six months....now they cannot do this.

[NancyL]

A recent restrictive change to add to your list, Paz, concerns medical extensions. In the past it was OK for doctors affiliated with private hospitals to write the documentation to obtain a medical extension -- now the documents must have a gov't hospital stamp. I don't know exactly when that new rule went into effect, but in Chiang Mai Immigration officials revealed it at a press conference on August 20 and representatives from CM Ram hospital -- the big upscale, private hospital in town, were visibly taken by surprise and asked several questions about the change. They were not happy.

[ubonjoe]

I noticed a lot of empty rooms that would normally have been rented by now, I asked an agent was this because of the Martial Law....not that he said....it was because of the crackdown on the back to back visas. Normally by now people would have come and booked a room for up to six months....now they cannot do this.

There is no crackdown on back to back visas. Only visa exempt entries have been restricted.

For somebody coming from most countries they could a 2 entry tourist visa that would give them a 6 month stay.

If only a single entry they could go out for another single entry tourist visa.

[Maestro]

A recent restrictive change to add to your list, Paz, concerns medical extensions. In the past it was OK for doctors affiliated with private hospitals to write the documentation to obtain a medical extension -- now the documents must have a gov't hospital stamp. I don't know exactly when that new rule went into effect, but in Chiang Mai Immigration officials revealed it at a press conference on August 20 and representatives from CM Ram hospital -- the big upscale, private hospital in town, were visibly taken by surprise and asked several questions about the change. They were not happy.

The rules don't say that. The immigration officer must have been confused. From clause 2.25 of Immigration Bureau Order 138/2557:

A. In the case of receiving treatment or recovery or taking care of a patient

...

3. Letter of confirmation and request for a temporary stay issued by a physician of the hospital or government medical institute providing said treatment

...

B. In case of receiving medical treatment for applicant from Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Arab Emirates and other countries as announced by the Ministry of Interior, the attendant of such applicant is exempt from visa issuance and permission shall be grant for no more than 90 days

...

3. Letter of confirmation and request for a temporary stay issued byMinistry of Public Health or a medical institute providing said treatment in Thailand as listed by the Ministry of Public Health

4. For an applicant receiving medical treatment, letter of confirmation regarding the treatment issued by the hospital in Thailand as listed, certified or issued by the Ministry of Public Health such as appointment, letter of confirmation from the physician, letter of confirmation of medical treatment or other relevant medical documents is required.

General rule: hospital or government medical institute.

For nationals of the specified Arab countries: hospital as certified by the Ministry of Public Health., ie not a government hospital, but a hospital certified by the government.

Give the concerned hospital managers these links to the the Thai text of the rules in case they need to argue clause 2.25 with immigration:

Immigration Bureau Order 327/2557, basis for extension of stay

Immigration Bureau Order 138/2557, documents for extension of stay

[paz]

A recent restrictive change to add to your list, Paz, concerns medical extensions. In the past it was OK for doctors affiliated with private hospitals to write the documentation to obtain a medical extension -- now the documents must have a gov't hospital stamp. I don't know exactly when that new rule went into effect, but in Chiang Mai Immigration officials revealed it at a press conference on August 20 and representatives from CM Ram hospital -- the big upscale, private hospital in town, were visibly taken by surprise and asked several questions about the change. They were not happy.

The rules don't say that. The immigration officer must have been confused. From clause 2.25 of Immigration Bureau Order 138/2557:

I have the feeling that some officers rarely bother reading (in Thai) official orders. That was the same press conference where they swore that visa exempt extensions remained at 7 days, which of course is not the case.

[oldthaihand99]

There is no crackdown on back to back visas. Only visa exempt entries have been restricted.

Exactly what details are included in the official policy re the restriction? The following?:

“Furthermore, foreigners who enter the Kingdom under this Tourist Visa Exemption Scheme may re-enter and stay in Thailand for a cumulative duration of stay not exceeding 90 days within any 6-month period from the date of first entry.”

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/725610-thailand-visa-crackdown-banning-walk-in-visa-runs-to-begin-august-13/

Or is this the official policy?:

"Gen Pharnu clarified the focus of the new immigration regulation, which allows most foreigners to enter the country only once using visa-exempt status."....

“From August 13, if we suspect any foreigner of working illegally in Thailand on a tourist visa, that person will be detained and deported, even if the foreigner has not previously completed even a single visa run,” he said.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/726721-thai-immigration-is-determined-to-prevent-abuse-of-visa-exceptions/

Edited October 28, 2014 by oldthaihand99

[paz]

There is no crackdown on back to back visas. Only visa exempt entries have been restricted.

Exactly what details are included in the official policy re the restriction? The following?:

“Furthermore, foreigners who enter the Kingdom under this Tourist Visa Exemption Scheme may re-enter and stay in Thailand for a cumulative duration of stay not exceeding 90 days within any 6-month period from the date of first entry.”

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/725610-thailand-visa-crackdown-banning-walk-in-visa-runs-to-begin-august-13/

This quote about a cumulative period has been used by in the piece by a local newspaper in Phuket, from MoFA website: http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/123/15380-Questions-&-Answers-on-Thai-Visa.html

As often happens, the Ministry has failed to update the page to account the fact that the regulation has been repealed on Nov 2013, and the local newspaper journalist didn't knew any better.

Here again the official notice for you: http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/doc/temporarystay/policy778-2551_en.pdf

Further to that, as ubonjoe said, there is had been no restriction and no member reports on repeated visa entries.

[ubonjoe]

There is no crackdown on back to back visas. Only visa exempt entries have been restricted.

Exactly what details are included in the official policy re the restriction? The following?:

“Furthermore, foreigners who enter the Kingdom under this Tourist Visa Exemption Scheme may re-enter and stay in Thailand for a cumulative duration of stay not exceeding 90 days within any 6-month period from the date of first entry.”

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/725610-thailand-visa-crackdown-banning-walk-in-visa-runs-to-begin-august-13/

Or is this the official policy?:

"Gen Pharnu clarified the focus of the new immigration regulation, which allows most foreigners to enter the country only once using visa-exempt status."....

“From August 13, if we suspect any foreigner of working illegally in Thailand on a tourist visa, that person will be detained and deported, even if the foreigner has not previously completed even a single visa run,” he said.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/726721-thai-immigration-is-determined-to-prevent-abuse-of-visa-exceptions/

The 90 days in 6 months rule went away 6 years ago when they went to 15 days at border crossings.

These are the guidelines that immigration uses for visa exempt entries that were posted in a topic back in August.

ImmigratioNotice4-English_PDF.pdf

[Sophon]

You answered your own question.

What is the justification for only people from G7 countries to get 30 days visa exempt at land borders, and why only give medical extensions without a visa to people from certain countries?

I know that the visa exempt rule in it self can be seen as discriminatory, but it is based on an evaluation that tourists from the chosen countries are not likely to overstay (and, of course, on the benefit it brings to the Thai tourist industry).

No, I did not.

I gave two reasons for why some countries are granted visa exempt entries, neither reason explains why only people from G7 countries are given 30 days at land borders or why only people from certain countries are given the medical exemptions without visa. Are you suggesting that a person from Switzerland or Norway is more likely to overstay than someone from e.g. the U.K.? If that was the case, then those countries would not be given visa exempt entries in the first place.

Sure, assuming that it is not abused both the 30 days visa exempt entries at land borders and the medical exemptions are beneficial for Thai tourism. But it would also be beneficial to grant those bnefits to citizens from other countries on the visa exempt list. Rightly or wrongly, people from visa exempt countries have been deemed unlikely to overstay or work illegally, so why not grant those same privileges to all visa exempt countries?

Sophon

Edited October 28, 2014 by Sophon

[geisha]

Paz, concerning Europe, why is it that some cities/countries are only issuing single entries ( France) and others issue single and double entries.? Can I, British, living in France, make a double entry visa in GB , I'm going there anyway for a family visit ? I've had a really nice email answer saying they are issuing double entries and to make an appointment.