Retirement Visa - Americans- Chiang Mai - Requirements

[mesquite]

Part of the problem, perhaps, is that the Affidavit also contains no language at all that says or even hints that the notarizing consulate/embassy officer has verified in any manner that what the affiant is saying is true. If one actually reads/translates the language, the embassy/consulate official is only confirming the identity of the person who signed the form. In other words, the official is only acting essentially as a notary according to the language on the form.

I have no idea as to why most (apparently) embassies/consulates require some proof about the income. Perhaps it's because Immigration issued some instructions in the past as to how it should be done or, perhaps, maybe the embassies/consulates just felt they ought to do that. Hell if I know.

There is no problem. The statement has been the same for years if not decades.

[Dante99]

The affidavit in question is provided by the Chiang Mai U.S. Consulate and provides spaces for completeing the affiants personal and address information and then goes on...

"I also affirm that I receive the amount of US$___________ every month from the United States Government and/or other sources."

There is a fail built into the language of this affidavit. The affidavit does not ask for a declaration of useable or adjusted gross income but only asks for the amount the affiant receives. For example, you could have rental house income from exceeding $4,000 each month but rental house expenses of $3,650 per month. You could honestly swear to $4,000 in income from "other sources" despite the fact that your adjusted income from rental houses was actually $350.

Nor does the affidavit concern itself with before or after tax income. My before tax monthly income is more than 22% greater than my after tax income. I do indeed receive the before tax income so I can state that I "receive" this amount which is considerably larger than when Uncle Sam takes his bite the following April.

I agree with what you say; but, playing 'devils advocate', does the Thai Immigration requirement specifically state 'after tax', net income, or simply income? If it doesn't then they opened the loop hole and your gross income statement could be valid.

After tax net income is just a number, it does not represent cash available for living expenses because many deductions are not included: debt payment, child care, divorce settlement, legal liens, fines.....It may be a little better than gross income but still not very good.

It is all a game. They pull a monthly or annual number out of the air and want papers, so give them papers.

[northernjohn]

The affidavit in question is provided by the Chiang Mai U.S. Consulate and provides spaces for completeing the affiants personal and address information and then goes on...

"I also affirm that I receive the amount of US$___________ every month from the United States Government and/or other sources."

There is a fail built into the language of this affidavit. The affidavit does not ask for a declaration of useable or adjusted gross income but only asks for the amount the affiant receives. For example, you could have rental house income from exceeding $4,000 each month but rental house expenses of $3,650 per month. You could honestly swear to $4,000 in income from "other sources" despite the fact that your adjusted income from rental houses was actually $350.

Nor does the affidavit concern itself with before or after tax income. My before tax monthly income is more than 22% greater than my after tax income. I do indeed receive the before tax income so I can state that I "receive" this amount which is considerably larger than when Uncle Sam takes his bite the following April.

Immigration is only concerned with your income. Not what you do with it.

You may have missed my point northernjohn. Of course Thai Immigration is concerned with your income. My point is: What IS your income? Is it your business income before business expenses? Is it your taxable income before taxes? Is it the actual cash in your pocket at the beginning of every month? Is it the income you report on line 22 of your IRS 1040? Or is it the income you report on line 38 of your IRS 1040?

The US Consulate affidavit asks ambiguous questions and of course you can give ambiguous answers.

Your income is all they care about. They could care less with your expenses. If you receive $600 a month for a rental it is income. If you pay $450 of it for a mortgage it is an expense nothing to do with income or this topic. Just like food you don't deduct that from your income. It is an expense.

[Dante99]

My point is: What IS your income? Is it your business income before business expenses? Is it your taxable income before taxes? Is it the actual cash in your pocket at the beginning of every month? Is it the income you report on line 22 of your IRS 1040? Or is it the income you report on line 38 of your IRS 1040?

Who cares what your income is? Who cares how income is defined?

It is not important.

[CMX]

For a number of years, I did not understand that the 1st time application route by way of the consulate letter was available to U.S. citizens there in CM. Thus, I could not comprehend puzzlement by others about someone who might lie in order to stay in Thailand. I assumed that all the bank assurances and so forth would have been previously established in 'America.'

Had I known, I might have taken the route in Chiang Mai - $50 notwithstanding - because the governmental organizations in the U.S. these days often charge a lot for simple documents; additionally, they can be sluggish in performance. Plus a health document and police etc. It happens, for example, that my state's police alone charge a lot for an embossed letter. Very pretty, but nonsensically priced.

In short, the hassle alone in the US, involving the Thai consulate/embassy and associated mailings of passport plus documentation, is much greater than that of CM - costs too! This does not mean, however, that I am financially below the bar in any way. Perhaps most of us using the local CM route are legal - particularly given the quite serious penalties should we be caught swearing to falsehoods to our government, say in the case that one contravenes Thai law sufficiently to become noticed?

In short (at last), we're all on a leash promising good behaviour while in Thailand. At issue is that - rather than which sort of lead.

Edited November 29, 2014 by CMX

[Mapguy]

My point is: What IS your income? Is it your business income before business expenses? Is it your taxable income before taxes? Is it the actual cash in your pocket at the beginning of every month? Is it the income you report on line 22 of your IRS 1040? Or is it the income you report on line 38 of your IRS 1040?

Who cares what your income is? Who cares how income is defined?

It is not important.

Actually it is quite important (while I agree that Immigration would go crazy with doing anything more than checking simple gross income from the sorts of sources they do). It is important because anyone here, especially those who are elderly and are generally retired, needs to have reserves in case of serious illness or, that aside, adequate health insurance. It is sad but true that there are a number of elderly expartriates (in particular, single males, it seems) who are flying on a wing and a prayer financially.

Sometimes one hears the argument about how much expatriates living here contribute to the Thai economy. No one has even tried, let alone even been close to supporting such an assertion (especially at 500 bhat a day or however the current thread on living cheap in Thailand goes!)

Edited November 29, 2014 by Mapguy

[northernjohn]

My point is: What IS your income? Is it your business income before business expenses? Is it your taxable income before taxes? Is it the actual cash in your pocket at the beginning of every month? Is it the income you report on line 22 of your IRS 1040? Or is it the income you report on line 38 of your IRS 1040?

Who cares what your income is? Who cares how income is defined?

It is not important.

Actually it is quite important (while I agree that Immigration would go crazy with doing anything more than checking simple gross income from the sorts of sources they do). It is important because anyone here, especially those who are elderly and are generally retired, needs to have reserves in case of serious illness or, that aside, adequate health insurance. It is sad but true that there are a number of elderly expartriates (in particular, single males, it seems) who are flying on a wing and a prayer financially.

Sometimes one hears the argument about how much expatriates living here contribute to the Thai economy. No one has even tried, let alone even been close to supporting such an assertion (especially at 500 bhat a day or however the current thread on living cheap in Thailand goes!)

That is irrelevant. Those are things they need in any country.

[mania]

I'd really rather not say, because some of their citizens may not be aware of this. Also, sometimes the American consulate does raise an eyebrow when they see someone claiming a high income yet they know that person has been in to see them during the past year asking for help because of financial difficulties. Actually, I suspect they do more than "raise an eyebrow" in some cases.

As I said, it's a Federal offense to swear a false oath and despite barroom chatter it is not a situation where "every American lies about their income". Believe it or not, there are many, many Americans here who have retirement income of substantially more than 65,000 baht/month.

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make

65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income

or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Edited November 29, 2014 by mania

[mesquite]

I'd really rather not say, because some of their citizens may not be aware of this. Also, sometimes the American consulate does raise an eyebrow when they see someone claiming a high income yet they know that person has been in to see them during the past year asking for help because of financial difficulties. Actually, I suspect they do more than "raise an eyebrow" in some cases.

As I said, it's a Federal offense to swear a false oath and despite barroom chatter it is not a situation where "every American lies about their income". Believe it or not, there are many, many Americans here who have retirement income of substantially more than 65,000 baht/month.

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make

65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income

or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Interesting point, and one I've never thought of. My guess is that in the US Govt, like most govts, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. But to have two conflicting sworn statements on file, the affidavit and the tax return, might make one a bit nervous.

[mania]

I'd really rather not say, because some of their citizens may not be aware of this. Also, sometimes the American consulate does raise an eyebrow when they see someone claiming a high income yet they know that person has been in to see them during the past year asking for help because of financial difficulties. Actually, I suspect they do more than "raise an eyebrow" in some cases.

As I said, it's a Federal offense to swear a false oath and despite barroom chatter it is not a situation where "every American lies about their income". Believe it or not, there are many, many Americans here who have retirement income of substantially more than 65,000 baht/month.

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make

65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income

or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Interesting point, and one I've never thought of. My guess is that in the US Govt, like most govts, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. But to have two conflicting sworn statements on file, the affidavit and the tax return, might make one a bit nervous.

Yes & while I use the cash in bank method I have seen it implied a few times that none ...even the embassy

do any real checking on whether you have that income or not. Just a sworn statement.

So I thought to myself a person would have to be crazy to falsify unless they were willing to pay taxes on

that which they did not receive...hence the tangled web

Like you say it is most likely the left hand never see's the right but....

These days with FBAR etc being required of US citizens living abroad it does seem

we are more a person of interest than before. Forms may at some point be linked/cross checked

[Dante99]

My point is: What IS your income? Is it your business income before business expenses? Is it your taxable income before taxes? Is it the actual cash in your pocket at the beginning of every month? Is it the income you report on line 22 of your IRS 1040? Or is it the income you report on line 38 of your IRS 1040?

Who cares what your income is? Who cares how income is defined?

It is not important.

Actually it is quite important (while I agree that Immigration would go crazy with doing anything more than checking simple gross income from the sorts of sources they do).

It is important because anyone here, especially those who are elderly and are generally retired, needs to have reserves in case of serious illness or, that aside, adequate health insurance.

Mapguy you are wrong again.

Income is NOT important.

First, it has been previously posted to the point that a person could have US$10,000.00 per month of rental income but if the rental expenses were $9,900 per month they would have little to live on. It is not just rental expenses that can eat up income, there are a lot of other things besides living expenses that can too.

Secondly, if a person had US$10,000,000.00 they would not need any income to be comfortable living in CM. With sufficient savings, no income is needed. That is just an example to help you understand, the amount need not be that large.

Third, income is not important because the parties involved (Immigration and Consul) do not have the budget, staff or sufficiently motivating need to significantly confirm income. They also know that even if they did that it would not confirm financial ability to provide support because of the above two points and others.

Edited November 30, 2014 by Dante99

[EPICFAIL]

I'd really rather not say, because some of their citizens may not be aware of this. Also, sometimes the American consulate does raise an eyebrow when they see someone claiming a high income yet they know that person has been in to see them during the past year asking for help because of financial difficulties. Actually, I suspect they do more than "raise an eyebrow" in some cases.

As I said, it's a Federal offense to swear a false oath and despite barroom chatter it is not a situation where "every American lies about their income". Believe it or not, there are many, many Americans here who have retirement income of substantially more than 65,000 baht/month.

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make

65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income

or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Interesting point, and one I've never thought of. My guess is that in the US Govt, like most govts, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. But to have two conflicting sworn statements on file, the affidavit and the tax return, might make one a bit nervous.

Actually, by design, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing when the U.S. Department of State is the proverbial right hand and the U.S. Treasury Department is the left.

By law U.S. tax returns are protected, confidential documents, copies of which cannot be obtained by ANYONE in ANY federal, state or local agency unless a federal subpoena issued via the Justice Department is obtained. The only other way to obtain a copy of a U.S. tax return is with the taxpayers written permission. Even state courts cannot subpoena federal tax returns.

As a former long-time financial investigator I can assure you that verifying the financial information submitted on consular income affidavits would be an investigators nightmare. Without the written permission of the subject of your investigation, you would need subpoenas for bank records, securities records, tax records, etc., etc. Good luck finding a federal prosecutor willing initiate the subpoena process for these items when the alleged possible crime is False Swearing at a consular station. Let me put it another way... the prosecutor would laugh you out of his/her office.

[mesquite]

I'd really rather not say, because some of their citizens may not be aware of this. Also, sometimes the American consulate does raise an eyebrow when they see someone claiming a high income yet they know that person has been in to see them during the past year asking for help because of financial difficulties. Actually, I suspect they do more than "raise an eyebrow" in some cases.

As I said, it's a Federal offense to swear a false oath and despite barroom chatter it is not a situation where "every American lies about their income". Believe it or not, there are many, many Americans here who have retirement income of substantially more than 65,000 baht/month.

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make

65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income

or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Interesting point, and one I've never thought of. My guess is that in the US Govt, like most govts, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. But to have two conflicting sworn statements on file, the affidavit and the tax return, might make one a bit nervous.

Actually, by design, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing when the U.S. Department of State is the proverbial right hand and the U.S. Treasury Department is the left.

By law U.S. tax returns are protected, confidential documents, copies of which cannot be obtained by ANYONE in ANY federal, state or local agency unless a federal subpoena issued via the Justice Department is obtained. The only other way to obtain a copy of a U.S. tax return is with the taxpayers written permission. Even state courts cannot subpoena federal tax returns.

As a former long-time financial investigator I can assure you that verifying the financial information submitted on consular income affidavits would be an investigators nightmare. Without the written permission of the subject of your investigation, you would need subpoenas for bank records, securities records, tax records, etc., etc. Good luck finding a federal prosecutor willing initiate the subpoena process for these items when the alleged possible crime is False Swearing at a consular station. Let me put it another way... the prosecutor would laugh you out of his/her office.

He wouldn't laugh me out of his office because I wouldn't be there. He would laugh you out of his office.

[EPICFAIL]

Mesquite:

I wrote my comment using third person, subjective case. In my theoretical example the "you" refers to an investigator who was looking into an affidavit of income. Oh, never mind. If you didn't understand my previous post you certainly won't understand this one.

[mesquite]

I'd really rather not say, because some of their citizens may not be aware of this. Also, sometimes the American consulate does raise an eyebrow when they see someone claiming a high income yet they know that person has been in to see them during the past year asking for help because of financial difficulties. Actually, I suspect they do more than "raise an eyebrow" in some cases.

As I said, it's a Federal offense to swear a false oath and despite barroom chatter it is not a situation where "every American lies about their income". Believe it or not, there are many, many Americans here who have retirement income of substantially more than 65,000 baht/month.

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make

65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income

or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Interesting point, and one I've never thought of. My guess is that in the US Govt, like most govts, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. But to have two conflicting sworn statements on file, the affidavit and the tax return, might make one a bit nervous.

Yes & while I use the cash in bank method I have seen it implied a few times that none ...even the embassy

do any real checking on whether you have that income or not. Just a sworn statement.

So I thought to myself a person would have to be crazy to falsify unless they were willing to pay taxes on

that which they did not receive...hence the tangled web

Like you say it is most likely the left hand never see's the right but....

These days with FBAR etc being required of US citizens living abroad it does seem

we are more a person of interest than before. Forms may at some point be linked/cross checked

Very true. I've run into a few individuals who ignored the FBAR requirement and at least one is sweating it out right now.

[JimGant]

I imagine it could be quite the tangled web if one lied to the embassy claiming to make 65kbaht/$1978 a month income or even vice versa as you say...if they did not then also claim that income or claimed less on their yearly US Tax returns

Not really. Again, revisit what you're swearing to at the Consulate:

I receive the amount of US$___________ every month from the United States Government and/or other sources.

Other sources being: draw down of my Ross IRA; the self annuity of the inheritance from my folks; that "gift" from Aunt Martha, who's trying to get below the estate tax threshold; the principal from bonds that mature; etc, etc. All of this is "other sources," but not subject to taxation. Thus, we're talking cash flow, not necessarily income.

And, yes, Thailand is interested in your income -- but only disposable income (or cash flow) available for your maintenance in Thailand. How they would ever seriously ascertain that would be curious. But, I guess if I really worried about all those down and out farangs here on retirement extension, I'd insist they possess a Thai bank account, which, beginning at one's second year of extension, would be scrutinized for the the entire previous year's inflows and outflows.

Can't happen? Any gov't that promotes "happiness," but closes down businesses with "happy endings," is capable of anything.

[IMA_FARANG]

As far as I know the "income statement" as given by the U.S. embassy is still accepted at Thai immigration to apply for a retirement extension.

It is regarded as a acceptable proof for U.S. citizens of their stated income.

However, be advised, the Thai immigration ALWAYS had and still has the right to ask for FUTHER CLARIFICATION, including further documentation of income statements at their discretion.

That has not changed, and probably will not change in the near future.

In short, if they have reason to doubt what you claim, they CAN, at their discretion, require further proof.

Usually, they don't.

But it is possible.

Just be aware of that fact.

Also be aware that the U.S. embassy does NOT certify your income.

All they sign for and attest to is that:

• That you appeared before them, and they verified your I.D. and your valid U.S. passport.
• That they listened to your d\statement about your income and they testify that they correctly stated in that income form what you told them.
• That then the consulate officer signed the form confirming the two items above

.And that is ALL they certify.

They do NOT certify your income, and if the Thai immigration has issue with what you put in that income statement, the U.S. embassy will NOT go any further than that in defending your statement against Thai immigration.

If you don't believe me, ask the embassy itself.

[mania]

Just be aware of that fact.

Also be aware that the U.S. embassy does NOT certify your income.

All they sign for and attest to is that:

• That you appeared before them, and they verified your I.D. and your valid U.S. passport.
• That they listened to your d\statement about your income and they testify that they correctly stated in that income form what you told them.
• That then the consulate officer signed the form confirming the two items above

.And that is ALL they certify.

They do NOT certify your income, and if the Thai immigration has issue with what you put in that income statement, the U.S. embassy will NOT go any further than that in defending your statement against Thai immigration.

If you don't believe me, ask the embassy itself.

This is correct afaik & the consulate has said so regarding anything (income,residence,free to marry etc)

they notary/certify as sworn too by the applicant & nothing more.

Even say's so on the Chiangmai Consulate site under services

Affidavit of Income ("Income Verification"). To extend your stay in Thailand,

Thai immigration might ask you to get a letter from us to “verify” your income.

In fact, we are not empowered to do this.

Instead, you may execute an affidavit in which you swear under oath or affirm your monthly income.

Edited November 30, 2014 by mania

[Frank James]

Some of you are "thinking too much."

[wayned]

Part of the problem, perhaps, is that the Affidavit also contains no language at all that says or even hints that the notarizing consulate/embassy officer has verified in any manner that what the affiant is saying is true. If one actually reads/translates the language, the embassy/consulate official is only confirming the identity of the person who signed the form. In other words, the official is only acting essentially as a notary according to the language on the form.

I have no idea as to why most (apparently) embassies/consulates require some proof about the income. Perhaps it's because Immigration issued some instructions in the past as to how it should be done or, perhaps, maybe the embassies/consulates just felt they ought to do that. Hell if I know.

An ex vice consul at the US Embassy in Bangkok explained to me that that is exactly why it is a sworn notarized statement. The Embassy has no way of verifying the the documentation that you bring is true, it could be fake. I get a SSA statement every year along with another private pension statement. The SSA statement would be hard to forge, but I could write the pension statement on some Company letterhead myself. He said they would have to research the validity of the documentation to accept them as true copies before they could issue the income affidavit and that would increase the cost and time required to get the letter and they are not in the business of doing that.

I don't know what other embassies require but if you supply them with a pension letter from a private company how can they certify the validity of the letter.

I always take the proof with me but have never been asked since my first extension in 2008.

[SpokaneAl]

Part of the problem, perhaps, is that the Affidavit also contains no language at all that says or even hints that the notarizing consulate/embassy officer has verified in any manner that what the affiant is saying is true. If one actually reads/translates the language, the embassy/consulate official is only confirming the identity of the person who signed the form. In other words, the official is only acting essentially as a notary according to the language on the form.

I have no idea as to why most (apparently) embassies/consulates require some proof about the income. Perhaps it's because Immigration issued some instructions in the past as to how it should be done or, perhaps, maybe the embassies/consulates just felt they ought to do that. Hell if I know.

When one obtains a notarization, the notary is only notarizing to the best of his/her ability that the person signing the document is, in fact, the person he/she says he/she is. The notary renders no opinion on anything other than the signature.

[uptheos]

It seems to me that the way the American consulate do it, i.e. not asking to see proof is the correct method.

An affidavit is just stating 'a truth' and swearing to it.

Like I have to go to the British Consulate soon and get a notorised proof of address and hand over about 2,600 baht to the #@$%, for the pleasure of doing so.

[BB1955]

Monday morning got here 4 15 am 3 spots in lot number 4 in line for spouse extention. Retirement line had about 15 , by 630 both lines werevacross the lot . I drew number 409 for some reason she said that start at 405 . Will be interesting to see . My best guess I ll be out by noon.

[uptheos]

It seems to me that the way the American consulate do it, i.e. not asking to see proof is the correct method.

An affidavit is just stating 'a truth' and swearing to it.

Like I have to go to the British Consulate soon and get a notorised proof of address and hand over about 2,600 baht to the #@$%, for the pleasure of doing so.

Well I was a bit wrong, certainly as it applies to the British Consulate.

Was there this morning and they wanted proof of address to issue proof of address, so gave my DL.

Any by the way if anyone is interested, a British notorised proof of address is now 3,080 baht for a signature!!

[Sparkles]

It seems to me that the way the American consulate do it, i.e. not asking to see proof is the correct method.

An affidavit is just stating 'a truth' and swearing to it.

Like I have to go to the British Consulate soon and get a notorised proof of address and hand over about 2,600 baht to the #@$%, for the pleasure of doing so.

Well I was a bit wrong, certainly as it applies to the British Consulate.

Was there this morning and they wanted proof of address to issue proof of address, so gave my DL.

Any by the way if anyone is interested, a British notorised proof of address is now 3,080 baht for a signature!!

Someone has to pay for the flood of immigrants going to the UK Is there no alternative ? 3,080 baht what a total rip off. I hope you made that point rather vigorously.

[uptheos]

It seems to me that the way the American consulate do it, i.e. not asking to see proof is the correct method.

An affidavit is just stating 'a truth' and swearing to it.

Like I have to go to the British Consulate soon and get a notorised proof of address and hand over about 2,600 baht to the #@$%, for the pleasure of doing so.

Well I was a bit wrong, certainly as it applies to the British Consulate.

Was there this morning and they wanted proof of address to issue proof of address, so gave my DL.

Any by the way if anyone is interested, a British notorised proof of address is now 3,080 baht for a signature!!

Someone has to pay for the flood of immigrants going to the UK Is there no alternative ? 3,080 baht what a total rip off. I hope you made that point rather vigorously.

It is a blatant rip off, but there's not much point in saying anything to the lady who just takes the applications.

No alternative, it's for certain international banking and they insist on a consulate proof of address letter.

To cap it all, the person who provides this signature isn't there today so I have to return tomorrow.

[BB1955]

I was out and finished by 10 30 very pleased . I will say the checked my income , was glad I had my letter from my pension company

[onthedarkside]

Post offering no useful information has been removed.

[slipperylobster]

By the way...

Nobody ever received a "Retirement Visa" in Chiang Mai.

That would be impossible.

I am trying to think of what the OP meant....and perhaps he meant "Extension of stay based on Retirement"

Surely not referring to the OA Retirement Visa ???

Think about it.

Edited December 1, 2014 by slipperylobster

[NancyL]

By the way...

Nobody ever received a "Retirement Visa" in Chiang Mai.

That would be impossible.

Think about it.

This is another non-useful post.

Yes, people have converted a 30-day visa exempt entry into a 90-day non-immigrant O-visa at Chiang Mai Immigration which they then return to Immigration during the last 30 days validity to extend for 12-months due to retirement.

The shorthand name for the non-imm O visa that CM Immigration stamps into their passport is a "retirement visa". Even the officials at CM Immigration call it that.

All this is done without leaving Chiang Mai. So much for the myth that you cannot get a visa without leaving Thailand.

Edited December 1, 2014 by NancyL