When I commented that things have changed as that was one of the requirements for a Retirement Extension, she said that "Everything is changing with Immigration now and the retirement extension qualification is now 65 years of age".

That is wrong, the age is 50. It is know for a fact that consular clerks will say anything to justify their actions and dismiss the conversation.

Edited December 7, 201411 yr by paz

I wouldn't count on anything being "grandfathered"

That sounds about right. Feeling of entitlement is strong. Not mentioning that many do not have those 800k in the bank but it is done through various tricks.

Sounds like you are trying the old, "Look over there" tactic.

The macwindups are coming hard and fast tonight. Excellent trolling work.

I wouldn't count on anything being "grandfathered"

That sounds about right. Feeling of entitlement is strong. Not mentioning that many do not have those 800k in the bank but it is done through various tricks.

So kindly list some of these "various tricks", then.

I am, in fact, one of the many devious retirees who commits the clearly mortal sin in your eyes of not actually having 800k in the bank here.

But I actually obtain my annual extensions of stay here on the perfectly legal and legitimate basis of monthly 65k income as confirmed by my Embassy.

I therefore take strong exception to my honesty and integrity being questioned through your implicit suggestion that I am staying in LOS solely on the basis of one of your "various tricks".

You clearly have a major grudge against retirees aged 50 and over who wish to spend their final years in Thailand without being hassled by the likes of you!

Edited December 7, 201411 yr by OJAS

When I commented that things have changed as that was one of the requirements for a Retirement Extension, she said that "Everything is changing with Immigration now and the retirement extension qualification is now 65 years of age".

That is wrong, the age is 50. It is know for a fact that consular clerks will say anything to justify their actions and dismiss the conversation.

Maybe to keep the spirit of the discussion going, you should say it's still 50

I don't need a visa....and don't really care either.

But I smell a rat. There appears to be a few 'newbies' appearing with their first post being about these upcoming changes.....then there's the usual contributors prattling away about not much.

It is possible, anything is possible, from time to time the rules will change......but I just suspect someone here is taking the piissss. 5/10.

Don't understand why everyone is getting so upset,

There has to be 100 better places to retire than Thailand now,

OK, so moving is a bit of an effort,

But look forward to the adventure,

New place, new language, new girl!

Don't understand why everyone is getting so upset,

There has to be 100 better places to retire than Thailand now,

OK, so moving is a bit of an effort,

But look forward to the adventure,

New place, new language, new girl!

Agreed. Embrace change.

They'll probably modify it one day, age up, age down, money up, money up. Lol.

Don't understand why everyone is getting so upset,

There has to be 100 better places to retire than Thailand now,

OK, so moving is a bit of an effort,

But look forward to the adventure,

New place, new language, new girl!

Agreed. Good idea and get all the married (older) guys who still want to stay, change to a Thai Family extension, this will cut the money required in half (400k vs 800k or when using income 40k instead of 65k) and everyone is happy.

Edit 1: But to me it seems (after reading all the conspiracy theories, that extension will be next

Edited December 7, 201411 yr by MJCM

Don't understand why everyone is getting so upset,

There has to be 100 better places to retire than Thailand now,

OK, so moving is a bit of an effort,

But look forward to the adventure,

New place, new language, new girl!

Agreed. Good idea and get all the married (older) guys who still want to stay, change to a Thai Family extension, this will cut the money required in half (400k vs 800k or when using income 40k instead of 65k) and everyone is happy.

Unless you're gay.

Funny coming from a person that belive 60 -70+ year old is normal for an ED visa and study

Nobody is too old to learn. Even older 80+.

No but your Chiang Mai school has an age limit, so 80 is out.

Interestingly, have a couple over from the uk on 6 month visit, lots of visa issues. Asked why they didn't get a retirement visa..he said it was now 65.. Thought nothing of it until this topic was raised. Simply thought he had mis understood..who knows?

Interestingly, have a couple over from the uk on 6 month visit, lots of visa issues. Asked why they didn't get a retirement visa..he said it was now 65.. Thought nothing of it until this topic was raised. Simply thought he had mis understood..who knows?

There is some issue with the Thai embassy in London requiring that some applicants be 65 but I don't recall any of the specifics. Somebody will wander into this thread and explain, hopefully. In any event, that's some local policy, not an actual Foreign Ministry rule.

without being hassled by the likes of you!

I do not hassle anybody and I have never had such an intention. It is just a discussion here.

Regardless of whether or not the OP was trolling, this topic generates a HOT discussion, which is bound to keep George happy with the high number of web views

The topic is also a valid one for discussion, not scaremongering. We should ask ourselves what benefit Thailand obtains from 'Western' retirees, other than substantial financial 'injection' into the Issan and Pattaya regions.

IMHO, I don't think any Thai government is really interested in the financial benefits from foreign retirees - Thai politicians are not well-known for their logical thought process...

I suspect that most Thai politicians would be much happier with Asian retirees settling in Thailand - the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese etc.

We 'westerners' really need to look at this subject matter from a Thai politician's perspective.

Then we can start worrying

Interestingly, have a couple over from the uk on 6 month visit, lots of visa issues. Asked why they didn't get a retirement visa..he said it was now 65.. Thought nothing of it until this topic was raised. Simply thought he had mis understood..who knows?

He did not misunderstood. The Thai embassy in the UK places the general requirement to 65. That is their decision only and has nothing to do with immigration regulations or what other consulates do.

Edited December 7, 201411 yr by paz

I don't need a visa....and don't really care either.

But I smell a rat. There appears to be a few 'newbies' appearing with their first post being about these upcoming changes.....then there's the usual contributors prattling away about not much.

It is possible, anything is possible, from time to time the rules will change......but I just suspect someone here is taking the piissss. 5/10.

Well, I am one of those 'newbies'with a first post. Actually I have only just become a member, and i posted because I thought I

might have something useful to contribute - not because I wanted to 'take the piss'. And, whilst it is my first post and we all

have to st to start somewhere, I posted on the basis of , as I thought, actual primary source evidence, and something which may

directly affect myself in the future. At the moment this is a speculative topic, and all opinions need to be respected. I value this

forum, and the advice in it, on all topics and from all contributors.

In the UK, and only in the UK, the age requirement for a non-immigrant O visa based on retirement is 65yo. The age requirement for an O-A longstay visa issued there remains 50yo. For their own reasons, this outpost of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pushes those between 50 and 65 to meet the more stringent hurdles of the O-A.

The rumor being discussed in this thread is almost certainly based on this unique situation.

Note that both of these are visas and the requirements for them applied by Thai embassies and consulates around the world are not the same as the rules applied for extensions of stay granted by Immigration offices in Thailand. Those who take a moment to learn the difference between a visa and one's Permission To Stay will find that suddenly the whole system starts to make a fair amount of sense.

I don't need a visa....and don't really care either.

But I smell a rat. There appears to be a few 'newbies' appearing with their first post being about these upcoming changes.....then there's the usual contributors prattling away about not much.

It is possible, anything is possible, from time to time the rules will change......but I just suspect someone here is taking the piissss. 5/10.

Well, I am one of those 'newbies'with a first post. Actually I have only just become a member, and i posted because I thought I

might have something useful to contribute - not because I wanted to 'take the piss'. And, whilst it is my first post and we all

have to st to start somewhere, I posted on the basis of , as I thought, actual primary source evidence, and something which may

directly affect myself in the future. At the moment this is a speculative topic, and all opinions need to be respected. I value this

forum, and the advice in it, on all topics and from all contributors.

Peakman, do not get discouraged, this forum is for tough guys.

Edited December 7, 201411 yr by MacWalen

I had a retirement visa in the mid 90's and then lost it as I came back one day too late to renew. At that time I was spending six months here and six months in the US. Then, I never applied until mid 2000's by which time Mr T had raised the requirement from around 35000 to the present 65000 bt monthly (or 800,000 bt in the bank) Just wondering if anyone still on here is under the so called grandfather clause and only has to have the 35000 bt monthly income requirement.

The real issue is that this visa should be named properly. It allows temporary residence w/o working permit. The minimum age can be dropped to anything for qualified expats.

Originally, I got a 2 year business visa w 10m investment requirement. After the first 3 months immigration asked for all kinds of additional crap. I said, forget about it and give me a retirement extension instead. No business investment in Thailand. Spent the funds on a condo instead and continued running my overseas companies from this virtual working place.

Got 1 year extensions ever since. I will get rid of companies but don't think I will ever retire fully. Maybe, I would start something new in Thailand should they change some of their rules. Getting a WP is very easy but linked to some nonsense.

Anyway, for me and many others, living in Thailand at 50+ has nothing to do with retirement. Digital nomads with high income can do their programming for customers at home countries from anywhere. When I was young I used to go on holiday in Southern France or Italy to be able to concentrate on one project. It is very hard to finish stuff in the treadmill of your home office being interrupted every other minute. Today, I would not mind if one of my developers would go to a Thai island for a project for as long as it takes. Such a business assignment is not possible. OK, I stop here. I am deviating a little bit from social security and pension issues.

Thailand should become more creative with their visa types attracting people that any country loves to host for a while.

I see you guys are very technical about it. Ok, here is a list of what retirement age is in various countries. I don't see 50 here. You might have retired by that age but that is not the general definition of retirement age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age

The retirement age in that list is to get a guvernment pension. And that has nothing to do with a retirement visa or extension.

without being hassled by the likes of you!

I do not hassle anybody and I have never had such an intention. It is just a discussion here.

So when are you going to list your "various tricks" then?

I wouldn't count on anything being "grandfathered"

That sounds about right. Feeling of entitlement is strong. Not mentioning that many do not have those 800k in the bank but it is done through various tricks.

Most people doing tricks to get the visa are probably the ones signing up for Walens visa schools. And not attending to the lessons. Which is ok in Walens visa school

In the UK, and only in the UK, the age requirement for a non-immigrant O visa based on retirement is 65yo. The age requirement for an O-A longstay visa issued there remains 50yo. For their own reasons, this outpost of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pushes those between 50 and 65 to meet the more stringent hurdles of the O-A.

The rumor being discussed in this thread is almost certainly based on this unique situation.

Note that both of these are visas and the requirements for them applied by Thai embassies and consulates around the world are not the same as the rules applied for extensions of stay granted by Immigration offices in Thailand. Those who take a moment to learn the difference between a visa and one's Permission To Stay will find that suddenly the whole system starts to make a fair amount of sense.

I believe Pattaya is full of rumours which are just that ' rumours '

enough said ..........

We give these endless rumors far too much attention - without a single link to anything credible, this should have been closed three posts in.

Well I think it is quite possible they will change the retirement visa rules.

Considering how xenophobic your average thai is and the number of dead beat farangs all over Thailand I would consider it to be quite popular with the majority of thais.

There seems to be a general crackdown on visas so an extension at looking at the retirement visa rules is not out of the question at all.

sexpats of all ages are frowned upon by polite thai society

Edited December 7, 201411 yr by ColdSingha

In the UK, and only in the UK, the age requirement for a non-immigrant O visa based on retirement is 65yo. The age requirement for an O-A longstay visa issued there remains 50yo. For their own reasons, this outpost of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pushes those between 50 and 65 to meet the more stringent hurdles of the O-A.

The rumor being discussed in this thread is almost certainly based on this unique situation.

Note that both of these are visas and the requirements for them applied by Thai embassies and consulates around the world are not the same as the rules applied for extensions of stay granted by Immigration offices in Thailand. Those who take a moment to learn the difference between a visa and one's Permission To Stay will find that suddenly the whole system starts to make a fair amount of sense.

In the UK, and only in the UK, the age requirement for a non-immigrant O visa based on retirement is 65yo. The age requirement for an O-A longstay visa issued there remains 50yo. For their own reasons, this outpost of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pushes those between 50 and 65 to meet the more stringent hurdles of the O-A.

The rumor being discussed in this thread is almost certainly based on this unique situation.

Note that both of these are visas and the requirements for them applied by Thai embassies and consulates around the world are not the same as the rules applied for extensions of stay granted by Immigration offices in Thailand. Those who take a moment to learn the difference between a visa and one's Permission To Stay will find that suddenly the whole system starts to make a fair amount of sense.

So, if the UK Thai regs are now requiring a retiremwnt age od 65, does this also apply to ex-pat Brits living overseas in countries other than Thailand who wish to apply for a Thai retirement visa?