Immigration Confirms The End Of Border Runs From Oct 1, 2006

[Felt 35]

How shall they controll they who legally carry two valid passports!

[mit]

Thats my dive shop knackered

and the dive industry

and think of all the money it brings in

forget cambodia the divings crap

Malaysia for me

[steveromagnino]

This subject is getting more interest than any other topic I've seen here on TV, over 22,000 views and with approx 400 people viewing the topic at any one time - I guess this is mostly made up of falangs but is there any Thai business people viewing this right now? And what are their opinions on the subject, how are they going to prepare for this if it turns out to be entirely true?

OK, well I am a 1/2 Thai business man. 50% of our business is with tourists with money; we are are dealing with the people spending 10,000 baht a day or more on their stay in Bangkok.

I would say it will have 0 impact on us. Possibly long term if this is part of TAT's efforts to upgrade the type of tourist Thailand gets then it could be good, as for sure there are some tourists who don't visit Thailand for fear of running into the less sanitary parts. I would guess that the higher end hospitality industry, overall retail industry and so on will be much the same as us. There may be some effect outside BKK in tourist hotspots, but I would hazard a guess that 95%-99% of tourists in these areas will be unaffected as they aren't staying 90+ days. Perhaps in my family's hometown of Buriram there might be some slight effect, but there are no westerners in the area we own property in; perhaps in the other areas there might be as the stats say there are; however most of these probalby have the correct visa and are retirees or married and thus on O visas (I might have that name of it wrong).

There will be sectors of the economy strongly affected at a guess. I probably wouldn't want to be owning the Thermae for instance right about now; perhaps 20% (absolute most) of their customers are on the visa on arrival/runner category - but I am guessing more likely maybe 5% with the rest being either tourists, work permit holders, retirees or married.

On a personal note, it will force (hopefully) the english teaching chop shops to actually do the right thing and get work permits for genuine teachers with genuine qualifications and pay them a fair amount. It will encourage people to stop cheating their way around the spirit of the law. This has been a long time coming, and I think it will be good even if there is a very minor drop in spending in a few parts of the economy e.g. beer, cigarrettes, prostitutes.

I guess the govt is saying , stop using visa on arrival, get the right visa and if you don't meet the criteria to do so, then you are not wanted; take your money elsewhere. That's what USA says. That's what NZ says. That's what pretty much most countries will tell you. Sorry if you are in that group, but there aren't many of you and I don't think you have significant spending power, so the threat 'we are going elsewhere' will have minimal impact.

I'm just working on a long stay tourism spending study at the moment and none of the people in this study would have problems qualifying under multiple categories if they wanted to stay long time. Incidentally, none of the people being studied are farang either.

For the people who are spending 90 days+ doing business here on buying trips...well obviously there are several ways you can qualify unless you are buying tiny amounts. And more importantly; surely you have better supply chain mgt than needing to spend 90+ days here if you are doing tiny amounts?

Having lots of deadbeat serial tourists doing visa runs might be good if you run a bus service to Poi pet, but it has minimal impact on the overall economy here. Without hammering the point, pretending to teach english with a fake degree, playing movie extras and dive teaching, while a nice thing to have are not exactly short term drivers of economic growth. If you cannot come up with the money to get people work permits and make them legal, then you aren't exactly big time.

In short, if you have some cash (and by western standards 3-4m baht is nothing) then come stay for as long as you want. If you are broke, stay for a while but not more than 90 days.

Seems completely fair to me. About on par with NZ.

Edited September 11, 2006 by steveromagnino

[bendix]

[

OK, well I am a 1/2 Thai business man. 50% of our business is with tourists with money; we are are dealing with the people spending 10,000 baht a day or more on their stay in Bangkok.

I would say it will have 0 impact on us. Possibly long term if this is part of TAT's efforts to upgrade the type of tourist Thailand gets then it could be good, as for sure there are some tourists who don't visit Thailand for fear of running into the less sanitary parts. I would guess that the higher end hospitality industry, overall retail industry and so on will be much the same as us. There may be some effect outside BKK in tourist hotspots, but I would hazard a guess that 95%-99% of tourists in these areas will be unaffected as they aren't staying 90+ days. Perhaps in my family's hometown of Buriram there might be some slight effect, but there are no westerners in the area we own property in; perhaps in the other areas there might be as the stats say there are; however most of these probalby have the correct visa and are retirees or married and thus on O visas (I might have that name of it wrong).

There will be sectors of the economy strongly affected at a guess. I probably wouldn't want to be owning the Thermae for instance right about now; perhaps 20% (absolute most) of their customers are on the visa on arrival/runner category - but I am guessing more likely maybe 5% with the rest being either tourists, work permit holders, retirees or married.

On a personal note, it will force (hopefully) the english teaching chop shops to actually do the right thing and get work permits for genuine teachers with genuine qualifications and pay them a fair amount. It will encourage people to stop cheating their way around the spirit of the law. This has been a long time coming, and I think it will be good even if there is a very minor drop in spending in a few parts of the economy e.g. beer, cigarrettes, prostitutes.

I guess the govt is saying , stop using visa on arrival, get the right visa and if you don't meet the criteria to do so, then you are not wanted; take your money elsewhere. That's what USA says. That's what NZ says. That's what pretty much most countries will tell you. Sorry if you are in that group, but there aren't many of you and I don't think you have significant spending power, so the threat 'we are going elsewhere' will have minimal impact.

I'm just working on a long stay tourism spending study at the moment and none of the people in this study would have problems qualifying under multiple categories if they wanted to stay long time. Incidentally, none of the people being studied are farang either.

For the people who are spending 90 days+ doing business here on buying trips...well obviously there are several ways you can qualify unless you are buying tiny amounts. And more importantly; surely you have better supply chain mgt than needing to spend 90+ days here if you are doing tiny amounts?

Having lots of deadbeat serial tourists doing visa runs might be good if you run a bus service to Poi pet, but it has minimal impact on the overall economy here. Without hammering the point, pretending to teach english with a fake degree, playing movie extras and dive teaching, while a nice thing to have are not exactly short term drivers of economic growth. If you cannot come up with the money to get people work permits and make them legal, then you aren't exactly big time.

In short, if you have some cash (and by western standards 3-4m baht is nothing) then come stay for as long as you want. If you are broke, stay for a while but not more than 90 days.

Seems completely fair to me. About on par with NZ.

By far the best and most cogent argument on the subject today, and posted by a 50% farang / 50% thai.

Well said, that man.

[markg]

jes--us,

what about all the casual farang working in the dive industry on the islands.

99% are on tourist visa's.

they'll be pissed.

bummer dude

Yes this is exactly the kind of thing they are clamping down on. The casual illegal worker who doesnt pay tax.

What is your point? Would you like it in your country? I wouldnt.

[Bleeder]

There is nothing of this new regulation on Thai Immigration's website:

http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/base....;section=notice

Have heard of plans to do this for years now. I don't think it will actually make much difference. Instead of doing a one-day border run, you take a three day holiday, as you've officially left (as opposed to leaving for an hour which they won't count as having left for this situation) then the clock starts again. Right?

Also, how does owning property here help? I own three condominiums, with a total value of over ten million Baht, my NON-B expired four months ago and I've been doing day-runs since, I've been told (but only ever by drunks) that this property ownership gives me special visa rights?

Anyone?

[Nikkijah]

This subject is getting more interest than any other topic I've seen here on TV, over 22,000 views and with approx 400 people viewing the topic at any one time - I guess this is mostly made up of falangs but is there any Thai business people viewing this right now? And what are their opinions on the subject, how are they going to prepare for this if it turns out to be entirely true?

OK, well I am a 1/2 Thai business man. 50% of our business is with tourists with money; we are are dealing with the people spending 10,000 baht a day or more on their stay in Bangkok.

I would say it will have 0 impact on us. Possibly long term if this is part of TAT's efforts to upgrade the type of tourist Thailand gets then it could be good, as for sure there are some tourists who don't visit Thailand for fear of running into the less sanitary parts. I would guess that the higher end hospitality industry, overall retail industry and so on will be much the same as us. There may be some effect outside BKK in tourist hotspots, but I would hazard a guess that 95%-99% of tourists in these areas will be unaffected as they aren't staying 90+ days. Perhaps in my family's hometown of Buriram there might be some slight effect, but there are no westerners in the area we own property in; perhaps in the other areas there might be as the stats say there are; however most of these probalby have the correct visa and are retirees or married and thus on O visas (I might have that name of it wrong).

There will be sectors of the economy strongly affected at a guess. I probably wouldn't want to be owning the Thermae for instance right about now; perhaps 20% (absolute most) of their customers are on the visa on arrival/runner category - but I am guessing more likely maybe 5% with the rest being either tourists, work permit holders, retirees or married.

On a personal note, it will force (hopefully) the english teaching chop shops to actually do the right thing and get work permits for genuine teachers with genuine qualifications and pay them a fair amount. It will encourage people to stop cheating their way around the spirit of the law. This has been a long time coming, and I think it will be good even if there is a very minor drop in spending in a few parts of the economy e.g. beer, cigarrettes, prostitutes.

I guess the govt is saying , stop using visa on arrival, get the right visa and if you don't meet the criteria to do so, then you are not wanted; take your money elsewhere. That's what USA says. That's what NZ says. That's what pretty much most countries will tell you. Sorry if you are in that group, but there aren't many of you and I don't think you have significant spending power, so the threat 'we are going elsewhere' will have minimal impact.

I'm just working on a long stay tourism spending study at the moment and none of the people in this study would have problems qualifying under multiple categories if they wanted to stay long time. Incidentally, none of the people being studied are farang either.

For the people who are spending 90 days+ doing business here on buying trips...well obviously there are several ways you can qualify unless you are buying tiny amounts. And more importantly; surely you have better supply chain mgt than needing to spend 90+ days here if you are doing tiny amounts?

Having lots of deadbeat serial tourists doing visa runs might be good if you run a bus service to Poi pet, but it has minimal impact on the overall economy here. Without hammering the point, pretending to teach english with a fake degree, playing movie extras and dive teaching, while a nice thing to have are not exactly short term drivers of economic growth. If you cannot come up with the money to get people work permits and make them legal, then you aren't exactly big time.

In short, if you have some cash (and by western standards 3-4m baht is nothing) then come stay for as long as you want. If you are broke, stay for a while but not more than 90 days.

Seems completely fair to me. About on par with NZ.

Good points I have to admit, I still feel sorry for the people who do not qualify for any type of visa but have commitments here.

We will have to see in the long run what effects this has on Thailand as nobody really knows for sure

What we can be sure of is that there will be some businesses not mentioned in the post above that will lose out, maybe some of these businesses will never reveal their losses as they are not exactly on the right side of the law either...

[steveromagnino]

By far the best and most cogent argument on the subject today, and posted by a 50% farang / 50% thai.

Well said, that man.

Cheques in the mail :-)

Honestly, if someone started spouting this sort of stuff in New Zealand (where I grew up) the VERY next thing said would be:

'Well if you don't effin like it, then eff off'

I don't think that is quite the right attitude here, but honestly, do the people doing perpetual visa runs honestly think they were going to be doing that for ever>?

Get the right Visa lads, and you'll all be fine

Cheers.

[Soju]

This subject is getting more interest than any other topic I've seen here on TV, over 22,000 views and with approx 400 people viewing the topic at any one time - I guess this is mostly made up of falangs but is there any Thai business people viewing this right now? And what are their opinions on the subject, how are they going to prepare for this if it turns out to be entirely true?

OK, well I am a 1/2 Thai business man. 50% of our business is with tourists with money; we are are dealing with the people spending 10,000 baht a day or more on their stay in Bangkok.

I would say it will have 0 impact on us. Possibly long term if this is part of TAT's efforts to upgrade the type of tourist Thailand gets then it could be good, as for sure there are some tourists who don't visit Thailand for fear of running into the less sanitary parts. I would guess that the higher end hospitality industry, overall retail industry and so on will be much the same as us. There may be some effect outside BKK in tourist hotspots, but I would hazard a guess that 95%-99% of tourists in these areas will be unaffected as they aren't staying 90+ days. Perhaps in my family's hometown of Buriram there might be some slight effect, but there are no westerners in the area we own property in; perhaps in the other areas there might be as the stats say there are; however most of these probalby have the correct visa and are retirees or married and thus on O visas (I might have that name of it wrong).

There will be sectors of the economy strongly affected at a guess. I probably wouldn't want to be owning the Thermae for instance right about now; perhaps 20% (absolute most) of their customers are on the visa on arrival/runner category - but I am guessing more likely maybe 5% with the rest being either tourists, work permit holders, retirees or married.

On a personal note, it will force (hopefully) the english teaching chop shops to actually do the right thing and get work permits for genuine teachers with genuine qualifications and pay them a fair amount. It will encourage people to stop cheating their way around the spirit of the law. This has been a long time coming, and I think it will be good even if there is a very minor drop in spending in a few parts of the economy e.g. beer, cigarrettes, prostitutes.

I guess the govt is saying , stop using visa on arrival, get the right visa and if you don't meet the criteria to do so, then you are not wanted; take your money elsewhere. That's what USA says. That's what NZ says. That's what pretty much most countries will tell you. Sorry if you are in that group, but there aren't many of you and I don't think you have significant spending power, so the threat 'we are going elsewhere' will have minimal impact.

I'm just working on a long stay tourism spending study at the moment and none of the people in this study would have problems qualifying under multiple categories if they wanted to stay long time. Incidentally, none of the people being studied are farang either.

For the people who are spending 90 days+ doing business here on buying trips...well obviously there are several ways you can qualify unless you are buying tiny amounts. And more importantly; surely you have better supply chain mgt than needing to spend 90+ days here if you are doing tiny amounts?

Having lots of deadbeat serial tourists doing visa runs might be good if you run a bus service to Poi pet, but it has minimal impact on the overall economy here. Without hammering the point, pretending to teach english with a fake degree, playing movie extras and dive teaching, while a nice thing to have are not exactly short term drivers of economic growth. If you cannot come up with the money to get people work permits and make them legal, then you aren't exactly big time.

In short, if you have some cash (and by western standards 3-4m baht is nothing) then come stay for as long as you want. If you are broke, stay for a while but not more than 90 days.

Seems completely fair to me. About on par with NZ.

So far, the manner in which this new law will be implemented is anything but clear. However I've seen it stated that a maximum of only 3 stamps per year for those of us without visas will be allowed. In another place it was stated that we can get 3 stamps and then wait 90 days and then are allowed another 3 stamps. Others state that if we aren't staying continously for 90 days then it won't be a problem. Whatever the case is, an official from the Thai immigration department needs to make a very clear and unambiguous statement about what exactly the new policy is, because many people, legitimate tourists and businessmen, are likely already panicking into thinking they will be barred from entering in the future and will begin making alternate plans. Myself, I'm sitting tight until I see how this rule is implemented. I guarantee you others who don't have firm commitments to Thailand will seriously consider taking their business and/or tourist dollars elsewhere. With such huge interest about this topic here on Thai Visa, you can be assured that word, albeit many of it rumors and false information, will spread rapidly and you are guaranteed of losing at least some of your business. You don't say what exactly your business is, but certainly some tourists who are your customers come in and out of Thailand more frequently than 3 times in 90 days. Huge numbers of tourists come to Thailand and make side trips to neighboring countries. If these tourists are barred from entering more than 3 times in 90 days, they will avoid Thailand or at least make it a more minor part of their vacation plans.

While I have a wife in Thailand, I end up spending a lot at mid to upscale resorts and hotels on my trips to Thailand as me and my wife head out of Bangkok at least once per trip. All those tourist places that I use will lose my business if this law is implemented as some are suggesting it will be.

Does NZ bar tourists from entering more than 3 times in 90 days? I don't know of any countries that have such a law. Many countries have laws and regulations that prevent the visa runner situation as it exists in Thailand. I agree Thailand has every right to try to stop this practice if they desire. But by making a blanket ban of non-visa tourists from entering more frequently than 3 times in 90 days doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Way too many legitimate tourists and businesmen will be affected.

Edited September 11, 2006 by Soju

[chingching]

I'm just working on a long stay tourism spending study at the moment and none of the people in this study would have problems qualifying under multiple categories if they wanted to stay long time. Incidentally, none of the people being studied are farang either.

So if they are not farang why in the world would they require a visa ?

[bendix]

While I have a wife in Thailand, I end up spending a lot at mid to upscale resorts and hotels on my trips to Thailand as me and my wife head out of Bangkok at least once per trip. All those tourist places that I use will lose my business if this law is implemented as some are suggesting it will be.

Soju, I might be missing the point here, but why are you worried? You say you have a wife, so all you have to do is get an O Visa. Why subject yourself and your family to the worry when you can be pefectly legit?

Edited September 11, 2006 by bendix

[A_Traveller]

A quick point, the act makes no mention of a 90 day in, then 90 day out provision. It does identify the maximum period for tourism as 90 days. I would be interested in seeing the Ministerial Regs. which state this, anyone able to provide them?

If no such regs exist, then like it or not the border runners have done nothing illegal, but have used the letter of the law to stay here. If the regs are extant then the IB has chosen not to act upon them, again that is not the 'fault' of any 30 day 'runner'.

It is probable that most will be able to find, assuming this report proves to be true, a workable solution to their, by definition individual, situations.

Regards

PS Not a 30 day runner....

/edit //

Edited September 11, 2006 by A_Traveller

[steveromagnino]

So if they are not farang why in the world would they require a visa ?

Koreans

Chinese

Singaporeans

Japanese

There was some work I did in the same area about 3 years ago, but I cannot really remember the results; it was farang exclusively, but only for Scandanavians long stay tourism. Again, none of that group would have had problems qualifying either.

[visarunner]

I would consider the source of this report as not reliable.

[dsan]

anyone know if this will eventually effect the triple entry visa users?

[deminister]

They have tried to do the same in 2002, after a while it died. It is simply not compatible with being an transit country. Not only is the idea stupid, you better enforce the labor laws and increase the fines and jailterms, it is simply a non starter an incompatible with the New Asean visa plan. Because if you get a visa for Malaysia, or Myanmar, they have to let you in, given teh fact that the new Asean plan should be in place within the next few months, it looks like someone first spoke and not yet thought. Ahh well TIT

[Soju]

While I have a wife in Thailand, I end up spending a lot at mid to upscale resorts and hotels on my trips to Thailand as me and my wife head out of Bangkok at least once per trip. All those tourist places that I use will lose my business if this law is implemented as some are suggesting it will be.

Soju, I might be missing the point here, but why are you worried. You say you have a wife, so all you have to do is get an O Visa? Why subject yourself and your family to the worry when you can be pefectly legit?

I'm sure I'm in the same position as a lot of others are who have a Thai "wife". We are not legally married. We did the ceremony in her home town, but never registered our marriage. Even for those who are married, I'm sure that for some of them it is just a hassle to go through and they'd rather avoid it if they have another alternative. In my case, I'm not living in Thailand. I live and work outside of Thailand. I'm a totally legitimate tourist that just happens to come very frequently to Thailand. If worse comes to worse, I suppose I'll just meet my wife in Singapore, Malaysia, or other nearby countries on our vacations. But it'll end up costing us a lot more. Anyways, as I already said, I'm not panicking or making any alternate plans based a single news report that could turn out to be wrong or be implemented very differently than some are suggesting.

[bendix]

Oh, of course. Sorry soju. My bad. Well, knows the time to make an honest women of her

Edited September 11, 2006 by bendix

[Mobi]

Good points I have to admit, I still feel sorry for the people who do not qualify for any type of visa but have commitments here.

We will have to see in the long run what effects this has on Thailand as nobody really knows for sure

What we can be sure of is that there will be some businesses not mentioned in the post above that will lose out, maybe some of these businesses will never reveal their losses as they are not exactly on the right side of the law either...

Yes the points are well made and make a lot of sense. I have no real problem with the tightening up on the visa rules, but it would be good if they could clarify all the 'grey' areas, so that everyone knows exactly where they stand, and as I said previously, it would have been decent of them if they could have given more notice of implementation. People's lives and livelihoods are being affected by all this.

[DerringDo]

You can't get a Non-Imm O, LEGALLY, for renting a house. SO you're either being simplistic in your argument or the visa officer in Washington? issued you an illegal visa. However, as you married your girlfriend and are expecting a child, congrats by the way, perhaps he used a little poetic licence to award it. THAT would make it fake therefore a scam. Either you or he is scamming the Thai government.

People are making a big deal about "Teachers" but i would guess that their salary is going into the local economy. Not necessarily a rich persons pockets as happens with most "Quality tourists." I have worked with several people who have bought a property outside of Thailand and send their children to schools in order to increase their "face." How does this money benefit Thailand?

One half(something) and half Thai businessman who caters to an upmarket clientele is not a good barometer as to whether something is good for Thailand. This is not a slur but he doesn't say half farang so i won't be so foolish as to assume that.

For the sexpats here who don't want to get a visa: unlucky. For many people instead of doing a run every month they'll have to do one every 3 after they get a proper visa from outside the country and extend it inside perhaps. Days lost doing visa runs can now be used to have a small holiday while you wait for a legal visa. It's not more time, just condensed.

Perhaps we can all settle down and relax a bit and wait for more information to flow out, it always does, and wait for new ways for people to get around whatever has been decided.

[VanZam]

By far the best and most cogent argument on the subject today, and posted by a 50% farang / 50% thai.

Well said, that man.

Cheques in the mail :-)

Honestly, if someone started spouting this sort of stuff in New Zealand (where I grew up) the VERY next thing said would be:

'Well if you don't effin like it, then eff off'

I don't think that is quite the right attitude here, but honestly, do the people doing perpetual visa runs honestly think they were going to be doing that for ever>?

Get the right Visa lads, and you'll all be fine

Cheers.

NZ offers tourist visas for up to a year, provided you have the required capital per month of stay.

Thailand does not.

[Breema_Ken]

teachers: have no fear, as korea, japan, and taiwan are always here. you'll get paid well in these countries, experience new cultures, and enjoy new women. don't fret- they are a great bet!

and, if this fully goes into affect, the market dynamics will shift, and it will allow for another SE Asian country to have a chance of being the hub and offering the khao san. if hotels weren't so pricey kuala lumpur would be the favorite for new hubs with it's air asia affordablity and ease. maybe it will be kl, yet as a transit hub more than a hang out and shop hub?

i am looking forward to seeing how things change, as the well-worn traveller's circuit could use a little shaking up.

and, it won't be so bad for the thais to start developing a deeper gratitude for the backpackers that do frequent thailand- which might only surface with a decline in numbers (unfortunately).

life is constant change, so let's welcome it!

(by the way, is this all about the jon-benet ramsey arrest? fear of pedeophyle killers?)

Edited September 11, 2006 by Breema_Ken

[steveromagnino]

Does NZ bar tourists from entering more than 3 times in 90 days? I don't know of any countries that have such a law. Many countries have laws and regulations that prevent the visa runner situation as it exists in Thailand. I agree Thailand has every right to try to stop this practice if they desire. But by making a blanket ban of non-visa tourists from entering more frequently than 3 times in 90 days doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Way too many legitimate tourists and businesmen will be affected.

FOr NZ, as far as I know, many nationalities need to apply for a visa in advance, and tourists can only stay a maximum of 180 days out of 2 years, then cannot stay again for another 2 years or something like that. You get 3 months on arrival, and can extend up to a year with proof of finanial support etc but then you must exit the country and not return for the same period as you have just stayed. It is all a bit unclear; all I know is that my family have ended up in some cases getting PR just to avoid the whole having to get visas bit.

You cannot work, be a student and must be a genuine tourist and not be sponsored and be able to financially support yourself and prove that, otherwise you MAY get swept up and deported if the NZ police service manage to ineptly stumble on you. Odds of that are pretty low.

So... a vaguely simimlar principle to Thailand with the obvious difference that NZ tends to attract tourists staying longer as it is a long way away to go for 2 days holiday. And of course that there are 50 countries with visa waivers compared to Thailand which has AFAIK almost 100. When things go wrong (e.g. lots of Thais overstaying; 5% of arrivals in one year if I recall correctly) then NZ responded; they removed Thailand from the Visa on arrival country list. Given the epidemic levels of visa runners that you can see at a place like Poipet, someone here might have had the same brainwave, coincidentally in an election year...hmmm..

I do agree with you; communication of this is being poorly handled; however I think once a clear statement goes out and the policy starts getting enforced, it will be clear enough. I also think that entering/exiting as many times as you want, but a cumulative 90 days is fair enough. If you want to stay longer, and have a reason to do so, there should be a visa available for application PRIOR to arriving.

I'll not disclose too much more, but I work in the high end services and luxury goods business; we know pretty much who our customers are and many are tracked worldwide; almost none of them are farang due to buying tastes and also due to service and price differentials, and as I said it is about a 50 50 split between locals and foreigners. Almost all the foreigners are tourists or business people here for short periods. So I stand by my comment; AFAIK there will be 0 impact on us, plenty of parts of the market will get affected by this to greater or lessor degrees, but we'll be at the end of the line I think.

I'm not claiming to know for the whole economy (although I think the economy is far bigger than the farang tourists staying more than 90 days at a time bit), I'm responding to someone who asked what a Thai business person thought of it. I won't try to add more than this, as this is the bit I know something about. Hope it is helpful to some.

And of course it goes without saying (I hope) condolgences to those who will affected by this; hope you can figure out a way to legally do what ever it is that you do here - work, fun, play, whatever.

Edited September 11, 2006 by steveromagnino

[lingyai]

Let's get some perspective. Thailand is trying to enhance its image in the world. The bottom-dweller farang may not like that, but it's a fact. This move is not aimed at genuine tourists and it is not aimed at genuine farang with jobs, wives, families or a desire (and the wherewithal) to live in Thailand. It IS aimed at low-lifes such as the guy I'm aware of who has done visa runs for 15 years and currently earns a living taking sex tourists on escorted trips of the nightlife, never having paid a satang in tax in 15 years. It's aimed at deadbeat Khao San hippies. It's aimed at enhancing the quality of teachers and avoiding another Karr incident.

Wow you are not only an ass, you are also clueless.

Um how does this stop another Karr incident? It doesn't. He could have (or he already did?) got a work visa (of course schools and regulations make this a long expensive process). How does this enhance the quality of teachers? It doesn't. The paper is filled with help wanted ads already, now less farang will be here so even more vacancies and lower standards.

Deadbeat khao san hippies, what is wrong with them (other than the smell)? I see them buying food & drinks from local people and staying in family owned guest houses. High end tourists stay in foreign owned hotels. Why don’t you go ask those Thai vendors and business people if they want the hippies kicked out?

So you know one guy who is in the sex tourism business, well I bet if they boot him out the whole sex trade will stop and all the go go bars will become Buddhist temples over night because only foreigners run sex related business. Oh and we all pay VAT so everybody in Thailand pays some tax. Infact since most of these foreigns don't use the schools system or public hospitals or other services, they might even contribute MORE than many Thais. Don't forget the taxes that some Thai people pay is beause of income earned from foreigners!

As I said before how does this benefit Thailand? Tell me the benefits and how they out way the costs?

The other thing that is annoying is how people say that Thais can do whatever they want. Well of course they can, but that doesn’t mean a majority would support this. There are a lot of Thai who wouldn’t

[gharknes]

Wanna live here get a VISA

Otherwise go home.

How simple is that?

Or be an illegal.

Same as any country where you're not a national.

Cannot see the angst.

Thailand could care less about the illegals here spending their money, and I'd guess the illegals (VISA run junkies) are the chepskates anyway, don't own any land etc.

boo hoo, they are cracking down.

Get a life chaps, or a VISA.

so what makes everyone think it's ok to a visa run on a Non IM type O, that is not the purpose of a type O either, this is also bending the rules.. At the end of the day retirement or full residency are the only true legal ways to stay in Thailand.

[manjara]

GOD - OK people, guess what? This isn't about how much money they can make. This is about the visa runs - like so many other rules and regulations in LOS, the visa runs never made any sense. I get a 30 day visa waiver, but all I have to do to get a new one is step with one foot over the border and come back? Makes any sense?? No!

If Thailand wanted the visa runners here, they would issue unlimited visa waivers (it's not a visa on arrival - it's a waiver). It was never, ever the intent of this law to allow people to do visa runs. No one benefits from visa runs except maybe people who want to be here and keep a low profile. Or who are just too lazy to get a proper visa.

Thai policy makers are not siting there going "oh, wait, the visa runners pay for lots of beer and stuff, we better keep them here". If they were thinking that they would change the rules so that you don't have to do visa runs. They would issue unlimited visas for anyone who wants one.

You can hardly blame Thailand for abolishing a completely senseless practice. Whether or not the current visa rules then optimize tourist arrivals is another question. But to me it seems it's not bad:

- BHT 3M gets you in so if you are young and rich, no prob

- Over 50 gets you in so if you want to retire, no prob

- Work gets you in so if you want to work here, OK

- Wife gets you in so if you want to be with family, OK

- Travellers get a 30 day on arrival or a real visa either back home or at their first exit, they are good for at least a year - OK

- Package tourists are totally OK with the 30 day

If you are young, poor, and don't want to work - good luck getting a visa anywhere

I don't disagree with the points above but there is a financial imperative that is not explained, and makes things difficult.

- Over 50 gets you in if you have 800k in the bank

- Work gets you in if your salary is 50k/month (about 2-3 times the Thai wage at least)

- Wife gets you in if you have 400k in the bank or have work (see above)

I don't know the exact figures required, but that's my impression anyway.

If you bought a condo, have a Thai GF (not wife), no job in Thailand and don't want to put 800k in a Thai bank (or you're under 50), then forget it...

Since the regulations changed you can't even set up a Thai company to pay yourself the requisite salary any more (unless you know 6 wealthy, trustworthy Thais!?!)

How many Farang does that affect? Probably a lot more than the Thais expect....

[bander]

I have been living here for a year on VOA's. I rent 2 properties in Bangkok, support a TGF (and family) and also employ a maid. My income is derived from outside Thailand and im 27 years old. Could the people who have been going about this being a good thing just get the correct visa please point out which visa i can obtain because i have to point out that there isn't one. I am not interested in getting married to anyone at this point in my life and do not wish to invest USD 85000 in Thailand thanks.

It seems in a months time i have no choice but to return to the UK and my TGF and maid are out of luck. Please correct me if this is not the case.

This is really going to hit the property market and economy big time. Glad i never bought a property here.

Good post Martin, I think a lot of falangs are in the same boat me included.

It's gone be a lot of unemployed TGF and familys in the near future.

[tigerbeer]

Wanna live here get a VISA

Otherwise go home.

How simple is that?

Or be an illegal.

Same as any country where you're not a national.

Cannot see the angst.

Thailand could care less about the illegals here spending their money, and I'd guess the illegals (VISA run junkies) are the chepskates anyway, don't own any land etc.

boo hoo, they are cracking down.

Get a life chaps, or a VISA.

so what makes everyone think it's ok to a visa run on a Non IM type O, that is not the purpose of a type O either, this is also bending the rules.. At the end of the day retirement or full residency are the only true legal ways to stay in Thailand.

i am not sure i get you. i have had a non immi "o" for the last three years and sure as hel_l don't do visa runs.

[bendix]

I said it's aimed at avoiding a Karr incident. Holistically, it's obviously an attempt to clean up the lingerers and generally upgrade the quality of visitors to and foreign residents of Thailand.

If you can't see how that would improve Thailand and its image as a respectable visitor destination, I'm afraid it's beyong my powers of influence to convince you.

[baanthale]

Thats my dive shop knackered

and the dive industry

and think of all the money it brings in

forget cambodia the divings crap

Malaysia for me

So instead of getting legal, you leave the country!?

I on the other hand is so pleased as a dive center owner (with a legal setup), to see that we finally maybe can start to make some bucks here, without competition from underpaid "free lance" instructors and diveshops witch avoid paying taxes, medical insurances ect.