Work online for an overseas company...

[elviajero]

I don't understand why people try to convince other people that their random, irrelevant and arbitrary layman interpretation of the law is actually the law.

What on earth does being on 'hoilday/vacation' have to do with anything - where is the law that even treats someone differently if they are on 'holiday/vacation'?

seancbk introduced claiming to be on perpetual holiday was a way to circumvent the law.

Right, so think we're in agreement that there is no legal distinction between whether or not an activity is 'work' regardless of the length of stay and visa status of the individual in question.

Thai law simply says 'working is working' so therefore what is 'work' for someone who stays in Thailand for 5 years must logically also be 'work' for someone who stays for 5 days,

1 - If someone stays in Thailand for 5 days and spends 10 minutes a day dealing with business related emails, are they working?

2 - If someone stays in Thailand for 5 years and spends 8 hours a day dealing with business related emails, are they working?

3 - If the answers to 1 and 2 differ, why is that and upon what legal basis?

Your questions are irrelevant to the OP.

He has claimed himself that he will be "working" and living in Thailand. The only question is whether or not he needs a work permit. We can all agree that if he was working for a Thai company he would need the right visa and work permit. The relevant question is does working for a foreign employer exclude him from Thai labour law. In my opinion and with advice from Thai authorities it doesn't.

I believe a senior immigration officer did go public and say that someone on holiday can "work" at their business while on holiday in Thailand. If you or anyone else want to argue with the Labour department about what constitutes a genuine holiday I wish you the very best of luck.

[rwdrwdrwd]

Guess you couldn't answer 3 then...

You're making the mistake of assuming that what the OP refers to as 'work' is definitely captured under the Thai legal definition - you cannot possibly know whether this is the case or not.

In regard to any comments from an IO pertaining to work - Immigration is not the DOL, and it is not their remit to give permission. Neither is there a legal definition of 'holiday'.

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[rwdrwdrwd]

I told the OP to talk to the Labour Department because they are the only authority that counts. And I'm not guessing but passing on information I've been told by the Labour Department.

A judge isn't required to throw someone out for illegal working. And as I've said to you before, if a court was involved there is no way they would come down in favour of the foreigner as the precedent would be to far reaching.

Many other people claim to have spoken to the Labour department and received conflicting advice to you - both versions of advice should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Pretty sure anybody arrested can deny charges and opt to go up in front of a judge, so in the case that the suspect wishes to contest the charges, a judge is required.

Your assumption regarding the decision a court would make is entirely opinion based. Still no precedents, I believe (not that they would necessarily impact future decisions anyway)

As the Labour Department would be the ones prosecuting I don't think taking their advice with a "pinch of salt" is good advice.

Agreed, if contested. If you were the OP and living in Thailand and working online for this foreign company would you honestly want to contest and face prison time?

Isn't a forum about opinion. Or does only your opinion count?

I am suggesting taking the conflicting second hand reports (including yours) from disparate DOL offices with a pinch of salt, not direct first hand interactions on a case by case basis with the DOL.

In regard to forums being 'about opinion', the reason I am arguing here because it seems that you are stating as FACT (and not as opinion) that the op would be illegal and I am questioning your ability to do so with the available information:

Simple. It's illegal.

• You cannot work in Thailand without a work permit and you cannot get a work permit for the work you describe

The OP did not describe the activity. They could be purely sending emails all day (hence the above questions), we do not know.

Given the extremely badly worded legal definition of 'work' in Thai legislation, only a judge can decide whether the OPs activity constitutes 'work' under that legislation or not, and the only true answer that the OP can be given is "It depends if a judge considers what you are doing to be 'work' under Thai law".

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[Mudcrab]

Just go and build your own house. Quite Ok apparently according to a post a couple of years ago quoting a government lady in Phuket.

[jspill]

If you were the OP and living in Thailand and working online for this foreign company would you honestly want to contest and face prison time?

More like a couple hundred dollars fine.

[F4UCorsair]

Do your online work and don't gob off about it......to anybody!!

[nithisa78]

If you really care, you ask the lawyer.

[rwdrwdrwd]

Lawyers can't answer the question either, indeed the question has been asked there many times and varying answers have been received. The only person who can answer is a judge.

Besides which, the 'Ask a Lawyer' section is hardly a buzzing hub of activity is it.

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[NoshowJones]

I wouldn't receive regular payments from a company into a Thai bank account. Have it deposited into an account in home country or ???. Other than that, pretty much what h90 said.

Well in his home country he would pay income tax for it.....

If his home country is the UK, he should keep his mouth shut, any tax will just go to the MPs "expenses", Immgrants, and overseas aid etc,etc,etc.

[Soutpeel]

Do your online work and don't gob off about it......to anybody!!

Why shouldnt they gob off to anyone ? There are those on here who say its all above board and have stated a WP is not required, so why should they be worried about who they tell ?

If someone asks me if i work in Thailand i would answer yes i do, but then again i have a WP

Fact is the OP stated it himself he intends WORKING in Thailand for a foreign emoloyer not a tourist ergo he intends working by his own admission, therefore he will require a work permit

Edited September 9, 2015 by Soutpeel

[Soutpeel]

Lawyers can't answer the question either, indeed the question has been asked there many times and varying answers have been received. The only person who can answer is a judge.

Besides which, the 'Ask a Lawyer' section is hardly a buzzing hub of activity is it.

This has been asked before on two occassions and believe in both cases the lawyer was of the opinion a WP was required

[jspill]

Why shouldnt they gob off to anyone ? There are those on here who say its all above board and have stated a WP is not required, so why should they be worried about who they tell ?

Because low level officials are corrupt, it's a developing country. Keeping quiet about it is irrelevant to whether or not a judge (more educated and not incentivized by money) would prosecute you for it.

Even the immigration chief is corrupt http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/854498-thai-immigration-chief-warned-he-might-face-the-chop/

[jspill]

This has been asked before on two occassions and believe in both cases the lawyer was of the opinion a WP was required

Your posts before have said you can't take the word of one person, only the DOL decides, etc. etc., yet here you cite non-DOL individuals as an authority.

Edited September 9, 2015 by jspill

[Soutpeel]

Why shouldnt they gob off to anyone ? There are those on here who say its all above board and have stated a WP is not required, so why should they be worried about who they tell ?

Because low level officials are corrupt, it's a developing country. Keeping quiet about it is irrelevant to whether or not a judge (more educated and not incentivized by money) would prosecute you for it.

Even the immigration chief is corrupt http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/854498-thai-immigration-chief-warned-he-might-face-the-chop/

Weak attempt at rationalisation LOL

[Soutpeel]

This has been asked before on two occassions and believe in both cases the lawyer was of the opinion a WP was required

Your response to the 'digital nomads are ok thread' was you can't take the word of individuals, and only the DOL decides, yet here you do the same thing.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/753621-digital-nomad-online-workers-permission/

Correct.. and you will note in the response i gave i indicated " in the opinion of "

you do know what opinion means dont you ?.....so i have stated nothing which contradicts anything you have linked to....so nice attempt at trying to muddy the waters...but fail

[fireplay]

With all these opinions flying around i am surprised no one touched my query....if someone has a non immb visa and NO work permit and works online for a foreign company do any of you highly comtentious and opinionated posters have an idea about this being ok?

[JLCrab]

With all these opinions flying around i am surprised no one touched my query....if someone has a non immb visa and NO work permit and works online for a foreign company do any of you highly comtentious and opinionated posters have an idea about this being ok?

On what basis did that someone secure the Non Imm 'B' visa?

[elviajero]

In regard to forums being 'about opinion', the reason I am arguing here because it seems that you are stating as FACT (and not as opinion) that the op would be illegal and I am questioning your ability to do so with the available information:

Simple. It's illegal.

• You cannot work in Thailand without a work permit and you cannot get a work permit for the work you describe

The OP did not describe the activity. They could be purely sending emails all day (hence the above questions), we do not know.

Given the extremely badly worded legal definition of 'work' in Thai legislation, only a judge can decide whether the OPs activity constitutes 'work' under that legislation or not, and the only true answer that the OP can be given is "It depends if a judge considers what you are doing to be 'work' under Thai law".

I understand that you are playing the wannabe/actual lawyer but this is a forum of people being asked for advice and information. Not for legal certainty. I assume that most people ask questions in the hope that the respondents have actual real life experience to pass on. Which many of us do.

You're absolutely right that my advice is opinion and that I failed to properly express that, but you fail to acknowledge the fact that I also said "If you truly want the answer then don't listen to anything posted here and go along to your local Labour Office.", which IMO indicates sufficiently that my advice was opinion.

No he didn't describe the activity but ​IMO someone employed to send emails all day is working regardless of whether some smart lawyer thinks he can contest the definition of work. You're are also right that a judge would have the final say, but that's of no help to the OP whatsoever. Work in fear of being caught and thrown in jail by a judge, or go and talk to the DOL who would be the ones putting you in front of the judge. I know which route I'd take. And have taken!

[Soutpeel]

With all these opinions flying around i am surprised no one touched my query....if someone has a non immb visa and NO work permit and works online for a foreign company do any of you highly comtentious and opinionated posters have an idea about this being ok?

Ok in the first instance how would someone get a Non imm B ?

As it needs to be sponsored by a Thai entity eg a Thai company.... secondly a non imm B is not a work visa it doesnt replace the need for a WP

If someone managed to blag a B visa and worked on line for a foreign company without a WP they would be in the same postion as someone on a tourist or ed visa, unless said person fell under the work descriptions given in the list earlier on in the thread

[rwdrwdrwd]

Lawyers can't answer the question either, indeed the question has been asked there many times and varying answers have been received. The only person who can answer is a judge.

Besides which, the 'Ask a Lawyer' section is hardly a buzzing hub of activity is it.

This has been asked before on two occassions and believe in both cases the lawyer was of the opinion a WP was required

There have been quite a few more, and different answers. This one references 'actual work' which doesn't really add any clarity. Then states that the law does not currently cover 'work on the internet'

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/789130-working-remotely-from-thailand-computer-security/

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[rwdrwdrwd]

In regard to forums being 'about opinion', the reason I am arguing here because it seems that you are stating as FACT (and not as opinion) that the op would be illegal and I am questioning your ability to do so with the available information:

Simple. It's illegal.

• You cannot work in Thailand without a work permit and you cannot get a work permit for the work you describe

The OP did not describe the activity. They could be purely sending emails all day (hence the above questions), we do not know.

Given the extremely badly worded legal definition of 'work' in Thai legislation, only a judge can decide whether the OPs activity constitutes 'work' under that legislation or not, and the only true answer that the OP can be given is "It depends if a judge considers what you are doing to be 'work' under Thai law".

I understand that you are playing the wannabe/actual lawyer but this is a forum of people being asked for advice and information. Not for legal certainty. I assume that most people ask questions in the hope that the respondents have actual real life experience to pass on. Which many of us do.

You're absolutely right that my advice is opinion and that I failed to properly express that, but you fail to acknowledge the fact that I also said "If you truly want the answer then don't listen to anything posted here and go along to your local Labour Office.", which IMO indicates sufficiently that my advice was opinion.

No he didn't describe the activity but ​IMO someone employed to send emails all day is working regardless of whether some smart lawyer thinks he can contest the definition of work. You're are also right that a judge would have the final say, but that's of no help to the OP whatsoever. Work in fear of being caught and thrown in jail by a judge, or go and talk to the DOL who would be the ones putting you in front of the judge. I know which route I'd take. And have taken!

Glad to see the IMOs and I agree with much of what you say - I simply had issues with the categorical "It's illegal" statement.

My interpretation of the OP was that they were seeking legal certainty, not opinion.

In terms of emails, I don't personally see how emailing all day is working yet emailing for 5 minutes is not, but we can only speculate as to how a judge would see it.

The big issue here is the lack of clarity and absolutes in Thai legislation, imo.

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[Soutpeel]

In regard to forums being 'about opinion', the reason I am arguing here because it seems that you are stating as FACT (and not as opinion) that the op would be illegal and I am questioning your ability to do so with the available information:

Simple. It's illegal.

• You cannot work in Thailand without a work permit and you cannot get a work permit for the work you describe

The OP did not describe the activity. They could be purely sending emails all day (hence the above questions), we do not know.

Given the extremely badly worded legal definition of 'work' in Thai legislation, only a judge can decide whether the OPs activity constitutes 'work' under that legislation or not, and the only true answer that the OP can be given is "It depends if a judge considers what you are doing to be 'work' under Thai law".

I understand that you are playing the wannabe/actual lawyer but this is a forum of people being asked for advice and information. Not for legal certainty. I assume that most people ask questions in the hope that the respondents have actual real life experience to pass on. Which many of us do.

You're absolutely right that my advice is opinion and that I failed to properly express that, but you fail to acknowledge the fact that I also said "If you truly want the answer then don't listen to anything posted here and go along to your local Labour Office.", which IMO indicates sufficiently that my advice was opinion.

No he didn't describe the activity but ​IMO someone employed to send emails all day is working regardless of whether some smart lawyer thinks he can contest the definition of work. You're are also right that a judge would have the final say, but that's of no help to the OP whatsoever. Work in fear of being caught and thrown in jail by a judge, or go and talk to the DOL who would be the ones putting you in front of the judge. I know which route I'd take. And have taken!

Glad to see the IMOs and I agree with much of what you say - I simply had issues with the categorical "It's illegal" statement.

My interpretation of the OP was that they were seeking legal certainty, not opinion.

In terms of emails, I don't personally see how emailing all day is working yet emailing for 5 minutes is not, but we can only speculate as to how a judge would see it.

The big issue here is the lack of clarity and absolutes in Thai legislation, imo.

Given the OP stated catagorically he intends working in Thailand can we state catagorically he needs a WP ?

But the thing is there is clarity, there is a list of occupations a foreigner cant do under any circumstances and there is a recently published list of circumstances where a WP is not needed..... couple that with the standing rules that one needs a work permit to work in Thailand which further states where one is paid or even if one gets paid has no bearing on the defintion of work

It seems to me the intent is pretty clear in my opinion of course

The other thing that needs to be addressed about not being able to get a WP for on line work ....yes one could if one set up a Thai limited company, and in fact know someone who has done exactly this and the core on line business has nothing to do with Thailand big difference between "cant" and "wont "

Edited September 9, 2015 by Soutpeel

[elviajero]

Guess you couldn't answer 3 then...

In regard to any comments from an IO pertaining to work - Immigration is not the DOL, and it is not their remit to give permission. Neither is there a legal definition of 'holiday'.

My answers to 1 and 2 wouldn't differ making 3 void.

I am well aware of the remit of immigration and the DOL. I simply cited a comment by an Immigration spokesperson because it addressed your question about working on holiday. And IMO the fact that she specified holiday suggests that Thai authorities consider that there's a difference between someone working while on holiday and someone living here. One requires permission while the other does not. What she didn't say was that any foreigner staying in Thailand for any amount of time can operate a business or do any job of work for a foreign company without permission.

She does not have the power of permission or penalty, but IMO the message is a good indication of where authorities stand on the subject. There may not be a legal definition of holiday/vacation but IMO everyone in the world knows what it means in relation to business/employment. I'm pretty sure that a judge would agree with the masses too.

Edited September 9, 2015 by elviajero

[jspill]

'Thrown in jail' is also an opinion.

Much more likely a foreigner working online (not taking jobs from Thais) would get the lighter side of the penalty, a cash fine then released. That's what happened to the 17 foreign teachers in Chiang Mai (physically working in Thailand, so worse).

Section 51 of the Aliens Act of Thailand says that's 2000 Baht.

[Soutpeel]

'Thrown in jail' is also an opinion.

Much more likely a foreigner working online (not taking jobs from Thais) would get the lighter side of the penalty, a cash fine then released. That's what happened to the 17 foreign teachers in Chiang Mai (physically working in Thailand, so worse).

Section 51 of the Aliens Act of Thailand says that's 2000 Baht.

Its not an opinion in the least, there is a provsion in the law to do exactly that so not a question of can or cant, its a question of will or wont

[elviajero]

'Thrown in jail' is also an opinion.

Much more likely a foreigner working online (not taking jobs from Thais) would get the lighter side of the penalty, a cash fine then released. That's what happened to the 17 foreign teachers in Chiang Mai (physically working in Thailand, so worse).

Section 51 of the Aliens Act of Thailand says that's 2000 Baht.

Its not an opinion in the least, there is a provsion in the law to do exactly that so not a question of can or cant, its a question of will or wont

+1

And I said "in fear of being". IMO if someone were found guilty of illegal working they could be fined, imprisoned, deported or all three.

[rwdrwdrwd]

Given the OP stated catagorically he intends working in Thailand can we state catagorically he needs a WP ?

But the thing is there is clarity, there is a list of occupations a foreigner cant do under any circumstances and there is a recently published list of circumstances where a WP is not needed..... couple that with the standing rules that one needs a work permit to work in Thailand which further states where one is paid or even if one gets paid has no bearing on the defintion of work

It seems to me the intent is pretty clear in my opinion of course

The other thing that needs to be addressed about not being able to get a WP for on line work ....yes one could if one set up a Thai limited company, and in fact know someone who has done exactly this and the core on line business has nothing to do with Thailand big difference between "cant" and "wont "

I honestly don't think we can categorically state that, no - we have no guarantee that what the OP personally considers to be 'work' would also be considered 'work' for the purpose of Thai legislation by a judge. It might be, but it might not.

I'm not really sure where you're going with the occupation list comment, it doesn't really cover anything pertaining to remote work that I can see - http://www.thailawonline.com/en/others/labour-law/forbidden-occupations-for-foreigners-jobs.html - nor does the 'list of circumstances where a WP is not needed' cover every other possible activity. I don't think we can infer that any other activity is allowed or disallowed just because it does not appear on either list.

In regard the the WP for online income - yes by virtue of a Thai Ltd co and a lot of bureaucracy everyone 'can' get a WP, the question that remains is whether they 'need' to. I don't think anyone here can accurately determine the answer to that.

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[Soutpeel]

Given the OP stated catagorically he intends working in Thailand can we state catagorically he needs a WP ?

But the thing is there is clarity, there is a list of occupations a foreigner cant do under any circumstances and there is a recently published list of circumstances where a WP is not needed..... couple that with the standing rules that one needs a work permit to work in Thailand which further states where one is paid or even if one gets paid has no bearing on the defintion of work

It seems to me the intent is pretty clear in my opinion of course

The other thing that needs to be addressed about not being able to get a WP for on line work ....yes one could if one set up a Thai limited company, and in fact know someone who has done exactly this and the core on line business has nothing to do with Thailand big difference between "cant" and "wont "

I honestly don't think we can categorically state that, no - we have no guarantee that what the OP personally considers to be 'work' would also be considered 'work' for the purpose of Thai legislation by a judge. It might be, but it might not.

I'm not really sure where you're going with the occupation list comment, it doesn't really cover anything pertaining to remote work that I can see - http://www.thailawonline.com/en/others/labour-law/forbidden-occupations-for-foreigners-jobs.html - nor does the 'list of circumstances where a WP is not needed' cover every other possible activity. I don't think we can infer that any other activity is allowed or disallowed just because it does not appear on either list.

In regard the the WP for online work - yes by virtue of a Thai Ltd co and a lot of bureaucracy everyone 'can', the question remains whether they 'need', and I don't think anyone here can accurately determine that.

Per your second paragraph where i am going is this, they have published a list stating which activites dont require a WP, we also have a list which prohibits certain activites for foreigners, given the list was published in 2015 and the DOL will be fully aware of people working on line,

can we suggest seeing as on line work is not on that list, this suggests a work permit is required, as if it wasnt they would have put on line work on that list wouldnt they ?

[rwdrwdrwd]

I think that's a bit of a stretch, one could equally interpret it as 'undecided' - the list doesn't include 'sending a business email' and I can't get on board with the idea that this activity would be considered work, so am loathe to get on board with the opinion that anything else business related not mentioned on this list must by default require a WP.

The named activities are also very highly focused around conferences, seminars, lectures, business negotiations and trade based activity, which is a big money spinner - I suspect that this list is more about removing confusion that was previously hindering the organisation of such events and Thai/Non Thai business than anything else.

Edited September 9, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[jspill]

'Thrown in jail' is also an opinion.

Much more likely a foreigner working online (not taking jobs from Thais) would get the lighter side of the penalty, a cash fine then released. That's what happened to the 17 foreign teachers in Chiang Mai (physically working in Thailand, so worse).

Section 51 of the Aliens Act of Thailand says that's 2000 Baht.

Its not an opinion in the least, there is a provsion in the law to do exactly that so not a question of can or cant, its a question of will or wont

Yeah I didn't say they can't, I said it's more likely to be a 2k fine, and provided an anecdote of that happening, the teachers in Chiang Mai.

Just like the anecdote earlier of being told 'no problem for you' when they explained they work online but don't sell anything in Thailand. You guys don't have much to go on other than 'working is working' in the Alien Labor act.

See you in the next 10 threads debating this (as we've been doing for a year or two now) I have some emails to answer