Crime

[sanook1]

believe that this crackdown is aimed at finding the falangs that are working illegaly and dont contribute cash from abroad to the thai economy but take Cash from the thai economy.

Edited October 29, 2006 by sanook1

[CobraSnakeNecktie]

believe that this crackdown is aimed at finding the falangs that are working illegaly and dont contribute cash from abroad to the thai economy but take Cash from the thai economy.

it doesnt matter why. they have new rules and we have to deal with them. lots of things you can do.

travel and get tourist visa's every so often and combine with visa free entries

get married to thai girl

go to university in Thailand and get Non Immigrant ED visa

If there is a will there is a reasonably priced way to stay here or just go somewhere else for 90 part of the time. easy enough if you are willing to give up your place every 90 days or so.

[sting01]

believe that this crackdown is aimed at finding the falangs that are working illegaly and dont contribute cash from abroad to the thai economy but take Cash from the thai economy.

Take cash from thai economy?

you are thai, aren't you?LOL There is no cash to take from thai economy, and I am sure ifreally the governement was looking to improve the tax collection it would simply look after the thais who work under the table, or sell under the table.

The crackdown is only to push out a group of foreigners that are not welcomed anymore (hight risk people, sex pats, low income foreigners).

But believe me, there is no farangs, or let say less than one hundred, who are taken cash from thai economy. Those who do so are already rich (by US standart, not by thai standart) who heavily invested in thailand, get the thai nationality and run business here (the famous Heineken for exemple).

[maxbentley]

My take is that they are forcing foreigners to repatriate once a year so that anybody that is in Thailand illegally will be dealt with by the home country.

Then there is the fact that Thailand will now have larger coffers for the Immigration Ministry.

Wth the millions of Burmese,Laotians,Cambodians and all in Thailand lworking and iving on slave wages{if they are lucky enough} this cannot be about the felang does not spend enough/have enough.

The Burmese are making seven baht an hour.

I would agree that there are many felang who refuse to go home,should go home and are not going home.

THere are those felang I see and wish they would leave.THis way they will be forced out.

I have had the occasion of felang stealing from me to stay in Thailand and they refuse to go home to face the situation they have created and have run from-for whatever reasons.

[Casanundra]

Well with the married guys now having to show 40k per month plus tax paid on it along with the abolishment of the 30 baht health scheme to become free for all Thai's, I can only presume that the extra tax being levied (circa 30k per year) will help go and support the health service here which means that all foreign married guys here on a marriage visa now are supporting 1000 Thai's with their ailments instead

[tropo]

My take is that they are forcing foreigners to repatriate once a year so that anybody that is in Thailand illegally will be dealt with by the home country.

I would agree that there are many felang who refuse to go home,should go home and are not going home.

THere are those felang I see and wish they would leave.THis way they will be forced out.

I have had the occasion of felang stealing from me to stay in Thailand and they refuse to go home to face the situation they have created and have run from-for whatever reasons.

You've got to be joking. You're saying that foreingners should go home?

People who are independent and have sufficient income to support themselves do not need to go home.

The only reason that so many people choose to stay in Thailand is that it WAS relatively easy to stay here and inexpensive, not because it's the greatest country on earth.

Using myself as one example, I make my money through securities trading on the Internet. I make good money, but I'm not going to bother with "official" visas where too many questions are asked and too much disclosure is necessary, and I'm not going to pay tax in Thailand on my income that is derived abroad.

If back-to-back tourist visas are not going to be feasible (this is not yet known), I won't be staying.

I'm sure there are a growing number of "tourists" in Thailand deriving similar income. Thailand will lose people like us as the world has many places as good or better than Thailand as alternatives. Next please!

I'm not going to stay somewhere that forces me to leave every 90 days and it's quite a joke hearing from people like you talking about us needing to go home. The cyber world has opened up and changed the world. The word "home" has taken on a new meaning for people smart enough to see the new opportunities available to be able to "work and play" anywhere one chooses.

The worst suggestion that some are touting on here is to get married to a Thai. Talk about desperate. That's the kind of thing that Asian girls do to get residence in a western nations....but a farang marrying a Thai to stay in Thailand? Very sad and it's still no guarantee.

Edited November 1, 2006 by tropo

[Casanundra]

Tropo you are so absolutely spot on that I can do nothing but give you a pat on the back

[jackspratt]

The only reason that so many people choose to stay in Thailand is that it WAS relatively easy to stay here and inexpensive, not because it's the greatest country on earth.

Using myself as one example, I make my money through securities trading on the Internet. I make good money, but I'm not going to bother with "official" visas where too many questions are asked and too much disclosure is necessary, and I'm not going to pay tax in Thailand on my income that is derived abroad.

If back-to-back tourist visas are not going to be feasible (this is not yet known), I won't be staying.

I'm sure there are a growing number of "tourists" in Thailand deriving similar income. Thailand will lose people like us as the world has many places as good or better than Thailand as alternatives. Next please!

So Troppo, under the circumstances you outline above, can you explain exactly what it is that Thailand will be losing when people like you go to a better place?

Just wondering.

jack

[bkkmadness]

The only reason that so many people choose to stay in Thailand is that it WAS relatively easy to stay here and inexpensive, not because it's the greatest country on earth.

Using myself as one example, I make my money through securities trading on the Internet. I make good money, but I'm not going to bother with "official" visas where too many questions are asked and too much disclosure is necessary, and I'm not going to pay tax in Thailand on my income that is derived abroad.

If back-to-back tourist visas are not going to be feasible (this is not yet known), I won't be staying.

I'm sure there are a growing number of "tourists" in Thailand deriving similar income. Thailand will lose people like us as the world has many places as good or better than Thailand as alternatives. Next please!

So Troppo, under the circumstances you outline above, can you explain exactly what it is that Thailand will be losing when people like you go to a better place?

Just wondering.

jack

They lose the money that he spends here.

[JR Texas]

The only reason that so many people choose to stay in Thailand is that it WAS relatively easy to stay here and inexpensive, not because it's the greatest country on earth.

Using myself as one example, I make my money through securities trading on the Internet. I make good money, but I'm not going to bother with "official" visas where too many questions are asked and too much disclosure is necessary, and I'm not going to pay tax in Thailand on my income that is derived abroad.

If back-to-back tourist visas are not going to be feasible (this is not yet known), I won't be staying.

I'm sure there are a growing number of "tourists" in Thailand deriving similar income. Thailand will lose people like us as the world has many places as good or better than Thailand as alternatives. Next please!

So Troppo, under the circumstances you outline above, can you explain exactly what it is that Thailand will be losing when people like you go to a better place?

JR Texas (51, USA, currently in China): About Troppo, Thailand will be losing a potential investor and potential tax payer and probably a potential employer......all potential because he refuses to deal with the S*&^%T rules and regulations that are currently in place. Thailand also loses all of the money he spends in the Kingdom on a daily basis. I do not blame him at all for looking at other places to live and work. Another potential investor lost to another country. Singapore and Hong Kong welcome investors........they have open economies.......their rules and regulations (visa/immigration) are fairly stable. Investors know what they are going to get...........Thailand is a land full of uncertainties.......it is a risky investment climate. Enough said..........and now on to my main point regarding what it is all about: CRIME?

In early October, Immigration Bureau Chief Pol. Lt. Gen. Suwat Thamrongsrisakul informed reporters that the new visa regulations are aimed to prevent foreign tourists from committing crime or creating social problems.

Chief Pol. Lt. Gen. Suwat Thamrongsrisakul, I am a bit confused and need answers to the following questions:

1) How does removing the investment visa prevent foreigners from committing crimes or creating social problems? I do not see the connection. I can, however, see how this would prevent foreigners from investing in Thailand--especially investing in condos. At point A (prior to the changes) you invest 3 million baht on a condo in order to get a long-term visa. Then, at point B (after the changes), your visa is taken away from you because the rule no longer applies.

2) How does removing the 400K-marriage visa requirement prevent foreigners from committing crimes or creating social problems? Again, I do not see the connection. I can, however, see how this will make it more difficult for low-income farang-Thai partners to live together in the Kingdom. I can see how this will, in fact, break up some of these unions. It will also force more people to work in the Kingdom who do not really want or need to work (of course, the new rules virtually prevent foreigners from doing any type of work and out of desperation might actually compel them to work illegally).

3) Does the implementation of the 90 days in 90 days out rule (3 x border stamp rule or whatever you want to call it) prevent foreigners from committing crimes or creating social problems? Again, I am having trouble seeing the connection. In fact, it would seem to be that the more times a foreigner has to exit and enter Thailand via immigration check points, the greater the probability that any illegal activity will be detected. Right or wrong? Also, as an aside, if all of this has to do with preventing criminal behavior by foreigners (never mind that 99.9 percent of the crimes in Thailand are committed by Thais), why not simply allow foreigners to get a type of "security clearance" from their respective embassies in Bangkok that they can then take to immigration. In effect, certifying that they are not criminals.

As an aside, your entire immigration system seems chaotic and disorganized. In one country you can do A, B, C but not D. In another you can do A and D only. In another, B and C. In another, like Cambodia, you can do none of the above. Call me "stupid" but doesn’t' this type of system promote error via confusion? And could that not lead to criminals getting past the system? Why not have one system, one policy, for all embassies/consulates, especially within the region of Southeast/South/East Asia?

Chief Pol. Lt. Gen. Suwat Thamrongsrisakul, sorry about my confusion on these matters.

Best wishes and Happy Loi Kratong,

JR

[Thaising]

Globalization without border, closing one country to all foreigners is hurting their very own economic and it peoples. For long time visa runner, immigration department can impose certain fee in extending their visa, these directly help in upgrading the data center in trailing on those longstayer, and any money surplus can go into the state coffer to help the needy or in time of trouble.

Edited November 1, 2006 by Thaising

[JR Texas]

Globalization without border, closing one country to all foreigners is hurting their very own economic and it peoples. For long time visa runner, immigration department can impose certain fee in extending their visa, these directly help in upgrading the data center in trailing bad activities on those longstayers, and any money surplus can go into the state coffer to help the needy or in time of trouble.

JR Texas (51, USA): Sorry about messing up the threads.......I removed quotes. I think you are totally correct in the sense that Thais are "cutting their own throats." They simply refuse to learn from positive economic models that surround them (e.g., Singapore and Hong Kong). I just spent a long time explaining to a Thai friend of mine about how the new rules and regulations are hurting many farangs and hurting the Thai economy in general. Her response: "You don't understand anything about Thailand. You should be happy with the new changes." Typical Thai BS.....same response when they are confronted with a reality that they do not wish to acknowledge.

On a different note, one thing that puzzles me is how the "new system" will benefit those "in the loop" more than the old system. The old system was run, in many cases, by former police officers with connections to immigration (many worked in immigration). I am sure many politicians had their "hands in the pie." Many people were earning a lot of money taking farangs on border runs. It was BIG BUSINESS. I just do not see how they will make more money off of the new system. Is it just me? Can someone elighten me? I would think if they can't make more money then the new system will soon be abandoned in favor of the old system. This is, of course, not about crime. It is about something else (xenophobia? racism? money? anger at farangs dating Thai women? jealousy? total stupidity? what?).

Thanks,

JR

[Cyberstar]

As an addition to the opening post and other on-topic posts, here's my contribution:

Yes, the most prominent reason for the changes to visa rules is to get rid of criminals. Not only those that use the visa exemption to avoid registration, but also the ones with long term visas granted on basis of funds gained by drug dealing, illegal financial transactions, etc.

Of course, more tax-money is also important, but it isn't the most important issue. Think of it: The immigration department is part of the police force - they're not part of neither the revenue department nor the labour department. Do the immigration bosses get extra credits and bonuses depending on how much tax comes out of their rule makings and granting of visas? ... On the other hand - since they are the police: What a huge loss of face to grant one-year visa extensions to foreign criminals.

My guess is, Thailand (at least the immigration police) would rather prefer to loose the whole lot of tourist money and foreigner's tax-payments than to be known as a major refugee and butter-hole for international criminals.

Especially, the changes to the rules governing the one-year extensions of non-O visas based on relationship to Thai nationals, clearly indicate both parts above:

As for tax-income being a minor issue: The new rules make it possible for both a child (younger than 20), a spouse, and a parent (older than 50) to get one-year extensions without any funds and without any income at all ...

As for obstructing criminals: It no longer suffices to have 400,000 of foreign origin in the bank for a spouse-extension. Why not? - Because Thai immigration does not have the power to check how those funds were earned and thus would not know wether the applicant was a human trafficker or heroin boss.

Admitted: the elimination of the 400 K rule is like using a sledgehammer where a light tapping with a fingertip would have been better - not likely to be many defined targets hit by the change - and they'd likely to have other means anyway. There might be a pimp or two, having married one of his hookers for visa-convenience) ... However, this only adds to clarity: Immigration cannot but know that many law-abiding, big spenders would be hit - and of course - they don't deliberately change laws to keep law-abiding big spenders out of the country... So, my guess is the reasoning behind this change could go like this: - If we should loose a lot of millions (billions) on this rule - so be it, mai ben rai. Even if it only saves us from granting visa extensions to 1 -3 criminals per year, it'll be worth it.

[jackspratt]

The only reason that so many people choose to stay in Thailand is that it WAS relatively easy to stay here and inexpensive, not because it's the greatest country on earth.

Using myself as one example, I make my money through securities trading on the Internet. I make good money, but I'm not going to bother with "official" visas where too many questions are asked and too much disclosure is necessary, and I'm not going to pay tax in Thailand on my income that is derived abroad.

If back-to-back tourist visas are not going to be feasible (this is not yet known), I won't be staying.

I'm sure there are a growing number of "tourists" in Thailand deriving similar income. Thailand will lose people like us as the world has many places as good or better than Thailand as alternatives. Next please!

So Troppo, under the circumstances you outline above, can you explain exactly what it is that Thailand will be losing when people like you go to a better place?

Just wondering.

jack

They lose the money that he spends here.

How silly of (me and) Thailand - now they are doubling their losses. The money that Troppo won't spend, as well as the tax that he won't pay.

I am sure he and his ilk will be far better off in places where questions are not asked, disclosure is uneccesary, and taxes are optional.

[JR Texas]

As an addition to the opening post and other on-topic posts, here's my contribution:

Yes, the most prominent reason for the changes to visa rules is to get rid of criminals. Not only those that use the visa exemption to avoid registration, but also the ones with long term visas granted on basis of funds gained by drug dealing, illegal financial transactions, etc.

Of course, more tax-money is also important, but it isn't the most important issue. Think of it: The immigration department is part of the police force - they're not part of neither the revenue department nor the labour department. Do the immigration bosses get extra credits and bonuses depending on how much tax comes out of their rule makings and granting of visas? ... On the other hand - since they are the police: What a huge loss of face to grant one-year visa extensions to foreign criminals.

My guess is, Thailand (at least the immigration police) would rather prefer to loose the whole lot of tourist money and foreigner's tax-payments than to be known as a major refugee and butter-hole for international criminals.

Especially, the changes to the rules governing the one-year extensions of non-O visas based on relationship to Thai nationals, clearly indicate both parts above:

As for tax-income being a minor issue: The new rules make it possible for both a child (younger than 20), a spouse, and a parent (older than 50) to get one-year extensions without any funds and without any income at all ...

As for obstructing criminals: It no longer suffices to have 400,000 of foreign origin in the bank for a spouse-extension. Why not? - Because Thai immigration does not have the power to check how those funds were earned and thus would not know wether the applicant was a human trafficker or heroin boss.

Admitted: the elimination of the 400 K rule is like using a sledgehammer where a light tapping with a fingertip would have been better - not likely to be many defined targets hit by the change - and they'd likely to have other means anyway. There might be a pimp or two, having married one of his hookers for visa-convenience) ... However, this only adds to clarity: Immigration cannot but know that many law-abiding, big spenders would be hit - and of course - they don't deliberately change laws to keep law-abiding big spenders out of the country... So, my guess is the reasoning behind this change could go like this: - If we should loose a lot of millions (billions) on this rule - so be it, mai ben rai. Even if it only saves us from granting visa extensions to 1 -3 criminals per year, it'll be worth it.

JR Texas (51, USA):

Thank you for that interesting response Cyberstar. I am not, however, convinced that the prominent reason for the new rules is to get rid of criminals. It is, of course, one of the major reasons. But that aside, I do not understand what you mean by using the visa exemption to avoid registration. The implication is that using the visa exemption is less secure and can lead to crime. How? Both processes require that you produce a passport and personal information. Both are forms of "registration." Both require the immigration police to do a background check. And monthly visa runs means more checks and a greater probability of catching criminals. Maybe I am missing something. I am not a lawyer or a police officer. You also mentioned an attempt to thwart people from getting long term visas on the basis of illegal drug dealings or other criminal activity and suggested that was the reason for removing the 400K marriage requirement. If so, why did they not remove the 800K requirement for people who are not married? They could be even bigger criminals. And why not stop the TOXIN Card or whatever it is called.........Elite Card? I think you pay 20K (US$) for it and get a 10 year visa (not sure here). Even bigger drug dealers could afford that. It just makes no sense to me. But your point is well taken. And you might be on to something when you suggested that they would rather lose billions of baht implementing the new rules than to allow allow even one criminal in the Kingdom. But this is hard to imagine. People are self-interested.....yes, even Thais. Money makes the world go round. I find it extremely difficult to believe that they would willingly lose big profits in an attempt to check criminal activity among a small group of people. I wonder if they have ever thought of actually using the police force to track down criminals instead of trying to push them out via misguided visa rule changes and regulations. Big time criminals with lots of money will always find a way to live in the Kingdom (or any place else). One more thing in the form of a question: If they are serious about catching criminals and not hurting innocent expats living in the Kingdom, why not allow expats who are living here on a long-term basis to present a criminal background check document that they can get at their local embassy in Bangkok? I am a US citizen. I can guarantee you that if I go to the US Embassy in Bangkok they have the ability to do a very thorough background check on me. Such a check will show that I have no criminal background (one parking ticket). So, take the document to Thai Immigration and get a break on the rules......a free pass so to speak. Just a thought.

Best wishes,

JR

[sting01]

As an addition to the opening post and other on-topic posts, here's my contribution:

Yes, the most prominent reason for the changes to visa rules is to get rid of criminals. Not only those that use the visa exemption to avoid registration, but also the ones with long term visas granted on basis of funds gained by drug dealing, illegal financial transactions, etc.

Of course, more tax-money is also important, but it isn't the most important issue. Think of it: The immigration department is part of the police force - they're not part of neither the revenue department nor the labour department. Do the immigration bosses get extra credits and bonuses depending on how much tax comes out of their rule makings and granting of visas? ... On the other hand - since they are the police: What a huge loss of face to grant one-year visa extensions to foreign criminals.

My guess is, Thailand (at least the immigration police) would rather prefer to loose the whole lot of tourist money and foreigner's tax-payments than to be known as a major refugee and butter-hole for international criminals.

Especially, the changes to the rules governing the one-year extensions of non-O visas based on relationship to Thai nationals, clearly indicate both parts above:

As for tax-income being a minor issue: The new rules make it possible for both a child (younger than 20), a spouse, and a parent (older than 50) to get one-year extensions without any funds and without any income at all ...

As for obstructing criminals: It no longer suffices to have 400,000 of foreign origin in the bank for a spouse-extension. Why not? - Because Thai immigration does not have the power to check how those funds were earned and thus would not know wether the applicant was a human trafficker or heroin boss.

Admitted: the elimination of the 400 K rule is like using a sledgehammer where a light tapping with a fingertip would have been better - not likely to be many defined targets hit by the change - and they'd likely to have other means anyway. There might be a pimp or two, having married one of his hookers for visa-convenience) ... However, this only adds to clarity: Immigration cannot but know that many law-abiding, big spenders would be hit - and of course - they don't deliberately change laws to keep law-abiding big spenders out of the country... So, my guess is the reasoning behind this change could go like this: - If we should loose a lot of millions (billions) on this rule - so be it, mai ben rai. Even if it only saves us from granting visa extensions to 1 -3 criminals per year, it'll be worth it.

Why do I feel you are thai?

Are you thai?

I do not understand why since some month there is so many thai or thai alike who come in the forum, only to repeat the official stance/tune.

Or are you braind dead/washed farang? Did you exchanged some years in the IDC for a work as spy on the others fellas?

If I was a drugg boss, I would have enought money to pay , whatever the laws are. About criminal, I think thailand is famous about the crime rate, who is higher amongst the thai community than in developped countries amongst the local (I mean more thais are killed by thai in thailand than you have german killed by other german in germany).

Anyway laws are fine for me. They made me feel poor, hopeless, almost criminal (today I the convenience store where I use to buy my ciggy asked me about my passport and my visa ...). So I am going, I lost my investment that I made years ago, because anyway I will never ever be able to take my money from the bank, but as I am not anymore an happy camper/guest, I move out. Thailand will not lost many things for sure, I am only worth 1500us$ per month in foreign currency, but there is places where people seems to consider it's enought to have a life, a decent and legal business , even a long term visa.

But what is making me sad is the fact I am not the only one in this case. Troppo is another, even if I am sure he is more important that I am.

Does it will hurt the thai economy? Sure for a part, if I believe the numerous phone call I get since 3 weeks from the thai ladies I know ... All are loosing a part of their income, and it's only a start. Those ladies are not only maney earners but also customers, so if they do not have money, they can not shop ... Results will be show in 2 years I think.

I forget to precise I did not want here for the weather (thanks but it's better in my place), nor for the ladies (thanks again, women look akie in France too), nor for the fun ... I went here for economical reasons : compete agains indian and chinese. To say simply to make legally money. I will do it somewhere else, and pay my taxes in this somewhere else.

[Cyberstar]

Are you thai?

No. - Are you?

Or are you braind dead/washed farang?

No. - Are You?

Did you exchanged some years in the IDC for a work as spy on the others fellas?

No. - Did you?

[lopburi3]

This thread seems to have gone astray and is closed.