New Visa Rules May Do More Harm Than Good

[Meerkat]

I think it's dangerous of her to write a letter which basically says "NGOs have been operating illegally and are thus affected by new visa rules designed in part to stop illegal workers."

As much as we all know that these NGOs do some excellent work in Thailand, there are existing provisions in the law to cater for them. To bring to the attention of the powers that be in such a public forum as The Nation that some of them have not been following the law, is IMHO seriously misguided.

I disagree. Better than stick your head in the sand and pretend there is no problem, let the authorities understand what kind of problem they are generating for themselves with their xenophobic attitude.

I think you misunderstood my post, or perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I applaud her bringing the plight of NGOs to the administration's attention, but think she was wrong in putting in print that some of them have already been operating illegally here. Surely it is not conducive to changing policy to come out in public to say that "we think the law is wrong and thus have been flouting it for years".

[Beavis and Butthead]

JR, you are wrong on the investment visa as it was grandfathered and there were even last minute approvals. The only extension of stay for marriage (for a male) was support Thai wife and required 400k yearly on deposit to prove ability to pay for support (or his monthly income of 40k). The new rule allows wife to provide or a combination of both incomes (as is the norm here - most middle class or above have both working). If age 50 or above they also have the option of retirement extension with 800k bank or 65k pension or combination.

As for "encouraged" to buy condo statement do not believe it is based on fact. Immigration kept this program very low key in my view. Although this may not have been the case with some foreign/connected developers.

JR Texas (51, USA, wrong): Reply to Lopburi3: Thanks for correcting me. You seem to know the rules and regulations backwards and forwards. But let me give you a plausible scenario: 1) before the changes an investor purchases several condos worth well over 3 million with the desire to sell them later on; 2) one of the major reasons he purchased the condos was that he was under the impression that he could use the 3-million baht investment rule (spend it and get a long term visa solution) as a selling point to potential condo buyers; 3) then the rules changed and he can't use the "investor visa" as a selling point. Not good from an investors point of view. The basic question remains: Is this change good for Thailand? My answer is no.....especially for new investors. And I do not think this change has anything to do with crime.

On removing the 400K in the bank visa option: How can this positively impact Thailand? I think that for most expats (those living here now or those that are thinking about living here) it is probably more difficult to find a way to earn the 40K per month than it is to put 400K in the bank. I do not think this change is good for Thailand. And I do not think it has anything to do with crime.

Best wishes,

JR

I don't think that investor visa was available to purchasers of 2nd hand condos. I think they had to purchase new condos from a developer to be eligible

[JR Texas]

JR, you are wrong on the investment visa as it was grandfathered and there were even last minute approvals. The only extension of stay for marriage (for a male) was support Thai wife and required 400k yearly on deposit to prove ability to pay for support (or his monthly income of 40k). The new rule allows wife to provide or a combination of both incomes (as is the norm here - most middle class or above have both working). If age 50 or above they also have the option of retirement extension with 800k bank or 65k pension or combination.

As for "encouraged" to buy condo statement do not believe it is based on fact. Immigration kept this program very low key in my view. Although this may not have been the case with some foreign/connected developers.

JR Texas (51, USA, wrong): Reply to Lopburi3: Thanks for correcting me. You seem to know the rules and regulations backwards and forwards. But let me give you a plausible scenario: 1) before the changes an investor purchases several condos worth well over 3 million with the desire to sell them later on; 2) one of the major reasons he purchased the condos was that he was under the impression that he could use the 3-million baht investment rule (spend it and get a long term visa solution) as a selling point to potential condo buyers; 3) then the rules changed and he can't use the "investor visa" as a selling point. Not good from an investors point of view. The basic question remains: Is this change good for Thailand? My answer is no.....especially for new investors. And I do not think this change has anything to do with crime.

On removing the 400K in the bank visa option: How can this positively impact Thailand? I think that for most expats (those living here now or those that are thinking about living here) it is probably more difficult to find a way to earn the 40K per month than it is to put 400K in the bank. I do not think this change is good for Thailand. And I do not think it has anything to do with crime.

Best wishes,

JR

I don't think that investor visa was available to purchasers of 2nd hand condos. I think they had to purchase new condos from a developer to be eligible

JR Texas (51, USA): Reply to Beavis and Butthead: Thanks....that sounds so crazy and illogical that you are probably correct......it would make sense in terms of Thai law.

[Firefan]

Actually investor visas could originally be also 2nd hand condos. Later they moved the goal posts to still be 2nd hand Ok as long as bought from Thai person (or Thai bank Etc.). Then they again changed the goal posts to having to be new from developer only.... And now they cancelled (new) investment visas all together - but grandfather in old investment visa (extensions) no matter what was the condo status originally(2nd hand/bought from Thai/new/whatever).

Confused? I certainly understand if that is the case! I hope for no more changing goal posts, but fear that it is wishfull thinking at best.

Cheers!

[A_Traveller]

The 3 million baht investment visa was introduced to relieve a problematic situation after the '97 crash {of course everyone by then had forgotten the '91 crash } and was always viewed as anomalous.

The wording and the application of same, led to a position where some believed that a secondhand condo would qualify whereas, in fact, the intention was to sell brand new condos to foreigners, not to create or support a secondary market. {Irrespective of the parties to the marketplace}

Therefore it's not a foolish as it looks, and much of the trials and tribulations prior to October 1, were caused by the vacillation about 'to grandfather or not'. Ultimately, and I'm advised under legal pressure, the decision was taken to GF them but to stick to the letter of the law, thereby making it difficult for those who did not buy direct from the developer. Some leeway was granted, on an individual basis, for these who had purchased from a foreclosure, but any evidence that the condo had been 'used' even by a Thai family was adjudged to be grounds for possible rejection. As Firefan has noted there seemed to be considerable leeway this time around, but I do wonder what will happen as these visas come up for second renewal under the new structure. It strikes me as entirely feasible that an officer will take a harder line and say that despite the visa being issued before, his view is that the originating transaction does not meet the required status under the law.

Regards

/edit visa(s) //

Edited November 7, 2006 by A_Traveller

[sriracha john]

I think it's dangerous of her to write a letter which basically says "NGOs have been operating illegally and are thus affected by new visa rules designed in part to stop illegal workers."

As much as we all know that these NGOs do some excellent work in Thailand, there are existing provisions in the law to cater for them. To bring to the attention of the powers that be in such a public forum as The Nation that some of them have not been following the law, is IMHO seriously misguided.

I disagree. Better than stick your head in the sand and pretend there is no problem, let the authorities understand what kind of problem they are generating for themselves with their xenophobic attitude.

I think you misunderstood my post, or perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I applaud her bringing the plight of NGOs to the administration's attention, but think she was wrong in putting in print that some of them have already been operating illegally here. Surely it is not conducive to changing policy to come out in public to say that "we think the law is wrong and thus have been flouting it for years".

I think there's a very strong possibility that this is no big news to them. I'm sure they realize this already. If they don't, then they are too clueless to be clued in by a guest editorial in The Nation.

In the same vein that they likely realize that in the post:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...st&p=968719

that there are actually a few more than "105 foreign teachers" working in the province of Phuket.

Edited November 7, 2006 by sriracha john

[thaihome]

What I don't understand about the OP's letter to Nation is why don't they just go get tourist visas?

As stated many times, the 30 visa exempt entry stamp was never intended to be serially used.

In just about every case I have read about this, the person complaining is actually eligible to stay long term one way or the other. It just means more work for them, which is not unusual for immigration in any country in the world.

TH

[Steph1012]

I was talking to someone Sunday and the numbers he came up with were there are about 1 million people in Thailand who will be effected. I thought that was a bit high but perhaps he knows more than most based on his position. I think the fact there was no mention in the Thai publications of the laws, (perhaps now I don’t know). I think you can go on and on and list things like people who want to retire early but as yet are too young for the proper visa. I know people who have Thai wives and work in the middle east. They are back every 45 to 60 days or so for a few weeks. They will not be able to come back home.

Bottom line Thailand is in for a big reality check in the next several weeks. Wanting teachers with 4 year degrees???, well dig deeper in your wallet if you want that, like twice as deep as now. I said in a post in another thread I would wait 100 days to see what is going on. At least the Nation has put this beyond this forum and has just sampled the tip of the iceberg.

The last possible people to stay under the 90 day rule will leave at the end of January. They would be the ones that did a visa run the end of September and the first of 3 the end of October.

The key to changing this is to pass the burden to the Thais. They have influence and not us. That is until they notice just how much is contributed to the economy by the people they sent packing. Even Stickman made note of one building who canceled 10 million in renovations because 30% of the tenants were forced to leave under this. I m sure we will hear more and more from Thais who will take a hit in the coming days and weeks. The one question is how bad will the Thais let it get in the name of saving face before they act?

I have said in other threads about this reality check.

When this property starts coming empty, it will increase the supply side and drive the market down. Demand is falling off already as seen in the 50% decrease in business start ups last month. Nobody in their right mind is going to take a 1 year lease in this climate when prices are likely to fall, less still are looking at buying under any route, Company, G.F etc.

Whilst many are getting legal, lots are just leaving and prepared to live in other parts of Asia. Most of my circle of friends are battening down the hatches, not bringing more money into the country and contemplating getting out should the goal posts be moved again. Certainly I will not live here in my retirement.

Anybody fancy jumping through hoops and spending enless hours waiting around photo copiers whilst inefficient staff give you duff information hoping you will offer tea money etc.etc. when they are in their 70s and 80's?

Edited November 7, 2006 by Steph1012

[Thaddeus]

What I don't understand about the OP's letter to Nation is why don't they just go get tourist visas?

TH

Are you serious..... there is one blindingly obvious reason..... concentrate on the word 'tourist' ... bit of a clue

[Firefan]

Thaihome - Thaddeus have a good point. Also; lots of indications that back to back tourist visas will be harder and harder to obtain also. Check the boards for real life experiences about that. Cheers!

[Macx]

no sooner do you (think) you have your head around the latest regulation, they introduce a new one that contradicts the previous

Makes you want to keep your hard-earned money safe in your pocket, doesn't it?

Sure does make LOS a less sabai-sabai place.

[CRUNCHER]

JR, you are wrong on the investment visa as it was grandfathered and there were even last minute approvals. The only extension of stay for marriage (for a male) was support Thai wife and required 400k yearly on deposit to prove ability to pay for support (or his monthly income of 40k). The new rule allows wife to provide or a combination of both incomes (as is the norm here - most middle class or above have both working). If age 50 or above they also have the option of retirement extension with 800k bank or 65k pension or combination.

As for "encouraged" to buy condo statement do not believe it is based on fact. Immigration kept this program very low key in my view. Although this may not have been the case with some foreign/connected developers.

JR Texas (51, USA, wrong): Reply to Lopburi3: Thanks for correcting me. You seem to know the rules and regulations backwards and forwards. But let me give you a plausible scenario: 1) before the changes an investor purchases several condos worth well over 3 million with the desire to sell them later on; 2) one of the major reasons he purchased the condos was that he was under the impression that he could use the 3-million baht investment rule (spend it and get a long term visa solution) as a selling point to potential condo buyers; 3) then the rules changed and he can't use the "investor visa" as a selling point. Not good from an investors point of view. The basic question remains: Is this change good for Thailand? My answer is no.....especially for new investors. And I do not think this change has anything to do with crime.

On removing the 400K in the bank visa option: How can this positively impact Thailand? I think that for most expats (those living here now or those that are thinking about living here) it is probably more difficult to find a way to earn the 40K per month than it is to put 400K in the bank. I do not think this change is good for Thailand. And I do not think it has anything to do with crime.

Best wishes,

JR

Buying several condos to sell them on sounds to me like speculation not investment. In the long run (or perhaps not so long) speculators cause nothing but misery. The Thai property market has too many speculators and soon the bubble will burst. Perhaps that is why the goal posts keep being moved.

[trajan]

Whilst many are getting legal, lots are just leaving and prepared to live in other parts of Asia. Most of my circle of friends are battening down the hatches, not bringing more money into the country and contemplating getting out should the goal posts be moved again. Certainly I will not live here in my retirement.

just curious, what other parts of Asia are people moving to?? is it easier to move and live there? and are those parts of Asia attractive to live in?? I also have friends who have asked me but I just dont know....(Ive visited the Philippines alot, but I just cant imagine dealing with that govt/legal system)

Edited November 7, 2006 by trajan

[dr_Pat_Pong]

why Thailand not give one year visa to foreigners which are married to thai national and living together for more as 3 or 5 years for example.

Yes, they do.

if you are not 50 years and you don't made an extension before the 1st Oct. then the answer is NO

What on earth are you going on about?

I'm 28, married with kid on the way, I have 1 year-VISA and we have been living together for 3.5years.

Did I just prove you wrong?

Please allow me to confirm what you say. Sometimes people don't want to listen to people with actual experience.

[Maestro]

Sometimes people don't want to listen to people with actual experience.

You are right, Pat. It was the very same Mentors who wrote

There is daily again so much wrong informations from post's here which make headache to the readers.

... and then in his subsequent posts he did exactly that: post wrong information. He should be ashamed of himself.

---------------

Maestro

[dr_Pat_Pong]

All information seemingly gleaned at places that purvey strong beverages after midnight when the voice of experience takes over

[JR Texas]

JR, you are wrong on the investment visa as it was grandfathered and there were even last minute approvals. The only extension of stay for marriage (for a male) was support Thai wife and required 400k yearly on deposit to prove ability to pay for support (or his monthly income of 40k). The new rule allows wife to provide or a combination of both incomes (as is the norm here - most middle class or above have both working). If age 50 or above they also have the option of retirement extension with 800k bank or 65k pension or combination.

As for "encouraged" to buy condo statement do not believe it is based on fact. Immigration kept this program very low key in my view. Although this may not have been the case with some foreign/connected developers.

JR Texas (51, USA, wrong): Reply to Lopburi3: Thanks for correcting me. You seem to know the rules and regulations backwards and forwards. But let me give you a plausible scenario: 1) before the changes an investor purchases several condos worth well over 3 million with the desire to sell them later on; 2) one of the major reasons he purchased the condos was that he was under the impression that he could use the 3-million baht investment rule (spend it and get a long term visa solution) as a selling point to potential condo buyers; 3) then the rules changed and he can't use the "investor visa" as a selling point. Not good from an investors point of view. The basic question remains: Is this change good for Thailand? My answer is no.....especially for new investors. And I do not think this change has anything to do with crime.

On removing the 400K in the bank visa option: How can this positively impact Thailand? I think that for most expats (those living here now or those that are thinking about living here) it is probably more difficult to find a way to earn the 40K per month than it is to put 400K in the bank. I do not think this change is good for Thailand. And I do not think it has anything to do with crime.

Best wishes,

JR

Buying several condos to sell them on sounds to me like speculation not investment. In the long run (or perhaps not so long) speculators cause nothing but misery. The Thai property market has too many speculators and soon the bubble will burst. Perhaps that is why the goal posts keep being moved.

JR Texas (51, USA): Reply to Cruncher: I take a broader view of the term "investment." To me, an investment involves two things: time and money. An investment in money can, in fact, be speculative. I do not like having to pay an ever-increasing price for real estate. Speculation of this kind does cause misery to many (America is a good example....average workers are now paying a huge chunk of their monthly paycheck to condo/apt. owners).

But speculation in the real estate market also employs people in many areas (e.g., engineering, construction, law). I would say that , on balance, it does cause more harm than good. Such speculation is, in my view, currently ruining Pattaya/Jomtien at the moment. Of course, others--especially those benefiting financially from the specualtion-- think the development there is great. The good/bad news is that there is always a "burst" after each "bubble."

Are you saying that the Thai govt. is changing the visa rules/regulations in order to cause a "real estate burst?" I can't see it. But maybe others have a deeper understanding as to why they might do that (to get rid of a lot of expats?). Certainly, these rules maximize the probability that a real estate crash will become a reality in the near future....if not already. I am not in Thailand now. I do not know for sure what is going on there in terms of the market.

//Edit: removed known false information - lopburi3//

Not really. But what if they do that? I wonder how many expats would change their tune and start becoming extremely worried about what the government is doing in terms of the new visa rules and regulations. Now too many are saying, "no problem.......I was grandfathered."

With all due respect, I think the time to worry is before the visa cops start knocking on your door.......not after.

Do you think that the Thai government actually wants to play host to an ever-growing-geriatric expat community? At some point in the future, they may decide that the medical and social problems created by the elderly expats are too difficult to deal with. And then they just might abrogate the grandfathered laws just to get rid of them.

Maybe not.....who knows. Just a thought. Thais are good people, for the most part. Surely this will never happen. Right?

[brahmburgers]

Ms Valentina says it a lot nicer than I do. The new rules will certainly be harmful for Thailand in the big picture of things. Thailand needs a plethora of native English teachers if it hopes crawl out of its hole of having an English-illiterate populace. English is THE language needed for dealing with world affairs. There are many other reasons this ill-thought-out policy is harmful to Thailand: breaking up families, running out farang who actively contribute to Thailand - especially Thai poor folks. The greatest source of outside revenue coming in to Thailand is (soon to be 'was') tourists and resident farang. Sure there are degenerates among farang, but who's to say there are a larger % than degenerates among Asian visitors or among Thais themselves? To enact a draconian immigration law (to weed out degenerates) is like killing cockroaches in your house with a sledge hammer: You might kill a few, but you're sure to damage the house beyond repair.

[My Friend Same]

I would not be the least bit surprised at all if they denied all of these "grandfather claused" visas on renewal down the road. Whether it's the people on married visas with 400K in the bank or the 3 million baht condo purchasers "grandfathered" in. I just would not be comfortable or trust that I am covered going forward. Grandfather clausing is a western concept and this aint the west.

Edited November 8, 2006 by My Friend Same

[dr_Pat_Pong]

I would not be the least bit surprised at all if they denied all of these "grandfather claused" visas on renewal down the road. Whether it's the people on married visas with 400K in the bank or the 3 million baht condo purchasers "grandfathered" in. I just would not be comfortable or trust that I am covered going forward. Grandfather clausing is a western concept and this aint the west.

The Grandfather rule is in vogue. ( Unless you are too stupid to read ) The changes only apply to NEW applicants ( for the really, really slow .... post October 01 )

[A_Traveller]

The simple fact of the matter is that any subsequent visa application will be subject to the rules in place at the time of renewal and therefore it is simply speculation that investment visas subject to 'grandfathering' will automatically be renewed. In fairness, I should say, naturally, that it is also speculation that the rules will change, in a disadvantageous manner, but on that point we all do have the benefit of hindsight to plan foresight, do we not?

Regards

[Hublet]

And just when the goal posts are cemented with rubber they are preparing to change them again. All in the name of ''restoring confidence among domestic and foreign investors.

Up to 200 laws may change

CHATRUDEE THEPARAT

The interim government aims to amend between 150 and 200 laws that pose obstacles to economic development within its one-year tenure year of administration, business leaders said.

Khunying Jada Wattanasiritham, president of the Thai Bankers' Association, said that Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont has stressed that amending laws is an urgent task for the government.

''There were about 500 laws that needed improvement. However, the interim government aims to complete the amendment of about 150 to 200 laws,'' she sai

source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/Business/08Nov2006_biz47.php

If you want to go to or stay in Thailand be prepared to jump through their hoops, have very very deep pockets. Those who are there illegally get ready to bolt. Those operating businesses or worling illegally be prepared to bolt. A birdy told me recently that there are more things being put into action.

As for the NGO's Thailand has never put much stock in them and would really rather they butted out of the affairs of the Kingdom. When the decision was made to build a dam adjacent to the Mekong River for water and hydro electric power (a joint project between Thailand/Cambodia/Laos and funded by Eiropean money) 15 NGO screamed for an impact assessment and was told ever so politely by Thailand that it was none of their business.

I for one am glad Thailand is making it harder and harder for foreigner to find loopholes so that they can live there illegally.

[VBF]

Up to 200 laws may change

CHATRUDEE THEPARAT

The interim government aims to amend between 150 and 200 laws that pose obstacles to economic development within its one-year tenure year of administration, business leaders said.

A birdy told me recently that there are more things being put into action.

Firstly, there is always the chance that some of the changes will help rather than hinder us. I know recent events don't obviously lead to that conclusion but maybe keeping an open mind until more infomation is available might be a good idea? (In partial agreement with A Traveller's response above)

Exactly how high is the birdy perched? Has your feathered friend got real knowledge or is it just more conjecture?

VBF

Edited November 8, 2006 by VBF

[Travel2003]

New visa rules may do more harm than good

On October 1 the Kingdom of Thailand introduced a new visa policy to restrict the number of times a foreigner can enter the country during a certain period of time.

The policy states that one can only stay in Thailand for 90 days in a period of six months, after which one must leave the country and stay outside for another 90 days before they can re-enter.

Valentina Soe

Special to The Nation

The writer is an expat and a human-rights advocate who has been living in Thailand for more than six years. She has extensive experience with foreign workers in Thailand, many of whom are affected by the change in visa policy.

Hi there.

A bit confused about the new rules.

Some (silly maybe) Questions:

As I normally work 3 months outside Thailand, and then have about 3 months vacation (which I want to spend in Thailand), do I then get within the said 180 days window?

Is this a window, which starts when one enter (the first time after 1st Oct), and end 180 days later?

What about if I already were in Thailand when this new rule started 1st of Oct?

By the way, Im married to a Thai now, so any suggestions about what to do, in order to avoid all this new stressful way of travel (in and out of the country).

Greatfull

rgds

Sailor

[lopburi3]

1. Obtain a non immigrant multi entry O visa on the basis of your marriage which will cover you for a year of entry/exit at will.

2. Obtain a tourist visa prior to each entry.

3. Obtain an extension of stay from immigration with proof of 40k family income and then obtain a multi re-entry permit to allow travel. This is expected to be renewed at the same time each year so perhaps not the be choice now.

The rules as outlined only apply to entry without visa so you should not have any problem as long as you obtain a visa.

[sriracha john]

I love Thailand and spent 2 wonderful years there but it is obvious that it is no longer tenable nor viable for honest small businesses to even hope that they will survive.

A birdy told me recently that there are more things being put into action.

Firstly, there is always the chance that some of the changes will help rather than hinder us. I know recent events don't obviously lead to that conclusion but maybe keeping an open mind until more infomation is available might be a good idea?

Exactly how high is the birdy perched? Has your feathered friend got real knowledge or is it just more conjecture?

It would appear the birdy isn't even in Thailand, so likely it's not perched up very high....

Back in Australia are you, Hublet?

Edited November 8, 2006 by sriracha john

[ovenman]

I love Thailand and spent 2 wonderful years there but it is obvious that it is no longer tenable nor viable for honest small businesses to even hope that they will survive.

A birdy told me recently that there are more things being put into action.

Exactly how high is the birdy perched? Has your feathered friend got real knowledge or is it just more conjecture?

It would appear the birdy isn't even in Thailand, so likely it's not perched up very high....

back in Australia are you, Hublet?

Don't they say something about a bird in hand... ?

[sriracha john]

yes.... they are worth two in the outback....

[Travel2003]

1. Obtain a non immigrant multi entry O visa on the basis of your marriage which will cover you for a year of entry/exit at will.

2. Obtain a tourist visa prior to each entry.

3. Obtain an extension of stay from immigration with proof of 40k family income and then obtain a multi re-entry permit to allow travel. This is expected to be renewed at the same time each year so perhaps not the be choice now.

The rules as outlined only apply to entry without visa so you should not have any problem as long as you obtain a visa.

Thank you very much.

Great help.

Rgds

Sailor