Tourist visa warning - too many days in one year

[claffey]

24 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

Apologies for any confusion.  You are correct about the length of stay per visit during use of an METV - you can leave every 60-days or extend each entry by 30 more days at immigration.  Time "out of country" on these border-bounces can be simply leaving and immediately returning - no need to wait 24 to 48 hours.  This is the primary advantage over obtaining additional Tourist Visas, which usually involves at least one night out of the country.

 

Where I got the 9 months, is that you can leave and return just before the "enter before" date, and receive a final 60-days which can be extended by 30 more.  And, yes, you should obtain the visa as close to departure as possible, to maximize its use - as the "enter before" date will be set from 6 months from the issuance-date.

 

The OP was looking for a way to stay here long-term - the METV can aid in that effort.  But, yes, you do have to leave for a few minutes every 60 or 90 days if using an METV to do so.

 

 

I think you are confusing "Tourist Visas" with "Visa-Exempt Entries."  There has been a crackdown on Visa-Exempt entries, and those staying here long-term have/will be warned/denied entry using that method.  My advise: Visa Exempts should ONLY be attempted for "short term visits," and even then, only if not done with a high frequency.

 

There has been no crackdown on Tourist Visas.  Laos, for example, always had a restrictive limit (even back in the double-entry days), and Cambodia is actually more friendly now, than at some periods in the past.  Vietnam and Myanmar are also being quite friendly, these days. 

 

The only restrictive policy-change for Tourist Visas, recently, is the change-over from offering double and triple entries, to offering only the Single or METV - and the METV being more restricted (useless, for most) than the old double/triple entries were.  Yes, they are keeping closer tabs on us - but they are not preventing people willing and financially able to undertake frequent travel, from living here nearly full-time on Tourist Visas. 

So when the immigration officer asks the people what you do in Thailand they will say that they live there? I doubt it very much. They will lie and say they are travelling or on holidays...That's breaking the law...If it happened in your home country you'd want them to be refused entry...

[sanemax]

12 minutes ago, claffey said:

And what would you think of people in your own country who lie about their intentions in order to gain entry to your country? You'd want them deported probably. A tourist visa is for a short term visit. It's not intended for people who want to reside there. Lying to immigration is against the law in every country, including Thailand.

 

   I always write "Want to go to Chiang mai" , that is the truth , Ive been in CM for six years now

[LivinLOS]

Its people constantly looking for loopholes that causes all these clampdowns that hurt the legit stayers. 

 

If your not married and under 50 not working here legally.. Buy a Elite visa, do a real course of study, or go. 

 

Planning your life around the continued ability to fly around the region begging for tourist entries to the place you live seems bizarre to me. 

[JackThompson]

2 minutes ago, claffey said:

Lying to immigration about your intentions is breaking the law. I don't have time to find the exact law. I have a life...

 

I have honestly answered every question on every immigration / visa form I have filled out.  Yet I have stayed here year after year on Tourist Visas.  In fact, I would strongly discourage anyone from putting down incorrect / lying answers on any official form, as that would be very short-sighted = foolish.

 

1 minute ago, claffey said:

And what would you think of people in your own country who lie about their intentions in order to gain entry to your country? You'd want them deported probably. A tourist visa is for a short term visit. It's not intended for people who want to reside there. Lying to immigration is against the law in every country, including Thailand.

 

Again, you are confusing "visa exempt entries" - which are only for short term visits, as current policy enforcement has demonstrated.  Immigration knows exactly how long I have been in Thailand, and can see that information every time I enter. 

 

Just now, claffey said:

So when the immigration officer asks the people what you do in Thailand they will say that they live there? I doubt it very much. They will lie and say they are travelling or on holidays...That's breaking the law...If it happened in your home country you'd want them to be refused entry...

 

I state the truth - "tourism."  I do not work in Thailand.  There are hundreds of temples and other sights I have yet to see - and many, many more days I wish to spend on the beach here.  It could take a lifetime to complete my tourist-adventures in Thailand - with more foreign-capital spent into the Thai economy, the longer I stay.

 

As to my country, don't get me started.  Anyone can work illegally or on special visas there because the business-groups like cheap labor, and "our" government actively works against the interests of its people.  In fact, this is one reason I retired early and left.  Ironically, I should thank the traitors for helping me discover Thailand - now I'll never go back to that depressing, poverty-immigrant-wrecked country. 

 

I very much respect the attempts to rid Thailand of illegal workers who depress wages and rob Thai citizens of the opportunity to obtain honest work in their own country.   Also to require non-citizens to be "net-contributors" to the Thai economy, vs cost the Thai people money. 

[Saradoc1972]

15 minutes ago, claffey said:

And what would you think of people in your own country who lie about their intentions in order to gain entry to your country? You'd want them deported probably. A tourist visa is for a short term visit. It's not intended for people who want to reside there. Lying to immigration is against the law in every country, including Thailand.

 

That is circular thinking because it all depends on what tourism is, which boils down to the good old "how long is a piece of string?". If a year long vacation in one spot still counts as tourism (to the Thai officials, mind you) with owned property to boot, calling it tourism is not lying. "Residing" is just the opposite of tourism, so quoting that as an excluding factor is circular and a bit unhelpful.

 

In the end what the Thai officials make of it counts, so please refrain from coming up with your personal definitions of tourism (like longer out than in over a year, fixed abode someplace else). They can see a person's history of entering and staying in in Thailand when faced with an application stating tourism. If it's fine by them, that's it, otherwise from what I've heard they will issue a warning along the lines of "last tourist visa for you here"  or something. Apart from getting a METV which the OP can only do in Australia, a Non-O is cheaper at 2000 Baht than the SETV plus 1900 Baht extension fee for those extra 30 days anyway.

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Its people constantly looking for loopholes that causes all these clampdowns that hurt the legit stayers. 

 

 

 

    I am here legitimately though .

There are no laws stating that you cannot get consecutive visas, either retirement visas or tourist visas

[LivinLOS]

There are many things which fall between the laws, thats why they are called loopholes. 

 

And the continual tightening of those loopholes, to stop people living here when they dont have a visa class, is why we all suffer. 

 

They made a solution.. The elite visa is simple, easy, has benefits, and frankly doesnt cost that much per year. Surely your time, and the mental security to allow you to plan your life, is worth that small cost ?? You wouldnt get me flying about, researching, begging around the region like that. Its degrading. 

 

[LivinLOS]

9 minutes ago, Saradoc1972 said:

 

That is circular thinking because it all depends on what tourism is, which boils down to the good old "how long is a piece of string?".

 

Anyone renting a house long term isnt really a tourist ?? 

[Saradoc1972]

 

12 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Its people constantly looking for loopholes that causes all these clampdowns that hurt the legit stayers. 

 

If your not married and under 50 not working here legally.. Buy a Elite visa, do a real course of study, or go. 

 

Planning your life around the continued ability to fly around the region begging for tourist entries to the place you live seems bizarre to me. 

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

    I am here legitimately though .

There are no laws stating that you cannot get consecutive visas, either retirement visas or tourist visas

 

That is not using "loopholes", that is reading and using the law. If Thailand wanted to restrict staying in Thailand on visa labelled for purposes of tourism, they could do that e.g. by formulating time-caps per year or something, at one point that seems to even have been the case. They have not chosen to do so, so that's the way the Thais want it. What they do not want is people living here doing under-the-table work and taking jobs from the Thais or circumventing the requirements for working here, i.e. hiring some 4 Thais per westerner's job.

 

That does not rule out the law allows a retiree to live here if self-supporting and under 50, it just means they have a special set of rules when to extend special courtesies to someone meeting that set of additional requirements, like no border-runs, no 90-days checking on the guy at a border. That's all, does not make living here by other arrangements a "loophole" or semi-illegal.

[darrendsd]

10 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

There are many things which fall between the laws, thats why they are called loopholes. 

 

And the continual tightening of those loopholes, to stop people living here when they dont have a visa class, is why we all suffer. 

 

They made a solution.. The elite visa is simple, easy, has benefits, and frankly doesnt cost that much per year. Surely your time, and the mental security to allow you to plan your life, is worth that small cost ?? You wouldnt get me flying about, researching, begging around the region like that. Its degrading. 

 

 

Who's begging? You fill in the form and receive your visa

 

It doesn't matter what YOU think, if they keep getting granted and Immigration let people in then people who stay here longterm on TV's are here as legally as you are no matter how much YOU disagree with it

[Saradoc1972]

5 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

 

Anyone renting a house long term isnt really a tourist ?? 

 

Lots of Germans owning or full-time renting Fincas on Mallorca or houses round the Ballaton. We can make up definitions of tourism all day here on the forum, just the Thai government seemingly aren't joining the fray and have refrained from drawing up any definition in their laws. Just working to make a living in Thailand seems ruled out, not so much by a definition of who is a tourist (under 30-y-o can .e.g tour Australia on special tourist visa and lend a hand on farms and the like) but by who can get a permit for doing so.

[Mook23]

I ve been in thailand from 2009 til 2015 on tourist visas for 9 months a year. 6 ongoin years. Visas were given by one and the same western consulate and there is nothing illegal in that.       

[claffey]

54 minutes ago, darrendsd said:

 

You can't find it because there is no law, strange how you have time to make untrue claims but no time to find a non existent law 

 

 

It's pretty obvious and common sense that lying to a government official is against the law. WHICH LAW? I don't care? It obviously would take me longer to find a specific law than to post here.

[LivinLOS]

11 minutes ago, darrendsd said:

 

Who's begging? You fill in the form and receive your visa

 

It doesn't matter what YOU think, if they keep getting granted and Immigration let people in then people who stay here longterm on TV's are here as legally as you are no matter how much YOU disagree with it

 

 

Look at the amount of threads on this and forums like it.. 

 

Have 2 already, where do I go.. The immigration said last one.. Where next.. Can I get one in Bali..  etc etc. 

 

Thats begging. 

[LivinLOS]

19 minutes ago, Saradoc1972 said:

 

 

That is not using "loopholes", that is reading and using the law. If Thailand wanted to restrict staying in Thailand on visa labelled for purposes of tourism, they could do that e.g. by formulating time-caps per year or something, at one point that seems to even have been the case.

What you mean exactly like the OP being told 270 days in one year ?? 

 

Precisely the start of this thread, is exactly what your saying they are not trying to do.

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, LivinLOS said:

What you mean exactly like the OP being told 270 days in one year ?? 

 

Precisely the start of this thread, is exactly what your saying they are not trying to do.

 

   That was stated by a lady in a visa shop, nothing to do with Thailand or Thai immigration or anyone official, its was also incorrect information

[darrendsd]

8 minutes ago, claffey said:

It's pretty obvious and common sense that lying to a government official is against the law. WHICH LAW? I don't care? It obviously would take me longer to find a specific law than to post here.

 

That's not what you originally said and you're making yourself look silly by trying to find another reason to cover up the fact that there is no law prohibiting people staying here longterm on TV's

[darrendsd]

9 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

 

 

Look at the amount of threads on this and forums like it.. 

 

Have 2 already, where do I go.. The immigration said last one.. Where next.. Can I get one in Bali..  etc etc. 

 

Thats begging. 

 

What are you on? Retirement? Why don't you get the Elite Visa instead of going to Immigration every 12 months begging to be allowed to stay here another year?

 

Not much difference is there? 

[JackThompson]

37 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

There are many things which fall between the laws, thats why they are called loopholes. 

 

And the continual tightening of those loopholes, to stop people living here when they dont have a visa class, is why we all suffer. 

 

They made a solution.. The elite visa is simple, easy, has benefits, and frankly doesnt cost that much per year. Surely your time, and the mental security to allow you to plan your life, is worth that small cost ?? You wouldnt get me flying about, researching, begging around the region like that. Its degrading. 

 

If it was a loophole, they would close it, or perhaps define it.  They haven't.  They made recent changes to Tourist Visas, but they did not change their policy on consecutive issuance.  This is not a "loophole" - it is a choice.

 

The least expensive "Elite" visa costs more than a full year of comfortable living-expenses in Thailand for the average expat who lives here.  In the real-world of ordinary people, it is not a "small cost" - it "costs a small fortune" - and is way out of whack compared to visa-options in other countries in the region.  For rich "elites" who can burn that much money for the convenience it offers, it is fine - more power to them.  But not so for the other 99% of us who appreciate Thailand's affordability combined with relative modernity.  We aren't going to throw away a year+ of retirement-living for a visa.

 

10 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

What you mean exactly like the OP being told 270 days in one year ??

Precisely the start of this thread, is exactly what your saying they are not trying to do.

 

One visa-agent referencing one consulate - Phnom Penh - made up that "rule" - but if you show a bank-balance of $1000 USD, they waive the rule (I've done it).  Clearly, the purpose is to deny Tourist Visas to those who cannot show they can afford to live here.  Fair enough.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2016 by JackThompson

[claffey]

If you can read you will see that I have consistently referred to 'lying' to immigration officials. That is what could be construed as illegal. Especially if you write tourism on the documents but live here indefinitely. I guess it depends on what 'tourism' means. 

 

I do fail to understand why some Westerners feel that it is OK to reside in a country for many years on 'tourist visas'. If people want to live with no security in their lives and risk being deported from their 'home' that's up to them. I personally couldn't do it. I'd always be looking over my shoulder. The fact that you need to apply in different consulates highlights the suspicions that immigration have towards such people...

[Asiantravel]

18 minutes ago, claffey said:

If you can read you will see that I have consistently referred to 'lying' to immigration officials. That is what could be construed as illegal. Especially if you write tourism on the documents but live here indefinitely. I guess it depends on what 'tourism' means. 

 

I do fail to understand why some Westerners feel that it is OK to reside in a country for many years on 'tourist visas'. If people want to live with no security in their lives and risk being deported from their 'home' that's up to them. I personally couldn't do it. I'd always be looking over my shoulder. The fact that you need to apply in different consulates highlights the suspicions that immigration have towards such people...

 

good grief you almost seem obsessed with this. how does the way  other people choose to stay in Thailand affect you personally? 

Edited November 2, 2016 by Asiantravel

[darrendsd]

14 minutes ago, claffey said:

If you can read you will see that I have consistently referred to 'lying' to immigration officials. That is what could be construed as illegal. Especially if you write tourism on the documents but live here indefinitely. I guess it depends on what 'tourism' means. 

 

I do fail to understand why some Westerners feel that it is OK to reside in a country for many years on 'tourist visas'. If people want to live with no security in their lives and risk being deported from their 'home' that's up to them. I personally couldn't do it. I'd always be looking over my shoulder. The fact that you need to apply in different consulates highlights the suspicions that immigration have towards such people...

 

Nope that's not what your first post said

 

Why would people who are here LEGALLY on TV'S be looking over their shoulders and why would they be deported when they are here LEGALLY?

 

Even if you get a "yearly" visa do you really think that gives you security?

[Saradoc1972]

16 minutes ago, claffey said:

I do fail to understand why some Westerners feel that it is OK to reside in a country for many years on 'tourist visas'. If people want to live with no security in their lives and risk being deported from their 'home' that's up to them. I personally couldn't do it. I'd always be looking over my shoulder. The fact that you need to apply in different consulates highlights the suspicions that immigration have towards such people...

 

Might be because tourism, chiefly by a possible definition as in "stays in my country, has the means to do so from income from another country" is a boon for every national economy. Especially if you can limit the "reflow" I believe it is called by economists, i.e. money going back to that persons home country for things he buys your country has to import from there  (British/German beer, razors), like Thailand has done with high tariffs up to 40% at customs.

 

People taking their money out of another national economy and somehow bringing that money into yours is a good thing. It is how our western countries got rich-rich, i.e. by making everyone else who wanted a car or other feats of engineering cough up some surplus money to bring into our national economies. Thailand has found the means to do something similar in tourism. They just try and keep the negative side-effects in check, but otherwise seem to feel OK with people bringing their money.

 

Lack of security, I would especially be thinking of health insurance here, or having the means of setting up camp again in a western home country, is another topic. One I would hope for everyone to have thought about before venturing out from his home country, but deportation is a very manageable risk in Thailand, even on a chain of tourist visas.

[LivinLOS]

1 hour ago, darrendsd said:

 

What are you on? Retirement? Why don't you get the Elite Visa instead of going to Immigration every 12 months begging to be allowed to stay here another year?

 

Not much difference is there? 

 

No I am still more than half a decade away from the geezer visa.. Been resident since late 20s. 

 

And no, having a elite visa doesnt stop you going to immigration for renewals, you still have to or do border hops. It is however a very nicely packaged option for the under 50s who claim to have so much disposable cash and contribute to the economy so much that they should be entitled. 

 

 

[LivinLOS]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

The least expensive "Elite" visa costs more than a full year of comfortable living-expenses in Thailand for the average expat who lives here.  In the real-world of ordinary people, it is not a "small cost" - it "costs a small fortune" - and is way out of whack compared to visa-options in other countries in the region.  For rich "elites" who can burn that much money for the convenience it offers, it is fine - more power to them.  But not so for the other 99% of us who appreciate Thailand's affordability combined with relative modernity.  We aren't going to throw away a year+ of retirement-living for a visa.

 

 

 

Its 500k for 5 years of visa.. You think 99% of expats live here on 40k a month ?? 

 

No wonder the immigration constantly push against these kind of cases. 

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, LivinLOS said:

1 hour ago, claffey said:

If you can read you will see that I have consistently referred to 'lying' to immigration officials. That is what could be construed as illegal. Especially if you write tourism on the documents but live here indefinitely. I guess it depends on what 'tourism' means. 

 

I do fail to understand why some Westerners feel that it is OK to reside in a country for many years on 'tourist visas'. If people want to live with no security in their lives and risk being deported from their 'home' that's up to them. I personally couldn't do it. I'd always be looking over my shoulder. The fact that you need to apply in different consulates highlights the suspicions that immigration have towards such people...

 

 

   I do not lie to immigration officials and there is no deception .

All my entry and exit stamps and visas are all in my passport for all to see and all my visits to Thailand are all on computer for immigration to see , we are not pretending that we dont live here .

  I also write "visiting friends", on forms, which isnt untrue .

Immigration also need a valid reason to deny you entry or to deport you . 

I am not eligible for a long tern  visa and I dont intend to stay another five years, so I dont want to get an Elite visa .

    If Thailand decided to limit my stays here, I would just go to another Country , 

   

[performance]

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

That would have nothing to do with applying for a visa.

Unless you have permission for permanent stay abroad

[performance]

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

23 hours ago, gojdthai2016 said:

best to just go to savannaket easiest place i have used on many ocassions ,,keep going along with tvs hopefully until 50 thats what i have been doing

Savannakhet what are the transport options from Pattaya ?

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, performance said:

Savannakhet what are the transport options from Pattaya ?

 

   Hi, I just googled that for you

https://www.rome2rio.com/s/Pattaya/Savannakhet

 

    

[JackThompson]

13 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Its 500k for 5 years of visa.. You think 99% of expats live here on 40k a month ?? 

No wonder the immigration constantly push against these kind of cases. 

 

99% can not shell out for the Elite because it would be financially-unwise choice.  If priced for the market, such a visa-scheme could generate a lot more net-income in fees, not to mention the added spend into the economy from all those using it.

 

I would venture that the vast majority of retirees here do not spend more than 40K Baht/mo.  I have a nice condo with a beautiful view in one of the more expensive places to live in Thailand and often spend less.  If I only had 30K/mo to spend, I could move to a smaller-town, and still live quite decently. 

 

Those surviving on 20K/mo or less are probably "fan-room" folks (or amazingly thrifty), but even they are contributing foreign-capital, so no harm done that I can see.  Ask the vendors and landlords they patronize them whether they want them booted out.