Govt approves 10 year visas for foreigners over 50

[jpinx]

20 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

So what I gather from these discussions is that:

 

The 3 million in the bank option is stupid.

The 100K baht monthly income option is stupid.

The health insurance requirement is stupid.

The 90 day reporting requirement (which is part of the Immigration Act) is stupid.

 

At a certain point , when persons who are not responsible for these decisions claim that everything is stupid, then I get the feeling something is missing -- and I don't claim to know what it is.

Not so stupid.  90-day reporting as no big deal and can be done online and really is to be expected of any country with such a large foreign population.  The health insurance is not a stupid idea - it just needs to be thought through a bit better.  100k/month is high. 65k per month is the current requirement and is enough. Locking up any money in a Thai bank is just silly. :)

[JLCrab]

I was just rehashing what has been said by others on here. Sentence #1 of Post #1 this topic:

 

— Affluent foreign residents over 50 will soon be able to apply for 10-year visas, a government spokesman said Tuesday.

 

So maybe they think these are the requirements the affluent foreign resident should be able to meet (and already has health insurance) to get a 10 year long-stay visa and if you cannot meet these requirement, either continue on your current visa/extension regime or look elsewhere.

[tropo]

Keep it up guys! Only 17 posts to go to reach 2000 in just over a week... and yet no official answer to the most talked about 'question of the year'.

[jpinx]

5 minutes ago, tropo said:

Keep it up guys! Only 17 posts to go to reach 2000 in just over a week... and yet no official answer to the most talked about 'question of the year'.

You can count this poor misguided blighter too :)

 

 

[digibum]

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

I was just rehashing what has been said by others on here. Sentence #1 of Post #1 this topic:

 

— Affluent foreign residents over 50 will soon be able to apply for 10-year visas, a government spokesman said Tuesday.

 

So maybe they think these are the requirements the affluent foreign resident should be able to meet (and already has health insurance) to get a 10 year long-stay visa and if you cannot meet these requirement, either continue on your current visa/extension regime or look elsewhere.

 

Well, if you are coming to Thailand for medical treatment chances are you've got more than a few dollars in your pocket.  Most people would take whatever medical treatment their insurance was willing to pay for back home and roll the dice because they simply couldn't afford to travel half-way across the world and pay out of pocket.  

 

Likewise, if you're coming here with a medical condition already, Thailand doesn't want to get stuck caring for you so forcing people to get insurance to cover any unexpected medical costs seems like a wise move by the government.  

 

 

[Jingthing]

I was just rehashing what has been said by others on here. Sentence #1 of Post #1 this topic:
 
— Affluent foreign residents over 50 will soon be able to apply for 10-year visas, a government spokesman said Tuesday.
 
So maybe they think these are the requirements the affluent foreign resident should be able to meet (and already has health insurance) to get a 10 year long-stay visa and if you cannot meet these requirement, either continue on your current visa/extension regime or look elsewhere.

Yes. Probably. But we still await finalized details. Including such basic things as does this replace O-A visas and will people be able to apply initially for this new thing in home nations, at Thai immigration offices, or both. Until we have finalized answers to basic questions and more it's simply impossible to be definitive about this probable but not yet in effect visa change.

Cheers.
Don't panic.
Wait.

[JLCrab]

11 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

Well, if you are coming to Thailand for medical treatment chances are you've got more than a few dollars in your pocket.  Most people would take whatever medical treatment their insurance was willing to pay for back home and roll the dice because they simply couldn't afford to travel half-way across the world and pay out of pocket.  

 

Likewise, if you're coming here with a medical condition already, Thailand doesn't want to get stuck caring for you so forcing people to get insurance to cover any unexpected medical costs seems like a wise move by the government.  

 

 

Thank you. For those who cannot follow the above explanation, here's a handy flow chart:

[Gweiloman]

What would make sense, in keeping with the good guys in, bad guys out scenario is that this new visa type should replace the current 1 year visa for all NEW applications. 

 

Those who are already settled here are merely seeking extensions of stay and should therefore not be subjected to the new regulations unless they wish to change their visa type.

[Thaiwrath]

Just posting this to help them get to the 2,000 post mark.

[newnative]

53 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

What would make sense, in keeping with the good guys in, bad guys out scenario is that this new visa type should replace the current 1 year visa for all NEW applications. 

 

Those who are already settled here are merely seeking extensions of stay and should therefore not be subjected to the new regulations unless they wish to change their visa type.

Except it's limited to only 14 countries.

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, digibum said:

 

Well, if you are coming to Thailand for medical treatment chances are you've got more than a few dollars in your pocket.  Most people would take whatever medical treatment their insurance was willing to pay for back home and roll the dice because they simply couldn't afford to travel half-way across the world and pay out of pocket.  

 

Likewise, if you're coming here with a medical condition already, Thailand doesn't want to get stuck caring for you so forcing people to get insurance to cover any unexpected medical costs seems like a wise move by the government.  

 

 

Not to mention that the truly wealthy here go to Singapore for their medical treatment.....

[Gweiloman]

12 minutes ago, newnative said:

Except it's limited to only 14 countries.

 

TiT, nothing much makes sense here 

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

What would make sense, in keeping with the good guys in, bad guys out scenario is that this new visa type should replace the current 1 year visa for all NEW applications. 

 

Those who are already settled here are merely seeking extensions of stay and should therefore not be subjected to the new regulations unless they wish to change their visa type.

I could be wrong, but Thailand isn't generally that subtle when it comes to Immigration requirements?

 

Having said that, I think (or hope) you're right in that it will be like the Elite Visa - an option rather than a requirement.

 

Getting rid of all of us who only have an income of 67,000 bht p.m. will appeal to many locals who fully support Thai rak Thai.  Even (I suspect) a few whose businesses benefit enormously from the ordinary 'farang'.....

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

What would make sense, in keeping with the good guys in, bad guys out scenario is that this new visa type should replace the current 1 year visa for all NEW applications. 

 

Those who are already settled here are merely seeking extensions of stay and should therefore not be subjected to the new regulations unless they wish to change their visa type.

 

Good guy, bad guy?

 

The new police records, not wealth, will keep a lot of bad guys out, those guilty of tax evasion, extortion, bank fraud, insider trading, Ponzi schemes, insurance and health care fraud, etc.

 

Those here longer than dirt, who have raised multi-generation families, put countless relatives through college, built homes, worked on community committees, or do volunteer work for the poor may be a bit financially exhausted.

 

These good guys might appreciate the old system.

[Jingthing]

Except it's limited to only 14 countries.

That has not actually been finalized. Bizarre how so many people want to promote the fiction that all of the implementation details of this new thing are set yet.

They have not.

[Jingthing]

What would make sense, in keeping with the good guys in, bad guys out scenario is that this new visa type should replace the current 1 year visa for all NEW applications. 
 
Those who are already settled here are merely seeking extensions of stay and should therefore not be subjected to the new regulations unless they wish to change their visa type.

In that case it would mean a significant reduction in annual new retired expats. Which is good if that's what the government wants and bad for those who wouldn't qualify but would under the current levels.

However keep in mind grandfathering rights if granted go away if an expat breaks the chain of continuous extensions for whatever reason. It happens sometimes without intention and in such cases the consequences can be potentially devastating.

[Thaidream]

No one knows exactly what the final plan is. However according to reports- the Thai cabinet approved the plan for only 14 countries and they were named. They actually exclude countries that are much wealthier than the 14 named. The 14 named have an average income per population of $40K per year- hardly wealthy by any measure and indication that if the plan holds and the financials in the new scheme  hold- few people will have the means to obtain the new Visa.  Government pension plans/private pensions are based on a portion of one's income gleaned over decades and most people have purchased houses with any excess. The numbers proposed just won't get many takers.

[SaintLouisBlues]

9 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

The numbers proposed just won't get many takers.

I imagine even the Thais are capable of looking up the statistics of potential numbers on the Malaysia My 2nd Home site, as this visa is pretty much a clone of that one - http://www.mm2h.gov.my/index.php/en/home/programme/statistics. Mind you, given Thai chauvinism they undoubtedly expect they will get far more applicants for Thai visas than the Malaysians have achieved 

[Gweiloman]

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

In that case it would mean a significant reduction in annual new retired expats. Which is good if that's what the government wants and bad for those who wouldn't qualify but would under the current levels.

However keep in mind grandfathering rights if granted go away if an expat breaks the chain of continuous extensions for whatever reason. It happens sometimes without intention and in such cases the consequences can be potentially devastating.

 

With all the talk recently about good/bad guys, quality tourists etc, it is only natural that raising the bar on long term visas would be one of the steps.

 

Similarly, if an expat breaks the chain, this would also achieve the above without taking away any human rights from said expat. 

[newnative]

6 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

 

TiT, nothing much makes sense here 

I think it doesn't make sense to some posters because they are trying to make this new 10 year visa something that it's not and blowing everything way out of proportion.  It's not a replacement for any of the current visas in place--but that's not stopping some from leaping to the conclusion that it might be. If you try to force it into being a replacement, it doesn't work or make sense--like trying to force a puzzle piece into the wrong spot.  Why is it not a replacement?  It's only available for 14 countries.  A visa replacement would not be limited to just a few countries and exclude some of the biggest.  The 10 Year is just a limited visa option for affluent people over 50 in a few select countries.  Thailand isn't making a big deal about it and Immigration isn't making a big deal about it because... wait for it...it's not a big deal. 

[Jingthing]

 
With all the talk recently about good/bad guys, quality tourists etc, it is only natural that raising the bar on long term visas would be one of the steps.
 
Similarly, if an expat breaks the chain, this would also achieve the above without taking away any human rights from said expat. 

Oh please. A good guy here after 20 years could easily accidentally break the chain for a number of innocent reasons. Such as mechanical issue with his bank abroad. Hospitalized at the wrong time. Last minute large exchange rate move. Hundreds more.

[Jingthing]

I think it doesn't make sense to some posters because they are trying to make this new 10 year visa something that it's not and blowing everything way out of proportion.  It's not a replacement for any of the current visas in place--but that's not stopping some from leaping to the conclusion that it might be. If you try to force it into being a replacement, it doesn't work or make sense--like trying to force a puzzle piece into the wrong spot.  Why is it not a replacement?  It's only available for 14 countries.  A visa replacement would not be limited to just a few countries and exclude some of the biggest.  The 10 Year is just a limited visa option for affluent people over 50 in a few select countries.  Thailand isn't making a big deal about it and Immigration isn't making a big deal about it because... wait for it...it's not a big deal. 

Hey dude. How can you be 100 percent that this will not replace the O-A visa? Source please other than your guesses which may indeed be correct guesses but still not the same thing as definite facts.

[jpinx]

15 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Hey dude. How can you be 100 percent that this will not replace the O-A visa? Source please other than your guesses which may indeed be correct guesses but still not the same thing as definite facts.

From what has been written so far it seems that the current O-A visa issued in home country based on retirement could be the one that "might" be replaced for the 14 countries involved - but I've not seen that list of countries yet.  There is no indication of any intention to replace the extensions to O visas issued in Thailand based on retirement.

[Jingthing]

From what has been written so far it seems that the current O-A visa issued in home country based on retirement could be the one that "might" be replaced for the 14 countries involved - but I've not seen that list of countries yet.  There is no indication of any intention to replace the extensions to O visas issued in Thailand based on retirement.

Reasonable guessing. But just guessing. We won't know for sure about details until later.

BTW. Yes that's what an O-A visa is. The long stay issued only in home nations. This thing has also been labelled long stay visa in the less than clear "news" items about it.

[jpinx]

42 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Reasonable guessing. But just guessing. We won't know for sure about details until later.

BTW. Yes that's what an O-A visa is. The long stay issued only in home nations. This thing has also been labelled long stay visa in the less than clear "news" items about it.

I agree, but in the light of some reports from people who have actually quizzed their local Immigration Office about the non-O extensions, and report "no change" here, I think the odds are that the existing one-year-extensions are safe, until the next vague announcement of some maybe-possible change comes up. 

 

Sometime you'd think they do that just to see who's awake :)

[Jingthing]

Jolly good.

[nong38]

10 hours ago, SpokaneAl said:

 

 

It sounds like you obtained an extension of stay based on retirement and not a visa.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

New Retirement Visa.

[Chip Allen]

4 hours ago, newnative said:

I think it doesn't make sense to some posters because they are trying to make this new 10 year visa something that it's not and blowing everything way out of proportion.  It's not a replacement for any of the current visas in place--but that's not stopping some from leaping to the conclusion that it might be. If you try to force it into being a replacement, it doesn't work or make sense--like trying to force a puzzle piece into the wrong spot.  Why is it not a replacement?  It's only available for 14 countries.  A visa replacement would not be limited to just a few countries and exclude some of the biggest.  The 10 Year is just a limited visa option for affluent people over 50 in a few select countries.  Thailand isn't making a big deal about it and Immigration isn't making a big deal about it because... wait for it...it's not a big deal. 

Hope you're right. We will never know until they clarify it. Clarity is NOT a staple of Thai Immigration or any Thai government bureau, for that matter. Obfuscation is the norm.

[Jingthing]

33 minutes ago, nong38 said:

New Retirement Visa.

Which do you mean?

 

-- Change of status to O visa in Thailand (as first step before retirement extension)

-- Annual extension based on retirement in Thailand

-- Single entry O visa (typically from neighboring country)

-- O-A "Long Stay" visa from your home country

 

 

[Bill Miller]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Which do you mean?

 

-- Change of status to O visa in Thailand (as first step before retirement extension)

-- Annual extension based on retirement in Thailand

-- Single entry O visa (typically from neighboring country)

-- O-A "Long Stay" visa from your home country

 

 

This is very confusing. I came in from KL on a 30 day arrival visa. Went to Bkk immigration and converted (change of status option, I guess)  to a 90 day non immigrant "O" visa based on retirement, with instructions to return for my one year extension  within seven days, I believe it was, of the expiry of that visa. The ninety day was stamped to last until 11Jun 2016, and the subsequent one year permission is stamped on 8 June 2016 to last until 11June, 2017. I am confused about why folks keep saying you must do this in your home country, or "...typically from neighboring country."
Not my experience, at least, and I had expected to have to go to Ventiane or wherever to do this, based on such statements.
I am glad I asked at immigration when I went to extend that thirty day "on arrival" permission from KL, which trip was necessitated by being one day late applying for the previous extension.
Confusing ain't half of it!

Edited November 30, 2016 by Bill Miller
clarification (maybe)