3 tourist visas in one year too much??!!

[thetruth revealer]

On 24.11.2016 at 1:02 PM, bark said:

 

30,000 is not the point. Not alot of money, so I should not even said.

Point was to pay the lawyer, not to have problems.

The other point was everyone should get the correct Visa. Period.

Whats a ``Correct Visa``? Regarding Thai Policy? What does the Embassy and Consulates issue ?????

[thetruth revealer]

On 24.11.2016 at 1:05 PM, JackThompson said:

 

Based on the law, I have the "right Visa" - and so did the OP.  If they change the law, they need to publish this change. 

 

Yes, some teachers work without work permits, and are encouraged to do this by the schools that hire them.  Both the schools and the illegal-teachers should face criminal sanction.  And since we all know precisely where they are (in the schools), it would be easy to go round them up.  But this doesn't happen (often).   If illegal-teaching is the issue, I can only wonder why they are not targeted.  I can only assume that the motivation for what happened to the OP is something else. 

Why should a Teacher face criminal sanctions if they provide benefits to this society ? Just because not holding a  piece of paper ??? Round up ???? 

[buick]

i looked through my passport and want to amend my comments in #117.  this year i used two SETV's (one extended), as i visited the USA twice.  i also had 2 visa exempt entries, one extended.  in prior years, i used a double entry TV (usually one extension) and 3 visa exempt entries (no extensions). 

[thetruth revealer]

On 24.11.2016 at 1:05 PM, Tony125 said:

They have the correct visa they are tourists as in the case of the dentist who goes to Phillippines, Thailand and back and is not working in  Thailand. You asked how can guys stay away from a job for so long , I gave you the answer and it doesn't involve working here. And you just mentioned you had to pay 30,000 baht for your "stupid lawyer" to do your work permit because I guess your not "smart" enough to do it yourself?

[thetruth revealer]

On 24.11.2016 at 4:07 PM, itsuptome said:

Looking forward to the OP's next update. This is an unusual case and normally would only occur if the IO had strong suspicions the OP was working in Thailand, or something similar. I think his options really depend on the reason given for refusal.

 

Statements which amount to endorsement of immigration's attitude shift toward long stayers on tourist visas are misguided. The Thai government is entirely within its right to discourage this type of activity if they think that's best for the country, but the way they go about it will influence international perception of Thailand as a whole. Publishing clear policies and enforcing them consistently is the correct way. If they begin to sporadically disavow visas issued by their own Foreign Affairs ministry at the border it's not going to make Thailand look good.

 

 

 

I have to respectfully disagree with all of this. Developed countries normally publish clear visa policies and enforce them consistently, which Thailand has not done in the case of long stayers on tourist visas in Thailand. The country's GDP has been nearly flat since 2014 versus regional and historical growth of 5%+ per year. And Chinese tourism is way down this year after the crackdown on zero-dollar tours (which weren't making Thailand any money anyway).

 

Thailand is definitely less welcoming than it was a few years ago. Additional restrictions have been placed on foreign investment through the BOI, and incentives have been reduced. Work permits for foreigners have become harder to obtain. Education visas are harder to obtain and holders are treated with suspicion. Multi-entry tourist visas are now much harder to obtain. It looks like we are about to see the requirements raised substantially for retirement visas. All this comes in the context of an immigration policy where the path to permanent residence and citizenship is very difficult. In short, the country is closing itself off to non-Thais.

 

Nearly every class of visa has been affected in some way. You can argue that Thailand was too welcoming toward the wrong people in the past, but a lot of the "right" people (read: investors, business owners, skilled professionals, law-abiding visitors) have been affected by these changes as well.

 

The Thai people will benefit more from an open society which values a free exchange of ideas, commerce and people, and is regulated in a fair and consistent manner. Foreigners in Thailand stand to lose a great deal if the current trend of closing off the country continues. It's particularly distressing to me that there's so much infighting between different parts of the expat community, as if the type of visa you hold determines what kind of person you are. All parts of the expat community should be working together to identify concerns and present them to the government in a constructive manner, along with solutions that benefit the Thai people as well as the foreigners who come to visit, invest, and participate in Thai society.

 

[thetruth revealer]

On 24.11.2016 at 8:35 PM, elviajero said:

No one knows, but between 2006/08 there was an official published limit on visa exempt entries of 180 days in 6 months that was a rolling count.

 

This 180 day 'rule' seems to be frequently quoted by IO's at various border checkpoints.

How many months are 180 days????

[thetruth revealer]

On 25.11.2016 at 10:44 AM, LongTimeLurker said:

 

METV is 'harder' to obtain no because of the financial requirements but because you need a letter from an employer.

 

If you have the finance but no employer then you cannot obtain one.

Untrue

[JackThompson]

32 minutes ago, thetruth revealer said:

Why should a Teacher face criminal sanctions if they provide benefits to this society ? Just because not holding a  piece of paper ??? Round up ???? 

 

The underlying question is, "Should teachers be allowed to work here without work-permits?"   I would answer, "no," because this would undermine Thais who might wish to enter the teaching profession and also reduce the screening-process which could reduce the number of unqualified applicants.  Teachers already receive waivers which are not available to other foreign job-seekers, to facilitate a greater number of potential foreign applicants. 

 

Even foreign Volunteers, working for no financial benefit, must also obtain work-permits, in order to prevent their work undermining Thais who require paid jobs, in order to support themselves and their families.  What can be said of a government that allows its own citizens lives to be undermined by foreign labor?  I could answer that rhetorical question, directed at my own country, but I am at a loss for words using language which is permitted in this forum.

 

As to what "benefits society," the laws of a nation are instituted to that end.  It is up to the Thais, not foreigners like me, to answer that question.   I do hope they choose wisely, with regards to opening up new affordable avenues (relative to the cost of living in Thailand) for longer term Tourist Visas or freelance Business Visas, in order to see more foreign capital flow into their nation from offshore incomes. 

[thetruth revealer]

6 hours ago, asiansfirst said:

 

Huh? Why is this very odd? Because he holds US nationality? He stays in Thailand for 250 days and you find Thai immigration's stance on this  matter a very odd one? This is a sovereign nation and if their immigration officers find he is not eligible for admission, protesting on the basis of US nationality is uncalled for.

 

Imagine if a Thai (or any other Asian) national were to spend 250 days in the EU or in the United States on back to back visas. If he or she were denied entry, would you find that equally odd?

 

Regardless of having overstayed or not, tourists do not visit countries for 250 days. 

 

Some foreigners come to Asia thinking their nationalities exempt them from the immigration laws.

 

Again, for those who are confused about what a visa is and how one is permitted landing on Thai soil:

 

Landing permission is stamped in a foreigner's passport by immigration officers at the airport or seaport where he or she goes through immigration procedures. It is this landing permission, not a visa, that serves as the legal basis for the foreigner's stay in Thailand. A visa is only a recommendation and does not automatically guarantee landing permission. 
 

why generalizing ASIA if the matter is about Thailand? well your nickname  says it all.....

 

[elviajero]

2 hours ago, thetruth revealer said:

How many months are 180 days????

Less than 6 calendar months. 6 calander months vary in length from 181 to 184 days

 

If you are referring to my typo it has already been pointed out and acknowledged, and it didn't have any affect on the point I was making.

[KhonKaenKowboy]

6 hours ago, buick said:

 

i agree with what you say with a slight modification, you say living here on tourist visas is forbidden.  i would say 'living here on tourist visas while working in thailand (no work permit obviously) or without sufficient funds to support yourself is forbidden'.  i provided some detail on my experience a page or two back in this thread.  here is some more detail.   i've spent more than 250 days a year in thailand for the last 10 yrs.  in year 4, 5, or 6 (i can't recall exactly), immigration at suvarnabhumi pulled me aside and asked what i'd been doing in thailand.  i said i'm retired and too young to get the retirement visa (i was 44, 45 or 46 at the time).  they instructed me to obtain tourist visas and avoid visa exempt entries when possible (they said nothing about the elite scheme).  if it was truly forbidden, i wouldn't be here.  it is all speculation as to why they are 'okay' with me.  i get my visas in my home country (USA) and they currently require proof of funds to get a tourist visa so they know i have enough money to support myself.  in order to stay for the 250 days, i get a SETV and extend (90 days).  i then fly to hong kong, the PI, vietnam or europe (i always stay at least a week usually two).  i return on a visa exempt entry, extend that (60 days).  then do that again, 60 days.  that is 210 days.  then i fly back to USA for two months and return with an SETV and start all over again.  last year i did three visa exempt entries in a row (and extended each).  i had no problem although i was wondering if i would, i had my flight out of thailand plus my thai bank account statement just in case they pulled me aside.  so you just have to be ready for a 'discussion'. again, if it was forbidden, i would not have been allowed in.  i am now 50 and will be getting the retirement visa soon.

 

(i see another TV member has just now touched on the same topic !!)

If it is perfectly legal, then why do you get nervous every time you enter and the IO starts looking at your entries?

[bark]

4 hours ago, thetruth revealer said:

Why should a Teacher face criminal sanctions if they provide benefits to this society ? Just because not holding a  piece of paper ??? Round up ???? 

So teachers are special and do not need work permits ??

Three teachers( if you can call them ) got busted for selling drugs to kids at my daughters school, 3 years ago.

Benefits I think not.

 

[buick]

22 minutes ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

If it is perfectly legal, then why do you get nervous every time you enter and the IO starts looking at your entries?

 

i get 'prepared' not 'nervous'.  and that is only when i make a visa exempt entry.  immigration told me i should avoid that practice and i still use those entries a couple times a year (my tourist visa already confirms that i have a flight out and money, visa exempt does not so you should have the info available).  as noted by the person with the 7 year old daughter (who finally got a non imm O), there are grey areas in the system.  the people operating in those areas are not perfectly legal (to use your term) but also not forbidden.  but i'd suggest we are 'legal'.

 

the reason i post this information is for the benefit of others in the same grey area that i am in (but will be out soon as i'm now 50).  why should a 47 year old from USA buy the elite visa when they have the alternative of using tourist visas.  i'm not suggesting that someone at age 55 do it.  nor am i suggesting that a person age 25 do it.  if a 40 year old asked me for a recommendation, i'm not sure what i'd say.  i'd need to know more about their situation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[freedomnow]

This may render the METV worthless for some people going back home and all the trouble to get it, if their rolling tourist totals (paid and /or exempts) are 180+...flying in only to be bounced back home .....= nightmare.

Edited November 26, 2016 by freedomnow

[LongTimeLurker]

very true actually

 

You really should read the whole thread before you shotgun nonsense replies to posts.

[Cletus]

17 minutes ago, freedomnow said:

This may render the METV worthless for some people going back home and all the trouble to get it, if their rolling tourist totals (paid and /or exempts) are 180+...flying in only to be bounced back home .....= nightmare.

 

It seems you didn't understand a lot or at least haven't read the full  thread .

[freedomnow]

15 minutes ago, Cletus said:

 

It seems you didn't understand a lot or at least haven't read the full  thread .

 I just read the entire thread, and are they not tallying any previous combination of180 days of tourist entries triggering a red flag against people on entry ?

As in they have started the 180 days in a year rule for touristas again without announcing it like they did 10 years or so ago ?

Edited November 26, 2016 by freedomnow

[Cletus]

10 minutes ago, freedomnow said:

 I just read the entire thread and are they not tallying any combination of 180 days of tourist entries triggering a red flag against people on entry ?

No. It's not just against all people on tourist visa. It's against people who are suspected to be working illegaly bacause of no evidence of funds from outside Thailand and living in the Kingdom at the same time. If you get a METV you have to prior show at least 6000 euro, so no problem entering Thailand. Then if you have evidence of further funds/cash on you it's even better. That's what I understand as of now.

[freedomnow]

12 minutes ago, Cletus said:

No. It's not just against all people on tourist visa. It's against people who are suspected to be working illegaly bacause of no evidence of funds from outside Thailand and living in the Kingdom at the same time. If you get a METV you have to prior show at least 6000 euro, so no problem entering Thailand. Then if you have evidence of further funds/cash on you it's even better. That's what I understand as of now.

I think you need to read the thread again, not me.... the number of days of combined paid tourist or visa-excepts is triggering the alert for some, and its looking like 180 days.

No mention of other kinds of visas triggering the alert,  only combinations of paid tourist or visa-except ...yet others in excess of these combined days of paid tourist or visa-except are getting in OK ( lack of consistency again) , and that may be due to getting in before the new criteria for alerts, which might have come into force when the OP entered ...it is still to be seen if a deluge of people start reporting the same as the OP from this time period onwards.

Edited November 26, 2016 by freedomnow

[Cletus]

27 minutes ago, freedomnow said:

I think you need to read the thread again, not me.... the number of days of combined paid tourist or visa-excepts is triggering the alert for some, and its looking like 180 days.

No mention of other kinds of visas triggering the alert,  only combinations of paid tourist or visa-except ...yet others in excess of these combined days of paid tourist or visa-except are getting in OK ( lack of consistency again) , and that may be due to getting in before the new criteria for alerts, which might have come into force when the OP entered ...it is still to be seen if a deluge of people start reporting the same as the OP from this time period onwards.

ok up to you. Bye

[freedomnow]

Just now, Cletus said:

ok up to you. Bye

Up to me what ? I'm just trying to form a summary of what I understand so far and if it is wrong, I learn from another member who posts after this. No biggie !

[at15]

On 11/25/2016 at 1:53 PM, JackThompson said:

 

Thanks for the update.  Can you let us know what was stamped in your passport at DMK (if anything) before you flew back to Penang?  For example, did they stamp "void" or "used" on your Tourist Visa, or place any new stamps or notes in your passport (in Thai or English)?

Absolutely nothing so im assuming i can still use it. It just looks like i have a fresh tourist visa from penang and never came back to thailand. (only have the original exit stamp before going to get the visa) Basically what was translated to me through my girlfriend was im fine, just stay out for a month or two. So i guess just before that visa expires. And then to enter preferably by land or Suvarnabhumi. DMK too strict the air asia lady said. Probably because thats where all the poor people come in. Dont take this as some new precedence guys im young and come off like a douchebag. I did not have the exit ticket and 20k baht in my hand and they would not let me buy one or show my bank account on my phone. I just never thought i would have a problem as a legit tourist following procedure, in the future ill be a lot more prepared. 

Edited November 26, 2016 by at15

[JackThompson]

15 minutes ago, at15 said:

Absolutely nothing, it just looks like i have a fresh tourist visa from penang and never came back to thailand. (only have the original exit stamp before going to get the visa) Basically what was translated to me through my girlfriend was im fine, just stay out for a month or two. So i guess just before that visa expires. And then to enter preferably by land or Suvarnabhumi. DMK too strict the air asia lady said. Probably because thats where all the poor people come in. Dont take this as some new precedence guys im young and come off like a douchebag. I did not have the exit ticket and 20k baht in my hand and they would not let me buy one or show my bank account on my phone. I just never thought i would have a problem as a legit tourist following procedure, in the future ill be a lot more prepared. 

 

If they asked to see the 20K Baht (in cash), and you did not have it to show, that would give them legal cause to deny entry.  I am surprised they did not officially deny entry.  Good that they let you keep your unused Tourist Visa. 

 

If it were me, I would get the 20K Baht from the ATM (value in local currency), then come in through Pedang Besar tomorrow.  Even if they turned you away, you'd only be a short train-trip back to Penang.  They are not known to ask for air-tickets at that checkpoint, but you could purchase one online and print it out and return, if it was requested.

Edited November 26, 2016 by JackThompson

[at15]

20 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

If they asked to see the 20K Baht (in cash), and you did not have it to show, that would give them legal cause to deny entry.  I am surprised they did not officially deny entry.  Good that they let you keep your unused Tourist Visa. 

 

If it were me, I would get the 20K Baht from the ATM, then come in through Pedang Besar tomorrow.  Even if they turned you away, you'd only be a short train-trip back to Penang.  They are not known to ask for air-tickets at that checkpoint, but you could purchase one online and print it out and return, if it was requested.

They just said show me your pocket money and when i took out 500 baht it was over from that point on lol. I just thought i could show my bank account and not have to carry around so much cash but thats not the case. At least have 10k to pull out guys. 

 

also edit that jack: way in the back of the passport like they were hiding it there is some note in thai next to my exit stamp.

Edited November 26, 2016 by at15

[JackThompson]

2 minutes ago, at15 said:

They just said show me your pocket money and when i took out 500 baht it was over from that point on lol. I just thought i could show my bank account and not have to carry around so much cash but thats not the case. At least have 10k to pull out guys. 

 

The required amount for a Tourist Visa entry (60 days w/o extension) is 20K Baht in cash and/or travelers checks - not one baht less.  This is not a new requirement, though enforcement is random.   Not rubbing it in, at15 - on my early entries to Thailand, I did not carry cash, proof of finances, etc - just got lucky.   I was fortunate to find out these arcane bits of "border rules" on this board before I needed them.

 

Although it would be "logical" to be able to show proof by other means, this is not a logical system we are dealing with.  I also dislike carrying that much cash, so have some of it in Travelers Checks, which one can purchase at Bangkok Bank.

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

If it were me, I would get the 20K Baht from the ATM (value in local currency), then come in through Pedang Besar tomorrow. 

 

I would be a little wary of doing that, but I admit I have no proof there would be an issue. In favor is the fact that land borders rarely deny entry according to procedure. However, although DMK did not stamp the passport in any way, there may still be a note in the computer. Having escaped a formal denial (probably narrowly) I would not be pressing my luck.

[elviajero]

10 hours ago, thetruth revealer said:

LONGTERM TOURIST ?

If ``they`` dont want people stay in the country without ``proper`` Visa, why do the Consulates and Embassy issued the TR Visa to such person ?

Many Embassies/Consulates in the countries neighboring Thailand have limits so that it deters/stops people living in Thailand as long term tourists. If they had no problem with perpetual tourism these limits wouldn't exist, and they probably wouldn't have done away with double entry visa either.

[elviajero]

10 hours ago, thetruth revealer said:

Whats a ``Correct Visa``? Regarding Thai Policy? What does the Embassy and Consulates issue ?????

Tourist visas are meant for short term tourism. Non-Immigrant visas and non immigrant extensions of stay are meant for people living/staying long term. Someone living in Thailand for years using back to back tourist visas does not have the correct visa.

Edited November 26, 2016 by elviajero

[thetruth revealer]

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Tourist visas are meant for short term tourism. Non-Immigrant visas and non immigrant extensions of stay are meant for people living staying long term. Someone living in Thailand for years using back to back tourist visas does not have the correct visa.

Who says that? How come the Embassy and Consulates issue those visas again and again ?  Even telling people , next time go apply somewehere else, but not formally denied in future ?Its a bit like the snake bite her own tail isnt it.

[JackThompson]

6 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Many Embassies/Consulates in the countries neighboring Thailand have limits so that it deters/stops people living in Thailand as long term tourists. If they had no problem with perpetual tourism these limits wouldn't exist, and they probably wouldn't have done away with double entry visa either.

 

In my view, they simply made it more expensive to live in Thailand this way, to weed out those who cannot spend 25K+ Baht/yr to hop around to multiple foreign countries.  I think we agree they do not want those just barely hanging-on to stick around.

 

If the goal was to stop long-term tourists, they have an easy solution - set a limit with a future effective-date, publish it everywhere, post it at all entry/departure points and consulates, and issue resolved. 

 

I would not bet against this possibility, at some point in the future.  The result would be thousands of foreigners spending their incomes elsewhere, putting down roots, and later retiring in those other locales.  Whoever is making bucks off TE Visas, and likely investing in this outcome, will be happy with the extra few applicants.  The many thousands of Thais whose businesses and families are wrecked as collateral-damage will not be a concern.  I've seen similar behavior in my own country and elsewhere - greed is universal.