12 minutes ago, notmyself said:

 

The post is on the topic of cash and needing to show 20k upon entry. With regard to health I'm insured up to the eyeballs but again, that is not cash.

Different strokes for different folks.

4 hours ago, overherebc said:

Different strokes for different folks.

 Not sure I understand what you are getting at mate. Immigration want me to able to show funds so I do, in cash. Cash that I have withdrawn from a bank in Thailand. The barter system predates the concept of money and is still in use today by everyone though they don't realize it as such. Give us a hand dragging that old tree stump out of the yard and then I'll fire up the BBQ and we can have a nice dinner. What is that if not the barter system?

On 15/03/2017 at 2:34 PM, JackThompson said:

A visitor should need to show 100K, at least

Jack, with respect, I don't think you actually understand tourism in Thailand. Most tourists coming to Thailand do not have 100K. The #1 and #2 arrivals are Chinese and Malaysians, the entire deep south in particular runs on Malysians coming over for the weekend. They don't have 100K coming over for the weekend. Almost no farang down there at all, it's all Malaysians and Singaporeans and Indonesians coming for the weekend.

So many farang on this board have a completely myopic view of tourism in Thailand and seem to equate it with "rich Westerner". That is a tiny, tiny segment of the Thai tourism industry, the vast majority of tourists to Thailand are not rich and, believe it or not, are not even Westerners! Put in a rule like every visitor needs to show 100K and you end up with a tourist industry like Bhutan, lovely country and they aim to keep it "untarnished" and traditional by restricting tourism only to high spenders and by implementing a daily minimum spend (I think of $200) they get only a very small number of tourists.

 

But that isn't Thailand, the vast, vast majority of people, both Western and Asian, come here because the place is cheap. And the vast vast majority of the Thai tourist industry survives on these cheap tourists. You chop off that and start restricting access to "rich" "quality" tourists and you chop off the majority of Thai tourist industry income. Of course promote "quality" tourists who are going to spend money. But realise where the bulk of your money is actually coming from and it's not people bringing 100K for the weekend.

 

On 15/03/2017 at 4:30 PM, JayBird said:

You don't have to tell me its backwards.  I show the Embassy a big bank balance, European visas, spend 1M+ per year (and can prove it through billing if they want)) and they still don't want to give me a visa. 

 

Guess just not quality enough for the little girl in the embassy.  Meanwhile, with backpackers who can scrape up 20k collectively can get in.

The thing is, the backpackers who can scrape up 20k are presumably genuine tourists, yes they may be poorer than you but they do actually sound like "tourists" while you, if you are spending 1M+ per year, sound like you are living here.

 

IF this was a Western country, with a Western immigration policy, it wouldn't matter that you can spend 1M+ here per year, you would NOT get back-to-back tourist visas. While a backpacker coming in for two months on a shoestring would... because one's a tourist and one's something else. Even if they aren't working- you wouldn't be able to just plonk yourself down in the UK or the US or Australia on that basis if you were not a citizen.

The thing is, they don't know what they want. And on the one hand, they are sensitive about people "living here" on tourist visas but on the other hand they realise it is money in the country and almost every time they tighten something up in this regard they start to realise it is causing problems with the tourist numbers and they loosen it back up again or back down on it in some way, or introduce some exception... it's very typically Thai and while people often post here about wishing there were "firm published rules" I suspect it's precisely the lack of firm published rules that let people get away with living here for years on tourist/education/volunteer/whatever visas. The firm published rules might not allow what you want, so be careful what you wish for.

7 hours ago, notmyself said:

 Not sure I understand what you are getting at mate. Immigration want me to able to show funds so I do, in cash. Cash that I have withdrawn from a bank in Thailand. The barter system predates the concept of money and is still in use today by everyone though they don't realize it as such. Give us a hand dragging that old tree stump out of the yard and then I'll fire up the BBQ and we can have a nice dinner. What is that if not the barter system?

It only means that people live their lives in different ways.

Whatever makes you happy makes you happy.

Live and let live is another way to say it.

9 hours ago, blorg said:

The thing is, they don't know what they want

It would appear that different elements of the power-hierarchy want different things, hence the schizophrenic-seeming system in place.

 

On the one-hand, we hear the "quality tourist" talk, and people on international-flights are rejected for "not having enough cash" (who must then purchase return tickets from money they purportedly did not have).  On the other hand, we know that Thailand is actively recruiting relatively-poor tourists from China with free-visas, though we know that those staying long-term on serial Tourist-Visas spend far more into the Thai economy.  I do agree that Thailand would be foolish to go with the Bhutan system.  Comparisons to the "West" are not applicable - I outlined why here: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/971858-rejected-entry-to-thailand-because-too-many-tourist-visa/?page=13#comment-11689870

 

As to the increase in the cash to show, I'm not sure why an occasional short-term visitor would bother getting a "tourist visa" good for 60-days.  Most staying over 30 days would likely need more than 20K Baht (bartering notwithstanding).  Those coming in for the weekend (Malaysians and Singaporeans and Indonesians) come in on Visa-Exempt or bilateral arrangements, and only need to show 10K Baht.  Well, they did, until the various "crackdown" steps on Visa-Exempts, which ignores how long a person has stayed in Thailand cumulatively - a policy which, again, shoots themselves in the foot economically, and makes Thailand seem like an "unfriendly" place for tourists, in general.

 

If the goal is keeping long-term stayers out, then the Retirement system must be scrapped, and those unwanted foreigners sent packing.  If that is not the goal, and more foreign-capital spending is desired, then the 50-year-old-minimum rule for Retirement should be scrapped.  If the goal is stopping illegal workers, then those from nearby countries should be scrutinized (as they are 99.9% of that problem) and the rest left alone - yet the land-border exempt policy is the reverse of this.

 

My point to suggesting an increase in funds to show, is simply this: If money is the issue - let us show more (100K Baht) and they don't have to worry about us "going broke" here or being tempted by low-paying Thai-jobs.  If that is not the issue, what is? 

@sharktooth - that has been gone over already, this new "hard" limit of two visa exempt entries per year only applies to land borders, yes, but immigration apparently have a "soft" limit which is unknown but speculated to be in the region of six over a number of years at which point a warning pops up on their computer to scrutinise you entry more carefully. It's not an outright "must reject" but "scrutinise". There are reports of people having problems and being questioned arriving by air who have "too many" prior visa exempt entries.

Sorry I couldn't be bothered reading the whole 15 pages...

On 17/03/2017 at 8:43 PM, JackThompson said:

I've yet to hear of a case where a person was asked to show money, didn't have it, but was directed to withdraw it from an accessible ATM machine, so they could meet the entry-requirements. Does anyone really believe that is how things would happen?

I agree that this sounds unlikely, but in Thailand I have come to expect the unlikely and, frankly, nothing would surprise me!

On 17/03/2017 at 8:43 PM, JackThompson said:

I've yet to hear of a case where a person was asked to show money, didn't have it, but was directed to withdraw it from an accessible ATM machine, so they could meet the entry-requirements. Does anyone really believe that is how things would happen?

I agree that this sounds unlikely, but in Thailand I have come to expect the unlikely and, frankly, nothing would surprise me!

I really don't think it's a matter of them wanting foreign money... they do, but I think their thinking goes in this order:

 

1) Everyone is a criminal and want come to Thailand for bad reason

2) If they come for more than 30 days a year they must be bad bad bad

3) If they come for less than 30 days a year then they are good

4) Focus on people who come for less than 30 days a year, and get lots of them.

 

So yes, the mass Chinese tourists who come for 2-3 weeks a year are their ideal: Short time, spend money, get out.

 

Anyone who wants to stay more than 30 days they immediately think: Must be bad!  Proove you are not bad bad bad, then maybe we let you in.

 

It's a guilty until proven innocent policy in Thailand (At least, It appears, when it comes to matter of immigration).

 

 

When it comes to Thailand's "welcome", the good 'ole days are definitely over.......

1 hour ago, JayBird said:

I really don't think it's a matter of them wanting foreign money... they do, but I think their thinking goes in this order:

 

1) Everyone is a criminal and want come to Thailand for bad reason

2) If they come for more than 30 days a year they must be bad bad bad

3) If they come for less than 30 days a year then they are good

4) Focus on people who come for less than 30 days a year, and get lots of them.

 

 

 

 

5) People who don't come to Thailand but send only their money are very good foreigners. We love them.

 

(actually many do this :)

1 hour ago, JayBird said:

It's a guilty until proven innocent policy in Thailand (At least, It appears, when it comes to matter of immigration).ss

 

It's the same in most countries and most particular Western countries- you wouldn't be allowed re-enter any Western country repeatedly on tourist visas even if you could prove you weren't working there.

 

Thailand could cut off back-to-back tourist visas entirely, that they don't sort of indicates that they do see a value in some long term tourist visa stayers, but it's understandable that they pay people who are here an extended period a bit more scrutiny.

 

In terms of "guilty until proven innocent" the difference is you have no inherent right to stay in a country other than your own one...

 

 

1 hour ago, blorg said:

 

Thailand could cut off back-to-back tourist visas entirely, that they don't sort of indicates that they do see a value in some long term tourist visa stayers

 

 

Difficult to compare 2 weeks tourists against long term tourist visa stayers. As for me, I don't visit souvenir shops, don't need hotels and so on. On the other hand I rent a condo where I know the landlord is happy for every each tenant. Others buy a house or condo. I pay my monthly internet bill, laundry, bought several vehicles and so on. Sure, I spent much less as an "expat" as i were a few weeks tourist in the past. However, places like Phuket, Chiang Mai, Pattaya.... suffer when less long stay tourist are coming, particularly this kind of long term tourists are quite helpful to the local economy during the low season. Many expats have a GF and they get supported by the foreigner. I guess this expenses are nowhere recorded.

 

Due the many changes in visa rules, its shy away as well common western tourists which actually aren't affected by this. But it spreads uncertainty. Ok, if Thailand go for Chinese mass tourists, good luck with that. There will be an point, when Chinese tourists move further to another destination.

 

May be there will come a time where Thailand regret how they deal it with tourists. But I doubt about that.

On my 5th entry last year i got pulled aside, and told computer had flagged me for to many entrys. They wanted to see proof that i worked in my own country. 

Did a 6th holiday last year, no question asked.

 

Just got home from my first trip this year, he did spend some time looking over my entry stamps. Asked for my purpose for coming, said holiday. No further question asked. 

 

Been seaching internet for solid advise/rule, but always end up with various stories. 

27 minutes ago, Tubbygold said:

On my 5th entry last year i got pulled aside, and told computer had flagged me for to many entrys. They wanted to see proof that i worked in my own country. 

Did a 6th holiday last year, no question asked.

 

Just got home from my first trip this year, he did spend some time looking over my entry stamps. Asked for my purpose for coming, said holiday. No further question asked. 

 

Been seaching internet for solid advise/rule, but always end up with various stories. 

The rules is that there isnt any,as long as you dont just fly out and back in again strait away.No one kan give you any better advice then to get a propper visa to be on the safe side.

I would say do as you are ,as long as you have proof of income from a country outside and proof of residence with you.I am doing just the same with no problems so far.Been pulled aside but nothing else.It is not us they are after but people with worse intentions.I am spending more time outside then inside the country,so maybe that could be guideline.

2 hours ago, alocacoc said:

... May be there will come a time where Thailand regret how they deal it with tourists. But I doubt about that.

Well, those in the "visa for sale" business - the only ones who could possibly gain from what is happening - may be living in Dubai or the Caymans by then, so won't have to live in the human-wreckage they helped cause - as Vietnam flourishes, flush with money from all those who didn't feel welcome in Thailand any more.  Let's hope someone with the power to do something comes to the fore, before it's too late to reverse the damage.  Thailand could be a "Tech Mecca," if they'd just make a reasonable visa-accommodation for low-overhead start-ups and remote-workers.

I presume you can carry any currency (or travellers cheques) so long as it is the equavalent of 20,000 baht, right?

1 minute ago, FruitPudding said:

I presume you can carry any currency (or travellers cheques) so long as it is the equavalent of 20,000 baht, right?

Yes you can but it must be a currency you can exchange here.

3 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Yes you can but it must be a currency you can exchange here.

 

Thanks

Sounds like your living there on a tourist visa, like nearly everyone else but relality is maybe it was always going to happen. But thanks for the advice I will carry a little more cash just in case.

Sent from my MHA-L29 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

8 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Yes you can but it must be a currency you can exchange here.

A Single 1000CHF Note should cover it (32,000 THB or so), and take up very little space.

Difficult to convert (due to size) but the intent is to carry it, not convert it.

 

 

 

46 minutes ago, JayBird said:

A Single 1000CHF Note should cover it (32,000 THB or so), and take up very little space.

Difficult to convert (due to size) but the intent is to carry it, not convert it.

 

The Swiss franc can be exchanged here so not a problem.

The 20k baht requirement is meant to show you have funds to live on here. If it was a currency that could not be exchanged for Baht they would not accept it.

3 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

The Swiss franc can be exchanged here so not a problem.

The 20k baht requirement is meant to show you have funds to live on here. If it was a currency that could not be exchanged for Baht they would not accept it.

 

I've traded CHF notes without problem.  But I'm not sure if they would accept the 1000 CHF note (a single note with denomination of 1000 CHF) without a problem.  Haven't tried yet, might one day

 

I do expect the head branches of banks at their foreign exchange section to handle it fine tho.  Perhaps they would look at it for a while ....

 

But yes, its a thin piece of paper so very easy to keep in a dedicated place purely for presentation to IO (perhaps hide it in your passport wallet).  That way you don't have to worry about carrying around a bundle.  Feel sorry for americans with only 100$ notes. 

13 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Yes you can but it must be a currency you can exchange here.

Ok, no one bring Scottish pounds. Actually I've seen one booth ever offer to exchange Scottish pounds but the exchange rate was worse than the English pounds.

5 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Ok, no one bring Scottish pounds. Actually I've seen one booth ever offer to exchange Scottish pounds but the exchange rate was worse than the English pounds.

Superrich will exchange Scottish notes at very close to the exchange rate for regular UK notes.

23 minutes ago, JayBird said:

 

I've traded CHF notes without problem.  But I'm not sure if they would accept the 1000 CHF note (a single note with denomination of 1000 CHF) without a problem.  Haven't tried yet, might one day

 

I do expect the head branches of banks at their foreign exchange section to handle it fine tho.  Perhaps they would look at it for a while ....

 

But yes, its a thin piece of paper so very easy to keep in a dedicated place purely for presentation to IO (perhaps hide it in your passport wallet).  That way you don't have to worry about carrying around a bundle.  Feel sorry for americans with only 100$ notes. 

6 $100 dollar notes hardly takes much room 

On 3/4/2017 at 2:52 PM, Chivas said:

I'm neither rich or poor but simply would never contemplate travelling 6000 miles without at least £2000 in hard cash every time no exceptions. Who the hell travels that distance and relies solely on cards.

Hell even back home I dont leave house without walking around money of £500 or so

What has the distance got to do with anything? 600 miles or 6,000 miles would be much the same. I've never carried £2,000 in cash when travelling and never would. I think it's plain stupid to carry that amount of money unnecessarily and I have never encountered a problem withdrawing cash that couldn't be solved in around 10 minutes with a call to my bank. Let's assume one has a couple of ATM/Debit cards and at least one credit card - I would say there is 0% possiblity they would all stop working at the same time and certainly not for so long that you would need £2,000 in cash to cover your expenses. 

Removed a troll post.