Flashermac Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 << A tourist visa means a TOURIST Visa and don't mean that someone can stay in Thailand for years and years. >> Compare that to Malaysian thinking. Tourists on arrival in Malaysia get a THREE MONTH VISA. Want to stay longer? No sa-weat, go to Immigration and get it extended ANOTHER three months. No need to leave the country either. If I remember right, there is no limt to the number of tourist visas you can get either. A Malaysian explained the logic to me, "You stay in our country, pay rent on an apartment or hotel room, buy your food here, buy your clothes here ... spend YOUR MONEY in our country. We want you to stay." LOS, on the other hand, seems to act as if foreigners are all less than desirable. Let them come a few weeks, spend their money and then shove off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardy641 Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 This is a tough one. While I often condemn Thailand for is discriminating and racist laws, I can somehow understand the governmentâ??s position and action they took on the tourist VISAs. The situation in Malaysia is very different than in Thailand. Malaysia does not have P4P centers like Bangkok, Pattaya, Phuket which attract thousands of foreigners. Many become addicted and canâ??t leave even they donâ??t have as secured income or enough savings. I am sure employee of every western embassy can tell you dozens of stories of foreigners who died or had to be deported after running completely dry â?? often after several years on monthly VISA runs. A side that these poor creature arenâ??t doing themselves any favor to hang on in Thailand, they seriously damaged Thailandâ??s reputation as a 1st class tourist destination in the world. Therefore I actually supported the revision of the VISA regulations. However they stopped the half way. They curbed on VISA runs only. A revamp of the often discriminating and idiotic regulations for non Immigrant Visa (B, O, E type) never took place. By revising these and ensuring foreigners who are determined to choose Thailand as their new home and also significantly contribute to the society, a more secure legal existence and basis, Thailand could improve its damaged reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 From a $$$ point of view, having a tourist come into the country for a two week visit, most likely the tourist will spend 5 times (?) more $$$ then a long term "tourist". A two week visit, you are in a hotel, paying whatever the cost might be, going out to eat, riding in a taxi, etc. The long term "tourist" may have an apartment, much cheaper, maybe cooking his own meals, taking the bus, etc. IMO, I can see why they do now want the long term "tourist". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 I don't think the visa changes had all that much to do with "improving" the type of foreigners they get here. It was essentially another case of xenophobia. Look at the restrictions on land ownership, plus the hoops one has to jump through to run a business here. I remember the shock my Mrs encountered when she wanted to buy a house here years ago and told she couldn't because she was married to me. She said, "You mean I'm not a Thai citizen anymore?" p.s. Every time you go to immigration, there is a new change in the rules. They must have people who sit around and do nothing but think them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 Another thought ... the Thai ministries never work together! I remember when the retirement visa first came out. One had to have 400,000 in the bank or property worth at least that much (e.g. a condo). Then the Ministry of Finance decided no one could open a bank account without a work permit! So how were retired people supposed to open a bank account to put their money into, since they couldn't get a work permit because they were retired??? The MoF gave in, but the idiot banks still usually enforce the WP requirement anyway. Then Mr T decided he didn't like poor people and doubled the amounts for a marriage visa 200,000 -> 400,000 and a retirement visa 400,000 -> 800,000. Now somebody comes along and decides you have to leave your money sitting in your account and cannot use it. Let's say 800,000 at 1% interest in an ordinary account = 8,000. 800,000 in a promisary note at 3% pays 24,000! Thus a retirement visa costs 1,900 application fee PLUS and additional 16,000 baht in lost interest. Nearly 18,000 baht a year for your retirement visa? And nearly 9,000 a year for a marriage visa??? WTF! (As far as I know, retired folks can no longer use property for their visa. Has to be cash in the bank.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardy641 Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 Flashermac, I am actually fully on your side. While I am personally happy and can understand that Thailand has put a hold on the misuse of tourist VISAs, the implementation is a disaster because they havenâ??t come up with alternative VISA types that allow foreigners to legally live in Thailand as long they obeying to the laws. I am also aware that since Thaksinâ??s rise to power, immigration laws have been continuously tightened. Today it is not only way more expensive to get a VISA (e.g. increase of PR from 50 K to 191K!!) or several VISA types arenâ??t available anymore (e.g. investor VISA if buying real estate) but the application process has become more and more cumbersome - except you have the privilege to go to one way stop VISA. The 90 days reporting rule â??despite being in place for long time - has never been enforced until Thaksin discovered it and reinforced the law to hound foreigners. Absolutely worthless but a nuisance for every foreigner. Te clear messge here is give us you money but don't stay here. Aside of the immigration nightmare the long overdue land- and company ownership regulations reform never took place. Instead last yearâ??s discussion of the nominee structure and control of companies worsened the situation dramatically. Investor confidence hit a new low. In a nutshell Thailand became more and more xenophobic over the last 10 years and is today far less attractive for FDI than most other ASEAN countries. If Thailand wants to regain investor confidence it has first of all to scrap all the discriminating laws and regulations and establish secure legal platform for investors. Last but not least the frequent changes to the laws have to stop. Otherwise it will just follow the ay of the Philippines into meaninglessness and primary attract just low life guys as the porn producer arrested in Pattaya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 The 90 day rule is assinine. It only takes you about 15 or 20 minutes to do so, but ends up wasting most of a day. It actually started before Mr T came to power, but he made it tougher. i.e. I used to be able to delegate authority to someone to go and do it for me. Mr T said no, everyone has to go in person. When I came here in the 1970s, it was a much friendlier place in every way, bureaucracy included. A permanent resident's visa used to cost 20,000 baht. Mr T raised it to 200,000 (I think). Plus that is only to apply. There is no guarantee you'll get it. Also, you still need a re-entry permit with it. Leave without one and your permanent visa is cancelled! How permanent is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwood13 Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Recently when I renewed my retirement visa, they made me sign a paper at immigration that made me promise to have the 800K amount required in an account a full three months before I renew my visa. WTF is that? My question is this. Are there any viable interest bearing solutions here in Thailand? As of next year I can't just transfer the money over a week or two before renewing my visa. In the past a friend has used CDs issued by Bangkok Bank to meet the 800K baht financial requirements for visa extension for retirement at Pattaya Immigration. Paid around 5% for a less than one year period. The money was accessible, i.e. not â??locked inâ?Â, at any time by paying a penalty. Another friend was told last Monday by Pattaya Immigration that the 800K baht was no longer required to be in his Thai bank account for 3 months prior to application for extension of stay. Additionally from the Pattaya City Expats Club newsletter of 08 June 2008: â??Barry Kenyon, Honorary British Consul, at the May 25th meeting said that Pattaya Immigration is no longer requiring copies of bank ATM or debit cards as part of the retirement visa renewal process. He also said that you can renew a retirement visa up to 3 months before its expiration date, and that for renewing a retirement visa if using 800,000 Baht in a Thai bank, Pattaya Immigration does not require that it be on deposit 3 months beforehand â?? but, he cautioned that they might question a deposit made within a few days of the renewal.â? These rules vary from office to office. Today I saw a post on thaivisa from a guy whoâ??s been told by Nong Khai Immigration that next year heâ??ll have to show 60,000 baht being transferred on a monthly basis into his Thai bank account! Given that Nong Khai does have a reputation for its bizarre interpretation of the rules. -redwood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 5%? Sounds good. I will check if it is still available as I have some CDs in the USA and they are only paying 3.xx%. Even if I can get 3.xx% with Bangkok Bank, that will be OK for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khun_khon_neua Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 The 90 day rule is assinine. It only takes you about 15 or 20 minutes to do so, but ends up wasting most of a day. It actually started before Mr T came to power, but he made it tougher. i.e. I used to be able to delegate authority to someone to go and do it for me. Mr T said no, everyone has to go in person. ... You do not hsve to go yourself, it still can be delegated (you must sign a power of attorney) or you can do by post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.