Visa runs banned after Aug 12

[russ]

My friend went to get a Ed visa to learn thai and was told the army have stoped them cant get them anymore

[Pleng]

Well they went to the wrong place.

They're having a crackdown on illigit schools but the ones who genuinely comply with the requirements are still able to operate.

[heartofmidlothian]

I know a lot of people who use Hua Hin as a home base and travel to work. In between work they come back to Hua Hin to spend their off time. Getting 30 days everytime they arrived was perfect for them because they rarely spend more than that in Hua Hin at a time. Most of them do not have the option of a marriage visa or a retirement visa. The authorities need to bring in a new 1 year visa as long as you can show that you have either a salary or deposit a certain amount of money in a Thai bank. This would prove that you do not need to work while in Thailand. I dont understand those that refuse to deposit money in a Thai bank. They do offer a better rate of interest than UK banks at present. The Thai government should really try hard to encourage foreigners to come and live in Thailand as long as they can show that they have the means to take care of themselves.

[Thriftydrifter]

'No tourist should need to stay for more than 30 days'.
Really? What does that say about a country?


It kinda says that yer average tourist should be on a holiday!!!!!...if you want to stay longer then get the appropriate Visa from your home countries Thai Embassy/Consulate...

Lots of people go on holiday for more than 30 days - one long holiday a year is cheaper than several short ones, so if you are retired, or your work is seasonal, or you are just taking a career break it makes sense. Thailand is a reasonably large, interesting and pleasant country that is worth more than 30 days of someone's time - obviously the current authorities don't think so!

Shame about the education visa - most countries have them. A more reasonable step would be to increase the amount of time that must be spent in class to, say, 20 hours per week with an 85% attendance record, as it is in the UK.

[Korkenzieher]

I'm with Margaret on this one - it has all the hallmarks of a 'point at foot; pull trigger' moment. Policy is ignorant of real-politik and the facts on the ground. Broad-brush approaches never work - the world is too fine grained for that. Targeting Russians, the Vietnamese, ESL teachers and the like with simple-minded, one shot regulations is at the very best utterly naiive. By the time the dust has settled, Thailand will have already lost a lot of its long-termers. Maybe that is what they want but I am pretty sure that they don't factor in the loss of hard-currency that will happen as a consequence. By the time they have, many will have voted with their feet - Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines - wherever - and won't be in a hurry to come back and take another beating from Somchai. I act within the rules - I am sure the vast majority do - but I am dependent on the rules being both clear and stable. In fact, I kind of demand that! It is, effectively, what I pay for when I shell out for the visa, and rent, and the airfare. If they don't want it here - I can take it elsewhere. Again - I have that luxury. Not all do.

[STEVE G]

Is it not possible to extend a tourist visa without doing a visa run? I thought it was possible to extend to up to 90 days at the immigration office without leaving the country.
I'm still not sure that this is going to have any effect on genuine tourists as it does seem aimed at stopping people working without work permits, which does happen a lot.

[Korkenzieher]

SteveG - read the article on the 'site that must not be mentioned' about a German family caught in the middle of this. It may give some perspective about how this *is* being policed, as opposed to what perhaps ought to be happening. The simple fact is, the rules are in chaos.

[sateeb]

'No tourist should need to stay for more than 30 days'.
Really? What does that say about a country?


It kinda says that yer average tourist should be on a holiday!!!!!...if you want to stay longer then get the appropriate Visa from your home countries Thai Embassy/Consulate...

Lots of people go on holiday for more than 30 days - one long holiday a year is cheaper than several short ones, so if you are retired, or your work is seasonal, or you are just taking a career break it makes sense. Thailand is a reasonably large, interesting and pleasant country that is worth more than 30 days of someone's time - obviously the current authorities don't think so!

Shame about the education visa - most countries have them. A more reasonable step would be to increase the amount of time that must be spent in class to, say, 20 hours per week with an 85% attendance record, as it is in the UK.

Yes I understand that!!!!!...That's why I said get the appropriate visa prior to travelling. it's relatively simple and depending where you are from you could end up staying as long as 120 days or even more.

[Korkenzieher]

Better still. Take your money elsewhere until common-sense is restored.

[STEVE G]

SteveG - read the article on the 'site that must not be mentioned' about a German family caught in the middle of this. It may give some perspective about how this *is* being policed, as opposed to what perhaps ought to be happening. The simple fact is, the rules are in chaos.

Yes, my comment was aimed at people who were saying 30 days wasn't long enough for a holiday in Thailand and as for the rest of it, I agree, they need to clarify exactly what the rules are. If a visa exemption exists, then we need clear information exactly on when and how often you can use them. Incidentally, this will cause problems in the airline industry as they have to fly you back if you're refused entry and how can they know if a passenger is eligible for entry if the rules aren't defined?

[margaretcarnes]

Sateeb - yes I agree that tourists who plan to stay for more than 30 days should get the correct visa. That is not in dispute. And as Steve quite rightly points out many people do want to stay for longer. Those folk usually do it properly.
But the situation at the moment is far from clear - especially when, according to recent news, Thai embassies and consuls are themselves in the dark.

My real concern is for a regime which can make a blanket statement that tourists shouldn't need to stay for more than 30 days, as if saying that their country isn't worth a longer visit.

Of course we all know the real reason. Easier to impose a blanket ban than to tackle the problem of illegal workers. It's nothing new and we have discussed it ages ago. But I do remember saying way back whenever that Thailand doesn't really believe that it needs tourism at all. It can of course survive on it's huge income from other business, such as rice....
And I still stand by that belief for 2 main reasons. First that we have seen years of ill conceived and confusing changes to visa rules. Second that we have seen a simultaneous move towards catering much more for the 2 week package tourists who will spend a years worth of holiday cash in 2 weeks, and this is particularly true of HuaHin.

[Thriftydrifter]

But I do remember saying way back whenever that Thailand doesn't really believe that it needs tourism at all. It can of course survive on it's huge income from other business, such as rice....

An interesting point. On various TV channels in various countries I've seen an array of adverts enouraging tourism, from Scotland to India to Australia, even Azerbaijan. Malaysia currently has a campaign that sometimes seems to be bordering on the obsessive. But I don't recall seeing anything from Thailand. Is it just a pride thing do you think? (ie a simple 'we don't need foreigners'), or do they perhaps hope that strangling the tourist industry will diminish the sex trade/Thailand's reputation as a sex tourism destination?

[dozer]

An option for a legal long term stay when under 50 and not married to a Thai is the Easy Access Thai Elite card which costs THB 500k for 5 years, which means that you pay THB 100k per year, or THB 8333 per month for it.

http://www.thailandelite.com/glimpse.php

[STEVE G]

I came in to the country on a visa exemption yesterday without any problem and I tried to find someone to ask about future changes without any success. Apart from the immigration staff on the desks who were obviously busy, I couldn't find anyone to talk to about the issue, I'll try again when I go out in a couple of weeks.

[margaretcarnes]

But I do remember saying way back whenever that Thailand doesn't really believe that it needs tourism at all. It can of course survive on it's huge income from other business, such as rice....

An interesting point. On various TV channels in various countries I've seen an array of adverts enouraging tourism, from Scotland to India to Australia, even Azerbaijan. Malaysia currently has a campaign that sometimes seems to be bordering on the obsessive. But I don't recall seeing anything from Thailand. Is it just a pride thing do you think? (ie a simple 'we don't need foreigners'), or do they perhaps hope that strangling the tourist industry will diminish the sex trade/Thailand's reputation as a sex tourism destination?

I think it's maybe a bit deeper than just pride, but yes - along those lines. A country which prides itself on never having been colonised (which of course is debatable!) and doesn't really see why - IMO - it needs foreigners at all. That does sound harsh because Thai people are of course very welcoming, but there is always the 'mai pen rai'.