What do we all think about the new rules for Retirment visas!
No dependent wives - now we all need 65K monthly income or 800K in the bank. Husband AND wife!
This will effect many couple sin Hua Hin - what about all the new buildings awating the retirees
What will you be doing about your visa and retirements now
If this is going to be implemented as a change or add on to the existing law, the Thai authorities is sending a very negative signal to the farang-world.
The law today says: -
"In the case where the accompanying spouse is not eligible to apply for the Category ‘O-A’ (Long Stay) visa,
he or she will be considered for temporary stay under Category ‘O’ visa.
A marriage certificate must be provided as evidence and should be notarised by notary organs
or by the applicant’s diplomatic or consular mission".
Norseman wrote:If this is going to be implemented as a change or add on to the existing law, the Thai authorities is sending a very negative signal to the farang-world.
Yeah, and the signal is clear in my eyes:
"Farangs, piss off! ... But would be nice to let all your money in our wonderful country, so that we can afford your nice holiday-life here by ourselves for free!"
Nothing is coming up for private foreigners or foreign investors as I could observe in all the years.
...and the harder conditions, rules, laws etc. underline their real intention as written above more and more!
Two threads on this already - maybe the mods could merge them? I'm sure that there will be a lot more!
Unless farang has sufficient accessible funds to place into his wifes/partners name, it seems that this could have a major effect on "non-Thai relationship" farangs.
It goes without saying that if this sticks, it will have short, medium and long-term effects on every area where retirees are settled who only have sufficient, not mega bucks. And of course, a knock-on effect on the wider Thai community.
The logic being...?
I feel for a lot of people that are there already or preparing for the move that will be affected by this. On a personal level, it makes me wonder what's next and when they will draw the line, saying, "no more".
What do you think the chance is of any incoming Govt. overturning this, or being allowed to overturn this, in the future?
I guess it will all come down to economics and any visible impact it is seen to have, or maybe the effect on Thai's will be minimal?
Or have I misunderstood anything and in particular what other visa entitlement, and what that entails, that a wife/partner may have?
Norseman wrote:
A marriage certificate must be provided as evidence and should be notarised by notary organs
or by the applicant’s diplomatic or consular mission".
So you have to prove your married? Isn't that required anyway?
Yep, it is required that you can give proof of marriage to Thai imm. authorities.
You have to have a copy of your marriage certificate stamped by your embassy as proof of marriage.
Five years ago they even required my marriage certificate translated to Thai language.
Don't know if this is required now, but you have to check it.
...and, if you have bad luck about the stamp from your Embassy, you'll have to legalize this stamp from the Thai-foreign-ministry....takes about 1-2 weeks time!
If they are in a bad mood, of course, longer more!
This is probably going to make me extremely unpopular .. but I've heard lots of whining about the new/proposed visa regs for marriage. Why should expats married to Thais have lesser financial requirements than us single folks?
All things being equal, you are going to have more expenses, so shouldn't your financial requirements be at least as much as mine.
What if you have a child or two? What does that do to your financial requirements.
Why should your requirements be half or one-quarter of that for a farang-farang couple?
I wonder how many people under retirement age actually got married only because they wanted to stay in Thailand .. or ditto, guys over 55 (now 50?) who couldn't make the financial requirements for retirement visas?
IMHO, the new laws take the correct approach, parity rather than subsidy.
I asked imm about this a montha go and they said not required for both to have money in bank.
SO 2 questions:
1. Has it definately been implemented
2. Has any couple been asked for 2 bank account proof yet?
I see where you're coming from, klikster and have wondered the same myself in the past.
Although I don't believe that the authorities have ever gone on record as such, the reason for the lower financial requirements for a western/Thai couple is simply that the westerner is seen as taking care of a Thai national, so the requirements are reduced.
It dosn't seem to make much sense as the law changed last year from "supporting Thai wife" to "family income". Strictly speaking, your Thai wife could earn 40k per month and support you. As long as she produces tax certificates to demonstrate tax on at least 40k, you get the year's extension.
As for the doubling of financial requirements for a married western couple, the government did a U-turn on that and it was never implemented.
Rider wrote:They actually U-Turned on that ruling?
I tell you they must a kept that one quiet cause I saw little in the way of an official announcement. Did you?
There wasn't any need for an official announcement as the ruling was never implemented. It's probably still there in draft form somewhere, but no-ones getting hit twice - for now.
lomuamart wrote:
It dosn't seem to make much sense as the law changed last year from "supporting Thai wife" to "family income". Strictly speaking, your Thai wife could earn 40k per month and support you. As long as she produces tax certificates to demonstrate tax on at least 40k, you get the year's extension.
But for single retirees with no bank balance, the monthly income requirement is 65k.
Actually, the concept is nothing new. I experienced the same "shortchange" in the US Army, and again on the US tax rolls.
