Fat Prophet
-
Posts
233 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Fat Prophet
-
-
On 6/6/2018 at 9:50 AM, spidermike007 said:
When it comes to treaty agreements, trade agreements, and other policies agrees upon with other nations, Thailand is more or less a lawless nation, and an entity unto itself. The presumption must be that nobody will ever do anything about it, so let us try to get away with it, as long as possible. If they are called out enough, maybe they will change? It seems the only thing the government responds to is being shamed alot, on the world stage. A stooge is a stooge. A crime lord is a crime lord. A leader without morals, scruples, or ethics is a deadbeat, right? A renegade nation is just that. Law and order? Respect for other nations? What is that? Why even bother?
What complete nonsense! Other countries allow Thailand to impose punitive taxes/tariffs on their good because Thailand is too small to have any effect on the overall quantity of goods produced/exported of all western countries -- the "benefit of being small" is that you get overlooked/ignored. And every country tries to keep the price of their exports low and the price (including taxes and tariffs) of imported products high -- this is not a uniquely Thai trait. You really are looking through the wrong end of the binoculars.
There has been some threats recently by both the US and Thailand regarding steel imports, but consumer products, like wine, remain below the radar. And consumers in the western countries importing Thai made products get cheaper and relatively well made products, so who is complaining -- a Nikon camera make in Thailand actually sells for less in the US than it sells for in Thailand (go figure!). Australia has been pressing, on the surface successfully, for lower Thai taxes/tariffs on Australian wine, but there is fear that the tax/tariff reductions will be rescinded (which may have already been done, not sure) before they take effect or will be replaced with other new or increased taxes to offset the reduced import taxes -- protectionism is alive and well in Thailand. And the beer and whiskey makers are one of the most effective lobby/pressure groups in Thailand -- they have huge profits, and lots of money to throw around to have the necessary people "see the critical need for protection of a vital Thai industry (and the continued availability of expensive 'loaner' watches)". TIT......
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, puchooay said:
So there is not a "used" stamp on your original "o" visa? Yes, your visa status is non "O" but your visa had expired.
The following is from an official mfa website (http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4908/15380-Questions-&-Answers-on-Thai-Visa.html):
o I heard that Thailand is a nice place to stay after retirement. Is there any
special kind of visa for retirees?
A: Yes, there is special visa called Non-immigrant “O-A” (Long Stay). Foreigners who are
50 years of age or older who wish to stay in Thailand for a long period and do not
have any intention to work in the Kingdom may apply for such visa at the Royal Thai Embassy or Royal Thai Consulate-General in their respective country. The holder of
“O-A” visa is allowed to stay in Thailand for 1 year from the date of first entry,
and is also able to apply for an extension of stay afterwards. Please see the qualifications and requirements for application and relevant information in
the website (www.mfa.go.th). (emphasis added)
It is not entirely clear, but I think that it favours my interpretation of the Extension of Stay over the other views/opinions stated in this thread above. Others will no doubt disagree.
-
33 minutes ago, puchooay said:
So there is not a "used" stamp on your original "o" visa? Yes, your visa status is non "O" but your visa had expired.
If my visa has expired, I have no visa -- how can I have a "Visa status?
Note (one last time) -- the Non 0 Visa allows me to stay in Thailand for 90 days, and remains valid as a permission to remain in Thailand during that time period. This period is being EXTENDED! This is not a "Permission to Stay" for 12 months; it is an extension of the 90 day period in the Non O Visa by an additional period of 12 months.
-
Yes, it says "USED". It DOES NOT say "expired". When I enter a country, a single entry visa is "used" and it cannot be used to enter that country again. But the visa remains valid as permission to remain in that country for the time period stated in the visa. One visa that I have in my passport (not Thailand) states: "Good for journey up to _______; Duration of each stay ________." This is the correct statement of the "terms" of the visa -- it may not be used to enter a country beyond the specified date, but once having entered the country the holder may remain in the country for the allowed duration stated in the visa, even if the date by which the holder must have entered the country has passed. BOTH are parts of the visa and, having entered the country by the allowed entry date, the visa remains valid until the date allowed for each visit/stay has passed. And, in Thailand, that period of allowed stay (90 days) in the Non-O visa is extended by the issuance of an Extension of Stay.
-
1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:
That is not a official immigration website it is one created by a law firm.
Look at the bottom of the page and you will see this "THIS IS NOT THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE THAI IMMIGRATION NOR CONNECTED TO ANY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES".
This is the real immigration website. https://www.immigration.go.th/index
You are correct; my error. It is, however, informative on how the legal professionals dealing in the area of Thai immigration law view the "extension of stay" of a Non-Immigration "O" Visa. From a practical point, I don't think that it makes much/any difference, but when I receive my Extension of Stay and Re-Entry Permit each year, I think I have (or have the equivalent of) a multiple entry Non-O Visa allowing me to remain in Thailand (with multiple exits and re-entries) for 12 months from the date of issue of the Extension of Stay (or the expiration of the previous Extension of Stay, which ever is later).
-
53 minutes ago, puchooay said:
Read your passport. Does it say "non o visa extended to.... (date)" or does it say" permission to stay extented to... (date)"?
At the top of the stamp for the Extension of Stay is written in hand "Non 'O'" and on the very top of the "IMMIGRATION THAILAND RE-ENTRY PERMIT" is printed "NON-IMM", and in the bottom left hand corner of the Re-Entry Permit itself is printed "Category NON-IMM", both clearly indicating that they are tied to (and, I think, extend for the purpose of being allowed to remain in Thailand) the related Non-O Visa.
You are playing with semantics -- the reason that it states that "permission to stay is extended to ____" is because the fact is that the passport holder is already in Thailand and, based on his presence in Thailand, is now allowed to stay for an additional 12 months, rather that coming into Thailand within the visa validity period and being allowed to stay for 90 days, which period depends on the date when the passport holder enters Thailand. Note that when you first enter Thailand (or first get the Non-O Visa) the period that you are allowed to remain in Thailand is 90 days. That period is extended by 12 months by the issuance of the Extension of Stay. For the purpose of entering Thailand the Non-O Visa is no longer valid; but for the purpose of remaining in Thailand the Non-O Visa remains valid (the visa has not expired until the 90 day period has lapsed or you leave Thailand, which ever occurs first), which is why, if you want to leave and re-enter Thailand during the Extension of Stay period, you need a Re-entry Permit.
-
11 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:
Your non-o visa expired long ago. You have been extending the 90 day permit to stay it allowed not the visa itself.
The only reason you show copies of the visa is to prove you originally entered the country using a non immigrant visa which is a required to apply for the extension.
From the Thai Immigration website (https://www.thaiimmigration.net/thai-retirement-visa.html):
Processing of Visa Application
There are at least two ways on how to get a visa to retire in Thailand:
-
Application outside Thailand.
[Deleted]
-
Application inside Thailand
Getting a 1 year visa extension inside Thailand based on retirement requires an initial application for a Non-Immigrant O visa. The Non-Immigrant O visa is usually applied at the Thai Embassy in the applicant’s home country, but it can also be obtained inside Thailand. However, the applicant must already meet the financial requirement if they wish to go with the latter.
In addition, applicants of Non-immigrant O visa extension in Thailand must provide evidence of their address in Thailand. Processing of visa extension is done at the immigration office in the same area, or usually the one nearest to their location in case there is none in their city or province.
Renewal of Extension
Once the applicant has obtained a one year extension of stay based on retirement, the extension can be renewed every year within Thailand. The renewal application must be done prior to the expiration of the current visa. The procedure for renewal is the same as for the initial application, and therefore this should be an easier task for retirees who are able to obtain an extension before. (emphasis added.)
As I said, I think (at least according to the Thai Immigration website) I hold a valid (albeit extended) Non-O Visa.
-
Application outside Thailand.
-
1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:
To avoid confusion you did not have a valid non-o visa. You had a extension of stay issued by immigration and a multiple re-entry permit.
The OP is asking about using a multiple entry non-o visa issued by a embassy or consulate.
OK. I see the distinction. I think my case is analogous as to the conclusion.
I think that I do hold a valid Non-Immigrant "O" Visa ("Non-O Visa"), whose period of validity has been extended by the extension of stay (actually, now several), which is not a visa or separate "permission". My permission to enter and remain in Thailand is still based on my holding a valid (albeit extended) Non-0 Visa "issued by a (sic) embassy or consulate". Indeed, with the issuance of every new extension of stay, I am required to provide photocopies of my original Non-O Visa and all extensions of stay to "trace" the new extension of stay back to the Non-O Visa on a continuous uninterrupted basis. And, in my case, there was at least a logical reason to try to get a visa exempt entry rather than use my valid entry visa, as the visa (as extended) was about to expire.
-
I tried to enter Thailand at the Bangkok airport requesting a 30 day "Visa exempt entry" while also holding a valid Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit. My problem was that my Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit both expired on the day immediately following my entry into Thailand, so if I entered Thailand on the Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit, my allowed stay would have only been 1 day. I was hoping that Immigration would give me a 30 day Visa exempt entry to give me more time to renew my Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit, as the following day was a Saturday (and Sunday was Christmas). Three or 4 Immigration officers at the airport looked at my passport (together, not in series) and all flatly refused to give me a Visa exempt entry, saying that I could only enter Thailand on the Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit. The response was "You should have planned ahead and renewed your Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit before you left Thailand (scolding me). You can renew your Non-O Visa and Multiple Re-entry Permit anytime you want, but after tomorrow you will start paying overstay fees for each day you are in Thailand until you renew your Non-O Visa or leave." With no choice I did what they insisted that I do.
As it turned out, my plane arrived at 5:40 am, and I was able to get home, fill out the forms, go to the bank and get the required bank account deposit letter and get to immigration at Jomtien Soi 5 before 1:00 pm (getting the necessary photocopies at the shop next to the immigration office as my printer was having problems), and had my new Non-O visa the same day that I arrived back in Thailand. I got the Multiple Re-entry Permit the following week. Not the way I had planned or wanted to spend my first morning back in Thailand, especially having been on a plane for more than 17 hours, but it was not the "end of the world" either. It seems that immigration could be a bit more understanding/cooperative in unusual situations like this, but TIT..... So, getting a 30 day Visa exempt entry when you are holding a valid Non-O visa, even one that it about to expire imminently, is not an option.
-
1 hour ago, sometimewoodworker said:
You really need to get all the facts correct.
It is only if you receive pension payments made in the current year that you are liable to pay tax on them.
If you wait a year then get the cash there is no tax liability.
I did not mention anything about the year earned vs. the year brought into Thailand in my post. The relevant wording in my post comes directly (translated) from the Tax Code. And if you are using your pension as the basis for income to be used in Thailand, how could it not be brought into Thailand in the year received? I think it may be you that needs to get your "facts" correct.
-
47 minutes ago, giddyup said:
The OP never answered the question, why did you need a letter from the embassy if you had 900,000 baht in your account?
Perhaps the better question is " why did you provide a letter from the embassy if you had B900,000 baht in your account?" Unless B800,000 had not been in the account for at least 3 months prior to the date of application for the visa extension (in such case you would not provide the evidence of the required B800,000 in a Thai bank; you don't need both), I am aware of no requirement for a letter of income from an embassy if proper evidence of B800,000 in a Thai bank is used as the basis for the extension of stay in Thailand.
-
1
-
-
This may be an effort to assess tax in Thailand on pension payments sent into Thailand from overseas. The Thai Revenue Code stipulates that pensions are treated as income, as far as tax is concerned. A resident in Thailand receiving a foreign pension brought into Thailand would be liable to pay income tax in Thailand, but no other Thai taxation applies to such amounts. You may (probably do) get an offset against any tax liability here on pension income brought into Thailand for tax paid on such pension payments in the home country. This information may be shared with the Thailand revenue authorities. I would never disclose the source or amount of my income to Thai Immigration if I was using a deposit in a Thai bank as the basis for my extension of stay. I was asked to fill out a form asking similar questions regarding pension income and a certificate of tax paid in my home country by the Thailand revenue authority when I recently filed for a refund of withholding tax on interest income from a Thai bank. Clearly, assessing tax in Thailand on pension income brought into Thailand was the purpose of that form. I am not sure if this is a new requirement as this is the first time that I have filed for a refund of withholding tax. But, one should be very careful what you disclose and to who.
-
1 hour ago, HeyNow said:
Actually, those are the specs of the new Forza, pulled directly from the AP Honda website and other sources.
You're right that it's all on paper for the moment, and I said as much in my post. Comparing numbers is a part of learning about the bikes, not the whole. I'm eagerly awaiting the opportunity to test ride both bikes before deciding.
I was not talking about the specs in your post or about your post more generally, which I liked and found informative/useful. Indeed, I used your spec quotes to make the spec comparison between the new Forza and the XMax in my last post. I was referring to the specs given by idman in an earlier post (#31) of his, where he compares the specs of the XMax with the specs of the OLD Forza, and further comparisons of the XMax and the Forza based on specs and/or riding of the old Forza (see posts #177 and #215). And, based on earlier posts, he had bought the XMax by 10 January '18, before specs of the new Forza were even available. So, his statement that "I did the side by side specs comparsion (sic) and in each and every one the Xmax was superior to the Forza", at least in terms of his decision to buy the XMax, was based on specs of the OLD Forza -- kind of a worthless/meaningless/misguided effort in terms of a decision to buy, especially knowing that a new model is coming very soon.
But, more basically, basing a decision on which bike to buy on "specs" alone is foolish, and may have little relationship to performance or enjoyment of the bike. And, it is great that a current XMax owner still likes his bike and enjoys riding it. I still enjoy riding my old Forza and I enjoyed riding my PCX 125 after the new PCX 150 came out. But, in terms of the decision to buy a new bike today, few people will see anything about a XMax that would justify buying it instead of a new Forza, especially if they ride both first. The NMax and the new PCX are very comparable, and there are a lot of good things about each bike that could encourage a particular rider to choose one or the other -- horses for courses. That is not the case with the XMax and the new Forza. The XMax is toast (frankly, I expect that this fact will not go unnoticed by Yamaha, and I expect that it will come out with an "updated" XMax in the next 6/12 months to put it on a more even keel with the new Forza. Both are very good at copying (and in some cases exceeding/advancing) the other's successes). Thanks.
-
12 hours ago, idman said:
Opinions are like ass...holes, everybody has one as the above poster is proof positive. I am the proud owner of an Xmax, I did the side by side specs comparsion and in each and every one the Xmax was superior to the Forza. But, to each his own.
As I said in my earlier post "I expect that there will be all kinds of responses (excuses) from 'proud' Xmax owners trying to justify their huge mistake, but we should pity them rather than blame them, as such justification is normal in the face of such an irreversible (and obvious) blunder. Oh well, better luck (and foresight) next time." They have started..... It would be far better to stick to the merits/demerits of the XMax and the Forza (as other helpful posters have done in response to my earlier post) rather than name calling (which really doesn't make your claim any more convincing/correct; rather the contrary), but, "to each his own...." You stand "pitied", and not "blamed" (at least not too much).
You did a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the XMax with the specs of the OLD Forza. The specs of the new Forza are very different, which is part (but a small part) of my point -- you did a comparison (as shown in your earlier posts) with something yet unknown -- congratulations on your illusory paper chase, nice job! But my real point is that comparing specs on paper is a great exercise if all you want to do is sit at your desk and know that your motorbike is 4 kgs lighter or has brakes that are 12 mm larger or holds 1.6L more fuel (comparison of the XMax with the new Forza), but for most thoughtful/intelligent people (put me (and my @ss...hole) in that category), the real issues in making a motorbike a "better choice" are actual performance, reliability, service/after sale support, appearance and, perhaps, resale value (in that order)(I personally don't care about resale value as I seldom sell anything).
The actual performance of the old Forza IMO was/is very good (I own one and a CTX, among others); the new Forza is a tremendous improvement -- spectacular; the performance of the XMax is good (maybe very good, but not as good as the new Forza, but certainly better than the old Forza. Before you talk more about "specs"
, rent a Forza and actually ride it (wow, there's a thought!) -- you will convince yourself.
On reliability, they are probably very close, with some concern about each being a new model, which comes with issues. But in the past, with the old Forza, Honda took every possible step to correct design issues, even replacing the entire rear wheel assembly when problems arose. I do not think that Yamaha backs up its products to the same degree, case in point, the Tri-city.
There is absolutely no comparison between the service, service network and after sale support of Honda in relation to Yamaha in Thailand -- this is patently obvious and without dispute.
And, except for the color choices of both bikes, which are poor, the appearance (including the bells and whistles, which on a new bike make it a lot more "fun" (isn't that what riding is all about anyway?)) is in a totally difference class than the XMax -- it (meaning the new Forza, lest you try to misread my statement) is stunning -- I love the mirrors, they add a real touch of class (and if they also add a few thousand Baht to the price, no problem; well worth it)! The Xmax is too upright and erect (you might like that (if you need an explanation, PM me)) and lacks any "flare" whatsoever, and the "flaps" on the front forks look about as stupid as anything I have seen on a motorbike. Who designs these things (and who is the intended audience) -- kids in primary school?? So, as I said in my first post, with the new Forza now available, the XMax is toast. Sorry if you don't like or cannot handle the obvious truth. Your post is predictable, unnecessary insults and all. Sorry to pour salt on your wounds. Next.....
-
11 hours ago, idman said:
My Xmax zips through traffic here in Chiang Mai as easily as my previous PCX 150. Of course my years of experience riding a scooter and maxi scooter are a big help. If you watch out you wil not have any problems, IMO.
The Xmax has fallen into the toilet now that the new Forza is out -- absolutely no comparison between the two; how another Yamaha can become totally outdated in such a short time. I expect that there is or soon will be horrendous regret from those people with "years of experience" who were so foolish to buy an Xmax before waiting for the new Forza -- the tears are falling like rain. I expect that there will be all kinds of responses (excuses) from "proud" Xmax owners trying to justify their huge mistake, but we should pity them rather than blame them, as such justification is normal in the face of such an irreversible (and obvious) blunder. Oh well, better luck (and foresight) next time. My new Forza is on order and will be delivered in a few weeks -- "thank God!" I didn't succumb to the temptation to buy a Xmax, just because it was available.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, ttrd said:
RE - "beauty is in the eye of the beholder
With other words, we perceive beauty differently simply because we are different...
If it was a woman that we were discussing, I might understand. But it hard to get that philosophical about the appearance of a motorcycle -- even a Forza!
-
2 hours ago, Carsten007 said:
Honda is most of the time really behind. .........The Xmax is the end of the Forza, in every aspect. Unless they get it together and redesign the Forza completely. Say in maybe two years or so...?!
As I recall, back in November 2017 there were report of a new electric (and hybrid) PCX and a new redesigned Forza, based on models displayed at the Tokyo Motor Show, and there was even talk that Honda might build/assemble the electric PCX in Thailand. Nothing in either category seems to have "landed" in Thailand nor is there any indication at this time that either ever will. I don't care if Honda ever produces an electric/hybrid PCX or sells it in Thailand, but I am very interested in a new redesigned Forza. To say that I am not a fan of Yamaha would be an understatement, after watching my neighbor go through hours of torture trying to start his Nuovo after leaving it sit for a few weeks. And the looks of the XMax 300 just do not appeal to me in the least (the Forza, while a bit "bloated" is a far better looking bike IMO than the styleless (you may certainly disagree, but please don't bother to tell me; "beauty is in the eye of the beholder"). But, my present Forza is almost 4 years old and it really is time for an upgrade. I would really hate for its replacement to be a Yamaha, but if Honda doesn't come out with a new Forza in the next few months I may have no other choice (the XMax is certainly better than the present Forza). Ugh.....
-
Has anyone heard anything about the availability of a new redesigned/updated Honda Forza in Thailand? Honda seems to have fallen over the edge of the earth.....
-
22 hours ago, buick said:
OP - i converted a visa exempt entry (same process as tourist visa entry) to non imm O earlier this year at chaeng wattana (CW) in bangkok. to help your friend get an idea on the timeline, i entered thailand on march 1 and went to CW a couple days later with the required documents, etc.. they took the paperwork and told me to return in approx. two weeks. i went back two weeks later and received the non imm O stamp in my passport. that visa allowed a 90 day stay (to may 31) and day 1 was the day i applied (early march), not the day i picked it up (mid march). then i went back to CW in mid may to apply for the one year extension of stay, bringing along the same required documents as before. let me know if you have any questions on the process.
edit: i went back a 4th time to get a multiple re-entry permit which allows you to come and go as you please. each time i return, i get permission to stay until may 31, 2018.
Thanks very much, very helpful.
-
50 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:
A OA long stay visa could only be applied for at the Thai embassy in Bangladesh.
He can apply for a change of visa status at immigration to obtain a 90 day non immigrant visa (category O) entry based upon qualifying for an extension based upon retirement. Then during the last 30 days of the 90 day entry from the visa he could apply for a one year extension of stay based upon retirement. The 800k baht would need to be in the bank for 60 days when he applies for the extension for the visa application the 60 days is not required. No medical or police certificates are required.
Basic requirements for the change of visa status application is here. https://www.immigration.go.th/content/service_80
Thanks for this. If I read your post correctly, my friend would need to have stayed in Thailand for not less than 60 (or more than 75) days from his entry before he can apply for the 1 year extension -- correct? I accept that what you say is correct, but in the site that you link to I only see the "the application must be submitted more than 15 days before visa expiration" (i.e., with a 90 day visa, not more than 75 days after having entered Thailand). Is there any way around this requirement, as staying in Thailand for 60 days is likely not possible for my friend?
-
4 minutes ago, tgeezer said:
There is no answer to questions like this because it depends on how "immigration" sees the applicant, He appears to have been here long enough to have had a bank account for three months yet he is on a visa which allows for only a ninety day stay, which gives the the impression that he is a visa runner who has found a better way of staying in Thailand. Anything is possible but once a procedure is posted here it is often interpreted as an entitlement so the best thing to do is go to Immigration and ask.
Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa ConnectHow could you possibly get the impression that he is a "visa runner" from my post? My friend is a retired senior government official who has traveled to and through Thailand dozens of times over the past 5+ years. He is not presently in Thailand, but in the past he has held a Thai business visa and work permit and has generated significant income in Thailand, hence the very substantial bank account here in Thailand. He is now simply looking for an easy and straight forward way to travel to Thailand relatively quickly as he has serious health issues (kidney transplant) and he may need to get treatment at a Thai hospital on very short notice. He will not live here for any significant period of time, I expect. It was my suggestion to him that a retirement visa might solve his problem. Bangladesh (along with India and Pakistan) is on an immigration "watch list" which may cause problems for his long stay visa application, which was the reason for my inquiry here. But his background and financial position put him in a unique and I expect strong position for a retirement visa, and if I read UJ's post correctly, the major problem is that he will need to stay in Thailand for at least 60 days ("then during the last 30 days of the 90 day entry from the visa he could apply for a one year extension of stay based upon retirement") before he can apply for the 1 year extension, which may be a problem for him as to my knowledge he never stays more than 3 to 5 days at a time. But I can now at least explain the requirements and problem to him.
-
A friend of mine, who is a Bangladesh citizen, is interested in obtaining a retirement visa ("Non-Immigrant OA Visa") for Thailand and subsequent extension(s). He is 57 years old and has the required B800,000 in a Thai bank for more than 3 months and he presently has a Thailand tourist visa in his passport. Does he qualify for a retirement visa extension? I have looked on the internet, but I can find no statement regarding the countries from which citizens may apply for and receive a Thai retirement visa. Can a citizen of any country (specifically Bangladesh) that has a valid tourist visa for Thailand apply for and receive a Non-Immigrant OA Visa? Are any other documents required for a Bangladesh citizen (assuming that he qualifies for a Non-Immigrant OA Visa) to get the Non-Immigrant OA Visa, such as perhaps a Police Report or Medical Certificate? Thanks in advance for any guidance or information.
The Hit And Run Restaurant "review" Thread
in Pattaya
Posted
Can you/will you share the name and location of this "wonderful (and not expensive) Chinese dumpling restaurant"?