Denied entry to Thailand!

[Sheryl]

And what visa do you need for this?

Herein lies the problem. There isn't one.

Your options if beliw retirement age are elite visa, business investment visa or marriage to a Thai.

Technically on any of those you'd still be working without a WP but for now the authoroties seem to accept that given there is no way to get one. But at least your visa issue would be solved. Expensive though.

They do not want people living here on tourist visas or visa exemptions and are on the lookoutfor people who seem to be doing that. . All the accounts I've seen of oeople denied entry were people living here on VE or TR visas. In sone cases they had 20,000 and were still denied, so while having that is good idea it ud no guarantee.

You really need to straighten out your visa situation as while you may get in on your current visa in 2 weeks you are likely to have more problems down the line if continuing to live here more or less full time. If you can't afford an Elite visa then consider Cambodia, or dividing your time between Thailand and Cambodia.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dennis123]

18 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Herein lies the problem. There isn't one.

Your options if below retirement age are elite visa, business investment visa or marriage to a Thai
 

 

Even more limited if you're gay, can't marry! That's why all those young guys end up with 50+-year-old boyfriends, only ones that can stay easily. Poor them.

[lkv]

8 minutes ago, dennis123 said:

Even more limited if you're gay, can't marry! That's why all those young guys end up with 50+-year-old boyfriends, only ones that can stay easily. Poor them.

Poor them?

 

That what, they are more limited in Farang options than Thai women are?

 

Was that the biggest concern, what young Thai gay guys will do? Lol. Move into Europe or Australia or US whereever their partner is from, get married there for instance, and get long term residence and eventually citizenship, which is a dream for many Thais of any gender.

 

Edited October 22, 2018 by lkv

[dennis123]

14 minutes ago, lkv said:

Poor them?

That what, they are more limited in Farang options than Thai women are?

 

 

Yep

[moe666]

They do have a new Immigration head in Chiang Mai so the policy of working as a digital Nomad may have changed. It would be worth checking out to keep yourself out of trouble.

[rhodie]

3 hours ago, PAWNEESE said:

2 months ago my adult son and my nephew arrived for their first holiday in Thailand. They had no money at all on them as I was treating them .... (Its not cheap funding 2 young lads on a first time ever trip to Pattaya .. jeez cost me a fortune ... and NO Im not adopting you .. been asked that by a few old codgers I told).  (And I paid for flights and hotels though not directly .. reimbursed them but thats by the way .. I need therapy me thinks)

 

Immigration might not totally believe that if they had been asked to show funds and had none.

 

They (and one other) coming again (they love Pattaya .. no idea why ) in May (but Im only funding my son then) and we not planning he has funds other than maybe a credit card.  

 

Do the 3 now have to have 60,000 baht or equivalent in English pounds now ?

 

Or is it just people on umpteenth entry. Credit cards used by many tourists I guess and they get local money on arrival.

 

My English bank told me 7 years ago, travellers cheques very old fashioned. Credit cards is what people use .. they wont have cash ... well perhaps they better have £500 or 20,000 baht each now ? 

 

 

Normally you would not be asked to show funds unless you were in Thailand constantly using visa and visa exempt entries and the IO was suspicious. But, there is a requirement to show 10k or 20k depending on visa, so this can be a problem. But have not seen a report of that happening. I am sure they will be OK.

[Misty]

5 hours ago, balo said:

I don't see the problem here , you pay your income tax in your home country. In my case it's Norway , I pay my tax there, but it doesn't mean I have to live there , except for keeping an address. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The problem would be if you earn income while being in Thailand for more than 180 days in a year, than you're considered by the Thai Revenue Department to be a tax resident of Thailand, and your income is taxable in Thailand.  It doesn't matter to the Thai Revenue Department if you keep an address somewhere else, it matters where you physically live and work.

[Misty]

5 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Technically on any of those you'd still be working without a WP but for now the authoroties seem to accept that given there is no way to get one.
 

Please, which authorities are accepting that you can work without a work permit?  I'm not trying to be difficult and would really like this to be true, but that hasn't been my experience.    

[lamyai3]

1 hour ago, Misty said:

Please, which authorities are accepting that you can work without a work permit?  I'm not trying to be difficult and would really like this to be true, but that hasn't been my experience.    

None of them are accepting it officially. Rather they've accepted that their chances of catching people who work online are close to zero. Of course if you were to make an issue of it in the hope of getting an official clearance, you'd be asking for trouble.

[ericthai]

23 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

$100 is less than 3300 thb. 

Yup, your right! My mistake was thinking $1000. 

[cat handler]

On 10/21/2018 at 11:36 PM, dennis123 said:

The average working tourist spends more money on immigration fees and VAT (both can be seen as tax) then the average Thai employee pays in tax, plus the fact that those freelancers aren't stealing jobs from the locals. Thailand should welcome them with open arms. At least the ones from western countries.

They may not be stealing jobs but they ate working in Thailand and not paying income tax in Thailand. That in itself is a crime. I know if you did that in a Western country the respective Tax Offices would be hounding you.

[balo]

3 hours ago, Misty said:

Thailand for more than 180 days in a year, than you're considered by the Thai Revenue Department to be a tax resident of Thailand, and your income is taxable in Thailand.  It doesn't matter to the Thai Revenue Department if you keep an address somewhere else, it matters where you physically live and work.

I do not agree with you , you receive your pension from abroad as retired but you do not pay tax to Thailand. 

 

I am early retired but I still have a small business in Europe, got nothing to do with Thailand.

 

 

 

[The traveler]

On 10/21/2018 at 8:52 AM, kinyara said:

 Around the 10% mark

Around 10-12% seems to be right according to worldbank.org

 

but hey, it could be more or less.

[The traveler]

So many peoples here complaining that if we stay more then so and so long we are not tourists and we abuse the visas, yes that’s right we do, because for some of us that are under 50 years or are not married to a thai there are not many other options.

 

if Thailand could introduce a new visa for those under 50years that let you stay a full year without having to do anybody border crossing or go to the immigration to frequently I will be happy to pay up to 50,000 Baht a year for that.

 

only choice is education visa, but you have to meet to class or the elite visa which cost 100,000 baht a year, that’s to expensive, at least know with bad currency exercise rate, so it’s very easy for you guys over 50 years/ married to a thai and telling us we are abusing the visas, when you can chillax year after year without any problems.

 

it’s time to introduce new visas Thailand!

[vinny41]

1 hour ago, The traveler said:

So many peoples here complaining that if we stay more then so and so long we are not tourists and we abuse the visas, yes that’s right we do, because for some of us that are under 50 years or are not married to a thai there are not many other options.

 

if Thailand could introduce a new visa for those under 50years that let you stay a full year without having to do anybody border crossing or go to the immigration to frequently I will be happy to pay up to 50,000 Baht a year for that.

 

only choice is education visa, but you have to meet to class or the elite visa which cost 100,000 baht a year, that’s to expensive, at least know with bad currency exercise rate, so it’s very easy for you guys over 50 years/ married to a thai and telling us we are abusing the visas, when you can chillax year after year without any problems.

 

it’s time to introduce new visas Thailand!

have you looked at 1 year Non O Volunteer Visa  with a Thai Work Permit from a NGO

[AYJAYDEE]

2 hours ago, The traveler said:

So many peoples here complaining that if we stay more then so and so long we are not tourists and we abuse the visas, yes that’s right we do, because for some of us that are under 50 years or are not married to a thai there are not many other options.

 

if Thailand could introduce a new visa for those under 50years that let you stay a full year without having to do anybody border crossing or go to the immigration to frequently I will be happy to pay up to 50,000 Baht a year for that.

 

only choice is education visa, but you have to meet to class or the elite visa which cost 100,000 baht a year, that’s to expensive, at least know with bad currency exercise rate, so it’s very easy for you guys over 50 years/ married to a thai and telling us we are abusing the visas, when you can chillax year after year without any problems.

 

it’s time to introduce new visas Thailand!

does your home country allow Thais to come and stay for a year as a tourist  without a border hop?

[simoh1490]

9 hours ago, Misty said:

The problem would be if you earn income while being in Thailand for more than 180 days in a year, than you're considered by the Thai Revenue Department to be a tax resident of Thailand, and your income is taxable in Thailand.  It doesn't matter to the Thai Revenue Department if you keep an address somewhere else, it matters where you physically live and work.

ONLY if that income is transferred to Thailand in the tax year it was earned, even then this is a law that the Thai Revenue is not actively enforcing and never has. Simply, it's almost impossible to distinguish between overseas savings and income when it is remitted here.

Edited October 22, 2018 by simoh1490

[SammyT]

7 hours ago, The traveler said:

If Thailand could introduce a new visa for those under 50years that let you stay a full year without having to do anybody border crossing or go to the immigration to frequently I will be happy to pay up to 50,000 Baht a year for that.

 

 

it’s time to introduce new visas Thailand!

I'm pretty sure the whole point behind visa and immigration systems is to attract the types of people that a country wants, to benefit the country as a whole. Introducing a "long stay under 50's" visa will basically just attract people who want to come and live cheaply in Thailand because the cost of living in cheaper than the rest of the world. Please tell me what your proposed visa would contribute to the country? 

 

[Sheryl]

14 hours ago, Misty said:

Please, which authorities are accepting that you can work without a work permit?  I'm not trying to be difficult and would really like this to be true, but that hasn't been my experience.    

I was referring exclusively to digital nomad work. Not employed by a Thai company, income coming from out of the country, working online.

[JackThompson]

14 hours ago, Misty said:

The problem would be if you earn income while being in Thailand for more than 180 days in a year, than you're considered by the Thai Revenue Department to be a tax resident of Thailand, and your income is taxable in Thailand.

... only if the income is remitted to Thailand in the same year it is earned.  One can bring in past-years earnings tax-free.

 

6 hours ago, AYJAYDEE said:

does your home country allow Thais to come and stay for a year as a tourist  without a border hop?

Does his home-country have higher or lower wage-scales than Thailand?  The purpose of such regulation is to prevent people coming into a country en-masse, flooding the labor-market, and undermining the quality of life of the citizens (most especially those who are the lowest-paid / most vulnerable). 

 

In the case of Westerners coming to Thailand to spend foreign-sourced capital, the opposite effect is the case.  When we leave, the logical-task would be to try to convince us to stay longer, or come back ASAP, and keep spending here.

 

1 hour ago, SammyT said:

I'm pretty sure the whole point behind visa and immigration systems is to attract the types of people that a country wants, to benefit the country as a whole. Introducing a "long stay under 50's" visa will basically just attract people who want to come and live cheaply in Thailand because the cost of living in cheaper than the rest of the world. Please tell me what your proposed visa would contribute to the country?  

Every foreign-sourced dollar/euro/etc spent benefits the Thai economy by creating reserves for use in international-trade, as well as directly-funding Thai jobs.  Given there are no handout-programs for foreigners, even those who don't spend a lot are a net-benefit.  The logical cut-off would be foreign-beggars and those taking Thai jobs illegally, who should be quickly rounded-up and deported.

Other countries (in the region and around the world) are cognizant of this reality.  They make it easy for people to work-remotely and live in their countries, because their policy is designed to improve the lives of their citizens.  What is happening in Thailand on this issue is not logical on its face, so can only assume is due to some sort of payments being made to manifest a less-welcoming policy.

 

As to those working here legally: Work-permits not related to foreign-capital investment / creating businesses should be temporary, and solely issued for the purpose of training Thais to do the job ASAP.  

 

The "L1" Visa program should be ended immediately for all cases except transnational-factory jobs (the factories would move to Vietnam, if they had to pay Thai-level wages), so that supply-and-demand in the labor-market would bring wages up to a Thai level - increasing the size of the middle-class, and helping support/develop family-owned farms, many of which depend on some family-members working away from home.

[AYJAYDEE]

5 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

... only if the income is remitted to Thailand in the same year it is earned.  One can bring in past-years earnings tax-free.

 

Does his home-country have higher or lower wage-scales than Thailand?  The purpose of such regulation is to prevent people coming into a country en-masse, flooding the labor-market, and undermining the quality of life of the citizens (most especially those who are the lowest-paid / most vulnerable). 

 

In the case of Westerners coming to Thailand to spend foreign-sourced capital, the opposite effect is the case.  When we leave, the logical-task would be to try to convince us to stay longer, or come back ASAP, and keep spending here.

 

Every foreign-sourced dollar/euro/etc spent benefits the Thai economy by creating reserves for use in international-trade, as well as directly-funding Thai jobs.  Given there are no handout-programs for foreigners, even those who don't spend a lot are a net-benefit.  The logical cut-off would be foreign-beggars and those taking Thai jobs illegally, who should be quickly rounded-up and deported.

Other countries (in the region and around the world) are cognizant of this reality.  They make it easy for people to work-remotely and live in their countries, because their policy is designed to improve the lives of their citizens.  What is happening in Thailand on this issue is not logical on its face, so can only assume is due to some sort of payments being made to manifest a less-welcoming policy.

 

As to those working here legally: Work-permits not related to foreign-capital investment / creating businesses should be temporary, and solely issued for the purpose of training Thais to do the job ASAP.  

 

The "L1" Visa program should be ended immediately for all cases except transnational-factory jobs (the factories would move to Vietnam, if they had to pay Thai-level wages), so that supply-and-demand in the labor-market would bring wages up to a Thai level - increasing the size of the middle-class, and helping support/develop family-owned farms, many of which depend on some family-members working away from home.

so would his home coungtry allow me, as citizen of a modern western nation, to visit as a tourist for a year? according to your logic, that would be no problem

 

[JackThompson]

10 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

so would his home coungtry allow me, as citizen of a modern western nation, to visit as a tourist for a year? according to your logic, that would be no problem

 

If your wages in your home-country are significantly higher than the destination-country - they should.  Another factor is the % of GDP of the destination-country which is from foreign-income / tourism.

 

Unfortunately, visa/entry policies and enforcement are often designed to do the opposite of helping maintain a high standard-of-living for that nation's citizens - the USA being a prime example, where cheap labor is prized above maintaining (what was once) a 1st world nation. 

Edited October 23, 2018 by JackThompson

[AYJAYDEE]

5 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

If your wages in your home-country are significantly higher than the destination-country - they should.  Another factor is the % of GDP of the destination-country which is from foreign-income / tourism.

 

Unfortunately, visa/entry policies and enforcement are often designed to do the opposite of helping maintain a high standard-of-living for that nation's citizens - the USA being a prime example, where cheap labor is prized above maintaining (what was once) a 1st world nation. 

we arent talking about "should". I am pointing out that most countries dont let tourists stay for a year and there is no reason to single out Thailand and complain when They do the same. 

 

 

Edited October 23, 2018 by AYJAYDEE

[JackThompson]

6 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

we arent talking about "should". I am pointing out that most countries dont let tourists stay for a year and there is no reason to single out Thailand and complain when They do the same. 

There is reason to shame all of them into doing the right thing.  But most countries in the world do not restrict "repeat tourism."  Just in the region, no problem in Vietnam, Cambodia, and the PI - plus almost all of Latin America and the Caribbean.

 

It is primarily those with higher wage-scales, so experience massive visa-abuse by illegal foreign-workers, who have more restrictions. 

[AYJAYDEE]

10 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

There is reason to shame all of them into doing the right thing.  But most countries in the world do not restrict "repeat tourism."  Just in the region, no problem in Vietnam, Cambodia, and the PI - plus almost all of Latin America and the Caribbean.

 

It is primarily those with higher wage-scales, so experience massive visa-abuse by illegal foreign-workers, who have more restrictions. 

obviously there are other inducements besides wage scales that encourage visa abuse as evidenced by thailand. and if he wants to shame countries he can start with his own

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, AYJAYDEE said:

obviously there are other inducements besides wage scales that encourage visa abuse as evidenced by thailand.

I am unaware of any significant harm done by Westerners spending their foreign-incomes here.  The only larger-scale visa-abuse by Westerners is unauthorized English teaching, which could be solved by enforcement of labor-laws, making it easier for schools to get the needed authorizations for English teachers, and ensuring Thais are trained to replace each hire.

 

Quote

and if he wants to shame countries he can start with his own

I do - regularly - though it may be too late to save it, at this point. 

Ultimately, it's up to Thais to get policy changed here.  All we can do is point out the facts, and hope that love of country can rise above corrosive financial incentives to the contrary.

Edited October 23, 2018 by JackThompson

[balo]

1 hour ago, AYJAYDEE said:

we arent talking about "should". I am pointing out that most countries dont let tourists stay for a year and there is no reason to single out Thailand and complain when They do the same. 

 

 

Any EU country , including Scandinavia, if you're a EU/EEC citizen. I can live anywhere I want in Europe , except Russia and a few other countries in the east. 

 

[Misty]

7 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

ONLY if that income is transferred to Thailand in the tax year it was earned, even then this is a law that the Thai Revenue is not actively enforcing and never has. Simply, it's almost impossible to distinguish between overseas savings and income when it is remitted here.

I've asked tax professional about this and they say that's not correct for this type of income.  Yes, income earned through external investments - say an offshore investment portfolio or a property located somewhere else. But the tax professionals all say: income earned from working while living in Thailand is taxable in Thailand.  Doesn't matter where the income is paid.  So if you live and work online in Thailand, and you get paid in an account in Hong Kong, Singapore, London, the UK, they say it is taxable in Thailand (if you are a tax resident). 

 

If you know of any tax professionals that say differently, believe me, I would really like to know. I'd save a lot on Thai tax if that is correct.

 

 

[Misty]

2 hours ago, JackThompson said:

... only if the income is remitted to Thailand in the same year it is earned.  One can bring in past-years earnings tax-free.

 

 

Tax professionals I've talked to all agree that this rule does not apply to income earned from work that is done while a tax resident in Thailand.  Unfortunately this rule only seems to apply to offshore investment type income, or other income earned while you were working in another country.

[lkv]

11 minutes ago, Misty said:

I've asked tax professional about this and they say that's not correct for this type of income.  Yes, income earned through external investments - say an offshore investment portfolio or a property located somewhere else. But the tax professionals all say: income earned from working while living in Thailand is taxable in Thailand.  Doesn't matter where the income is paid.  So if you live and work online in Thailand, and you get paid in an account in Hong Kong, Singapore, London, the UK, they say it is taxable in Thailand (if you are a tax resident). 

 

If you know of any tax professionals that say differently, believe me, I would really like to know. I'd save a lot on Thai tax if that is correct.

 

 

Ok then, so let's just say then that I have retired early, and all the money spent in Thailand in the last 7 years was spent from prior savings transferred from my overseas account ????

Edited October 23, 2018 by lkv