Mandatory health insurance for over 50s in Thailand only affects those on Non-Immigrant Visa O-A

[marcusarelus]

1 hour ago, AAArdvark said:

And can probably translate the original much better than Google.  However, my argument remains the same.  This thread started with a translated interview with immigration.  From that interview alone, people were saying that everything is now perfectly clear.  From that article alone, that is not true.  I simply pointed out the inconsistencies in the particular article in the OP.

An official translation of the statement from MOPH would go a long way in resolving the issue.

Nope.  I can get you one but it'll cost.  I'm sure my wife will give you a discount.  She is a certified translator. 

[AAArdvark]

2 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

Nope.  I can get you one but it'll cost.  I'm sure my wife will give you a discount.  She is a certified translator. 

Sorry, I didn't mean from your wife. I meant someone in the government.

[madmen]

7 minutes ago, watgate said:

I didn't feel like reading 16 pages of replies so forgive me if what I am about to say has already been posted. I attended a heavily attended expat meeting in chiang mai and there was an owner from one of the visa agencies. He is an atty and is widely respected. He said that although the mandatory health requirement is currently only for those on the OA non-immigrant visa the handwriting is on the wall. He said there are many more O visas and extensions of stay and he is of the belief that it is only a matter of time before these retirees with these visas or extensions  of stay will also be required to have mandatory health coverage. He said now that 7-8 insurance companies are circling their wagons and licking their chops over this potential new windfall it is quite apparent that all retirees will eventually be forced to have mandatory health insurance.

 

     On another note, if  ALL tourists entering Thailand will be hit with this new tourist surcharge of 100 baht the thai authorities are stating that this will go a long way to covering the shortfall Thailand is dealing with whereby uninsured tourists are obtaining health care services and are not paying the bill. If this new tourist tax is going to remedy this ongoing problem why will mandatory health insurance coverage still be required for retirees? That was the reason for the mandatory health care coverage. It sounds like a potential cash cow and I wonder in whose pockets all this new found revenue will wind up?

 

     One potential possibly good solution according to the visa agency owner was if individuals can not obtain health insurance coverage due to their age or pre-existing condition(s) a plausible scenario would be a requirement that a retiree must keep  the whole 800K in the bank as an insurance policy for future health care coverage.

 

     Lastly,  a scary scenario is one that an insurance broker talked about concerning obtaining health care coverage with pre-existing condition(s). He said it is definitely not beyond the realm of possibility that the health insurance carrier collects your very expensive premiums but when it comes time to pay out a claim uses the policy holders pre-existing condition(s) as an excuse to not pay out the claim. I wonder how many health insurance companies will play that game and write a policy for folks who have pre-existing conditions knowing full well when it comes time to pay out a claim they will deny it based on the pre-existing condition. It would actually be better to be denied  coverage, especially if the prediction about having to keep the whole 800k in the bank comes to fruition. At least this way you know you at least have these funds in case health care services are needed.

 

     To quote a famous person. These are the times that make men and women weary. Fasten your seatbelt. It's gonna be a bumpy ride I am afraid.

     

 

     

You lost me after "well respected insurance salesman" ????

[marcusarelus]

18 minutes ago, AAArdvark said:

Sorry, I didn't mean from your wife. I meant someone in the government.

Who would you trust?  Immigration?  Nothing to do with it right now.  Ministers?  Who is the PM?  Do we know who is in the government next week? 

[aBigSmile]

My observations:

 

(1)

The new insurance requirement renders Non-imm O-A a poor option for most people because of the OPD requirement and the exclusion of deductibles. Using a yearly extension will save one $1,000 to $2,000 in unnecessary insurance outlay. (Only if one has OPD with their international healthcare insurance policy, for its own financial merit, will one apply for O-A).

 

For that reason, the applications for No-Imm O-A visa will dwindle to a trickle from July 2019 on.

 

(2)

The new requirements are here to trump up business for Thai carriers. There’s no other explanation. Non-Imm O-A holders aren’t more prone to stiff up hospitals and doctors than other retirees. The fact the authorities don’t divulge any of that information is a sufficient enough evidence.

 

The nature of the local policies is another telltale sign that rapaciousness is at play. Usually, the payout/premium of healthcare insurance is 0.25% to 0.5%; the local policies’ ratio is over 5%. Further, the coverage is abysmal and won’t satisfy anyone with a sense of caution. A little digression: I would keep a wide berth from any Thai carriers.

 

(3)

The Thai carriers are not going to be happy with the retirees’ change of behavior, and will push for instituting the mandate for all retirees in Thailand. For anyone who is of the mind to be protected, it’ll be either adding a costly OPD to an international policy, or having a basic insurance that meets the requirements, and a second layer of international insurance with IPD and deductibles. Both options are a burden and a waste. 

 

For me, that will be the first time I feel the Thai system is tilted against me, and moving back or away a viable option. 

 

 

[AAArdvark]

42 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

Who would you trust?  Immigration?  Nothing to do with it right now.  Ministers?  Who is the PM?  Do we know who is in the government next week? 

Anyone other than a news interview with immigration which this whole thread is based on.

[JetsetBkk]

3 hours ago, aBigSmile said:

(2)

The new requirements are here to trump up business for Thai carriers. There’s no other explanation. Non-Imm O-A holders aren’t more prone to stiff up hospitals and doctors than other retirees. The fact the authorities don’t divulge any of that information is a sufficient enough evidence.

Newly arrived Non-Imm O-A holders don't have to have money in a Thai bank. 

Retirees on Extensions of Stay do have to show either 800,000 in a bank or 65,000 per month.

(Some can show less, e.g. married to a Thai.)

 

[jimn]

7 hours ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

Ironically the increased financial requirements ( 800k ) caused me to prepare for plan B , back to the UK in September for an OA .
Now, due to the latest developments it’s back to plan A !!

Ho hum , such is life ????

Dont despair Andrew. Insurance cover purchased in the UK is not that expensive for a years cover. See link below

 

https://www.direct-travel.co.uk/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwz6PnBRCPARIsANOtCw0reg0vhxsvKKFv1LNMt9kZ-_DJJIPLFAv8ERaRGs0ZLZ3ok6fT5j0aAljzEALw_wcB

 

Single trip insurance just under a years cover £200 a bit more to cover pre existing medical conditions

[inThailand]

Clear as mud. 

 

So visa on arrival folks ie 30 days pay 100B. Tourist visa folks, also pay 100B and must have 40k 400k insurance. And retirement or marriage visa folks nada?  Does this make any sense? 

[madmen]

1 hour ago, inThailand said:

Clear as mud. 

 

So visa on arrival folks ie 30 days pay 100B. Tourist visa folks, also pay 100B and must have 40k 400k insurance. And retirement or marriage visa folks nada?  Does this make any sense? 

Wrong go back and do some reading and get your facts straight

[inThailand]

20 minutes ago, madmen said:

Wrong go back and do some reading and get your facts straight

Thats a useful post? I said it was clear as mud. So who has to pay or have insurance? 

[inThailand]

23 hours ago, madmen said:

No . Insurance covers you for that as well. Accident insurance wont cover you for a stoke

And most health insurance policies won't cover you for motorbike accidents. The most likely reason you will end up in the hospital here. 

[aBigSmile]

9 hours ago, JetsetBkk said:

Newly arrived Non-Imm O-A holders don't have to have money in a Thai bank. 

Retirees on Extensions of Stay do have to show either 800,000 in a bank or 65,000 per month.

(Some can show less, e.g. married to a Thai.)

 

 

I'm not sure how any of it is relevant to one's commitment to pay one's medical bills. Both groups have to provide evidence for financial soundness. However, in a case of a medical emergency, the people on yearly extension have greater incentive to withhold paying their bills, as it might drop their balance below the immigration requirements. So visa holder are the "safer" bet here...

 

In the grand scheme of things, the Imm O-A is only a trial. I suppose that particular visa status was chosen because it was convenient to implement. Immigration didn't wish to be encumbered with another chore, especially since having been handed the task of income verification so recently, so it fell on Thai consultants and embassies world-wide. But fret not, within a few short years, the requirements will apply to all retirees. 

 

 

8 hours ago, inThailand said:

 

[marcusarelus]

6 hours ago, inThailand said:

And most health insurance policies won't cover you for motorbike accidents. The most likely reason you will end up in the hospital here. 

Why not?  Covers hospital room and hospital procedures.  Who cares why? 

[sqwakvfr]

When I initially purchased Health Insurance from Bangkok Life Assurance the Representative offered the option of purchasing a separate Personal Accident Policy. I asked why and he replied because if you are injured while on a motorcycle or motor scooter then the health insurance policy will not cover my medical expense.  I declined and have not been any kind of motorized scooter since then.  Grab, bus, walk, or bicycle since then. 

[metisdead]

A post containing a link to a YouTube account site has been removed. 

[rabas]

46 minutes ago, aBigSmile said:

 

I'm not sure how any of it is relevant to one's commitment to pay one's medical bills. Both groups have to provide evidence for financial soundness. However, in a case of a medical emergency, the people on yearly extension have greater incentive to withhold paying their bills, as it might drop their balance below the immigration requirements. So visa holder are the "safer" bet here...

 

In the grand scheme of things, the Imm O-A is only a trial. I suppose that particular visa status was chosen because it was convenient to implement. Immigration didn't wish to be encumbered with another chore, especially since having been handed the task of income verification so recently, so it fell on Thai consultants and embassies world-wide. But fret not, within a few short years, the requirements will apply to all retirees.

 

They cannot get at an overseas bank account for lack of payment but they sure can get your Thai Bank account, thus the risk is with overseas money, not local money.  Besides, I doubt it is a coincidence that the required policies max out at 400K exactly that required to be in the bank at all times.

[aBigSmile]

33 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

They cannot get at an overseas bank account for lack of payment but they sure can get your Thai Bank account, thus the risk is with overseas money, not local money.  Besides, I doubt it is a coincidence that the required policies max out at 400K exactly that required to be in the bank at all times.

Sorry, you are wrong.

 

The 400K are required to be kept in the bank only for 3 months after the extension was issued. Your account balance can be close to zero for the next 6 months.

 

Besides, this discussion about stiffed up bills is a bit irrelevant. From my experience and knowledge, Thai hospitals and doctors won’t treat you without a guarantee of payment, be it a credit card or a valid insurance card (the pre-approval the comes along).

 

Finally, as I stated above, this scheme is primarily in place to trump up business for Thai carriers. Eventually, all retirees will have to pay their pound of flesh. And while we’re on the subject of craftiness, note that the Thai policies are less costly than adding OPD on international plans. Yes, they sell an inferior product that still makes senses to purchase (premium of bare-bones Thai carrier + international policy supplement < international policy IPD + OPD).

 

[Olmate]

26 minutes ago, aBigSmile said:

Sorry, you are wrong.

 

The 400K are required to be kept in the bank only for 3 months after the extension was issued. Your account balance can be close to zero for the next 6 months.

 

Besides, this discussion about stiffed up bills is a bit irrelevant. From my experience and knowledge, Thai hospitals and doctors won’t treat you without a guarantee of payment, be it a credit card or a valid insurance card (the pre-approval the comes along).

 

Finally, as I stated above, this scheme is primarily in place to trump up business for Thai carriers. Eventually, all retirees will have to pay their pound of flesh. And while we’re on the subject of craftiness, note that the Thai policies are less costly than adding OPD on international plans. Yes, they sell an inferior product that still makes senses to purchase (premium of bare-bones Thai carrier + international policy supplement < international policy IPD + OPD).

 

So sorry your wrong about the 400k, thought by now it would be clear, zero and your gone next year.

[rabas]

39 minutes ago, aBigSmile said:

Sorry, you are wrong.

 

The 400K are required to be kept in the bank only for 3 months after the extension was issued. Your account balance can be close to zero for the next 6 months.

 

Besides, this discussion about stiffed up bills is a bit irrelevant. From my experience and knowledge, Thai hospitals and doctors won’t treat you without a guarantee of payment, be it a credit card or a valid insurance card (the pre-approval the comes along).

 

Finally, as I stated above, this scheme is primarily in place to trump up business for Thai carriers. Eventually, all retirees will have to pay their pound of flesh. And while we’re on the subject of craftiness, note that the Thai policies are less costly than adding OPD on international plans. Yes, they sell an inferior product that still makes senses to purchase (premium of bare-bones Thai carrier + international policy supplement < international policy IPD + OPD).

 

1. New retirement rules require minimum balance of 400K all year round, 800K for 5 months for extension, this is already in place.

 

2. Stiffed bills are not irrelevant to Thai. I can easily walk out of my OPD without paying. No cards required beforehand.

 

3. Happy to hear your opinion, but I don't think it will be completely retroactive cover for all.

 

[wayned]

I thought that it was 800k 3 months before the extension, except the first time which is 2 months, the 800k 3 moths after the extension .  then it could drop to 400k for 6 months but had to be back up to 800k 3 months before the next extension.

[aBigSmile]

42 minutes ago, rabas said:

1. New retirement rules require minimum balance of 400K all year round, 800K for 5 months for extension, this is already in place.

 

2. Stiffed bills are not irrelevant to Thai. I can easily walk out of my OPD without paying. No cards required beforehand.

 

3. Happy to hear your opinion, but I don't think it will be completely retroactive cover for all.

 

 

Stand corrected on the 400k all year round requirements. 

 

Regarding number (2), I guess they trust you or the anticipated bill is paltry. When great deal of money is involved (e.g., MRI scans), they'll usually require a proof of payment in advance. In general, it's within their power to eliminate any stiffed bills; a quick change of admittance procedures will see to it. 

 

As for (3), it won't be retroactive, rather universal. The new arrangement renders the Non-Imm O-A less appealing for most people, so expect a switch to yearly extensions. That in turn will prompt the Thai carriers to lobby the government for a universal requirement. The writing is on the wall, although only time will tell.  

[losername]

5 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

Why not?  Covers hospital room and hospital procedures.  Who cares why? 

My health insurance, Aetna/Bupa specifically limits benefits to 50% if resulting from motorcycles.  So appears to be specific to individual companies.

[Bill Miller]

I am going stateside, with my  brand new marriage certificate and MFA stamp because the US Embassy Bangkok declined to authenticate it for us, the day befofe my permissuon to stay expires.

What do I do to return to my wife? Fly to Laos, e.g., and request a Non O based on marriage at Savannakhet?

[rocketman777]

On 5/24/2019 at 7:46 PM, AAArdvark said:

In 18 years you must have replaced your passport at least once.  Curious, the extension of stay must have been transferred to the new passport, was the visa? 

yes

[Searat7]

On 5/24/2019 at 6:22 AM, ianezy0 said:

Read the article very clearly before you post.

Quote: 

She said that once the rule is implemented, applicants for the non-immigrant O-A visa, which is valid for one year from the date of issue, would be required to buy health insurance. 

“Current holders of this visa will have to produce proof of their health insurance for visa renewal,” she said. 

I still feel they are making the change in steps and Step 1 is to require insurance for O-A visas at their gateways (consulates in home countries). Step 2 would be to require insurance when applying for extensions of stay in Thailand. It would be absolute pandemonium if they did this all at once and I think they will have to give those on extension of stay more notice than a month or two. I am not a scaremonger , just expressing a common sense opinion.  

[madmen]

1 minute ago, Searat7 said:

I still feel they are making the change in steps and Step 1 is to require insurance for O-A visas at their gateways (consulates in home countries). Step 2 would be to require insurance when applying for extensions of stay in Thailand. It would be absolute pandemonium if they did this all at once and I think they will have to give those on extension of stay more notice than a month or two. I am not a scaremonger , just expressing a common sense opinion.  

Majority have 800k and THEN 400k all year exactly the same as O-A insurance coverage. Did you miss that?

[Searat7]

Majority have 800k and THEN 400k all year exactly the same as O-A insurance coverage. Did you miss that?

No I did not miss that but I don’t think that’s the issue


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[madmen]

Just now, Searat7 said:

No I did not miss that but I don’t think that’s the issue


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Why not? 

[edwinchester]

7 hours ago, aBigSmile said:

Sorry, you are wrong.

 

The 400K are required to be kept in the bank only for 3 months after the extension was issued. Your account balance can be close to zero for the next 6 months.

 

Besides, this discussion about stiffed up bills is a bit irrelevant. From my experience and knowledge, Thai hospitals and doctors won’t treat you without a guarantee of payment, be it a credit card or a valid insurance card (the pre-approval the comes along).

 

Finally, as I stated above, this scheme is primarily in place to trump up business for Thai carriers. Eventually, all retirees will have to pay their pound of flesh. And while we’re on the subject of craftiness, note that the Thai policies are less costly than adding OPD on international plans. Yes, they sell an inferior product that still makes senses to purchase (premium of bare-bones Thai carrier + international policy supplement < international policy IPD + OPD).

 

Had about 10 visits to Thai hospitals both Govt and private for routine and emergency treatment.

Maybe I'm the exception but I have never been asked for my passport, credit card or money up front.