Jump to content
BANGKOK
John_Betong

TM30 Proposal

Recommended Posts

Who would prefer having to pay to a Thai Immigration bank account about 200 Baht at the nearest bank or 7/11 every 90 days instead of having to report and fill in the relevant forms?

 

A confirmation email with the bank deposit details and your current address should be an adequate TM30 replacement.

 

Having a copy of the email or payment details should be adequate proof if required by any official.

If a top immigration officer proposed this idea we should all congratulate his brilliant thinking 🙂

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Takes me less than 5 mins in immigration...that includes waiting my turn...

 

It is the idea of being carefully watched that galls my axx...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would prefer having to pay to a Thai Immigration bank account about 200 Baht at the nearest bank or 7/11 every 90 days instead of having to report and fill in the relevant forms?

 

A confirmation email with the bank deposit details and your current address should be an adequate TM30 replacement.

 

Having a copy of the email or payment details should be adequate proof if required by any official.

If a top immigration officer proposed this idea we should all congratulate his brilliant thinking 1f642.png&key=eca1ec9654d339e1dcb410e06a22bf572ac50349869e073b18c879ff8b59a030

 

Your assuming Thai immigration wants to forgo its new revenue stream from farangs and Thai landlords. That goose is only starting to nest...

Sent from my SM-T530 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 2:24 PM, John_Betong said:

Having a copy of the email or payment details should be adequate proof if required by any official.

You're overlooking how many separate benefactors tend to become involved in protection rackets. Just ask anyone who runs a business here how this works. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

You're overlooking how many separate benefactors tend to become involved in protection rackets. Just ask anyone who runs a business here how this works. 

I run a business and have done for many many years and have never seen a policeman.  So please tell me what you know, and base it on evidence and not bar stool heresay.   "Ask anyone who runs a business"......well here I am and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Sketchy guys running a bar, yes, you'll be expected to play the game.  I don't run a bar.   I also know several other foreign professional business owners - no protection rackets, no problems, never.  You are perpetuating  a bar stool myth.

Edited by josephbloggs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Sketchy guys running a bar, yes, you'll be expected to play the game. 

Fair enough, I withdraw the sweeping generalisation about business operators, and when I posted I very nearly used the phrase "anyone running a bar business". But please take into account the context of the suggestion I was replying to - it's quite clear that there's more than a few grubby mitts in the pot benefitting from the collateral damage of immigration enforcement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...