Expats lobby for better visa treatment

[reader]

From Pattaya Mail

By Barry Kenyon

A group of expats based in Pattaya, mainly holding one year extensions of stay for retirement or marriage, have written to Premier Srettha Thavisin to campaign for more humane treatment. Leader John Foulds, a British retiree, said that the government seemed to be interested only in expanding short term tourists by abolishing visas for mass markets, such as China and India, and easing the life of wealthy expat professionals on large salaries. He quoted the recent announcement about 10 year executive or professional work permits in the Eastern Economic Corridor offering specially discounted tax rates on earnings and confirming avoidance of 90 days reporting.

Mr Foulds explained, “By contrast, there never seems to be any good news for the mainstay expats who have retired here on pensions or are supporting Thai wives and families over many years. Now it looks like we may be faced by demands to register with the Thai tax system because of changing revenue rules and face more hurdles in renewing their annual visas.” He suggested that expats on one year renewals should be exempt from revenue regulations, at any rate until the system was open and equitable. “The very idea that expats like me living on an already taxed pension need to produce a whole load of annual paperwork to justify why we should not be re-taxed is a very sour notion.”

Amongst other visa complaints raised by the group are recent changes to the 90 day reporting system which require (in Chonburi) a new form and accompanying passport copies every three months, an increasing amount of paperwork required from Thai banks about the account holder’s cash balance and periodic alarm raised about compulsory medical insurance. “It’s as if older retirees in my position are being deliberately squeezed or forced into expensive visa options such as the 10-year Long Term Residence or 5-20 years Elite,” added Mr. Foulds. He said many retirees he knew were already planning to leave Thailand or relocate to more friendly visa regimes in Vietnam or Cambodia.
 

Expat visas in Thailand are now a complex field of options, each with its own set of rules. More recent choices have been aimed at wealthier foreigners or those prepared to pay lavishly upfront for a specific number of years. As regards the traditional one year extensions of stay based on retirement and marriage, there are thought to be at least 300,000 mostly-male visa holders including a sizeable number financially supporting Thai wives and families. Although Thai immigration does not publish comprehensive data, there may be 200,000 more foreigners living here part time on tourist and non-immigrant visas which they use together with spells of time outside the country.

A spokesperson for the Tourist Authority of Thailand said that she was well aware that the recent Thai revenue announcement had caused alarm in some expat quarters, but feedback was still being fed into headquarters. A representative of the Thai immigration hotline pointed out that the regulations for retiree and marriage annual extensions had remained basically the same for the past 15 years, if subject to some minor local variations. Given Thailand’s former good reputation as a retirement haven and the high daily spending by many foreigners with annual retiree or family permits, Mr. Foulds’ group is advising the Thai premier not to ignore these contributions to the national coffers. A sizeable market is in danger of being lost.

[reader]

From Pattaya Mail

Pattaya Brits join the campaign against new British visa regulations

By Barry Kenyon

A group of Brits, currently in Pattaya, have written to UK premier Rishi Sunak to complain about the latest family visa rule changes which require a sponsor to have 38,700 pounds in salary or pensions before a spouse, or family member, can be considered for entry to Britain. The current floor level is 18,600 pounds with the changes due to be introduced early next year. However, British government ministers have in recent days talked of “transitional arrangements” which likely mean the huge increase will apply only to new applications and not to those already in UK who need to apply for an extension on their initial time allowance of 30 months.

David Cole said he and his Thai wife were currently on holiday in Thailand, but his spouse would need to apply in UK for an extension on her family visa next summer. He said he was a restaurant chef in Newcastle on Tyne where wages were much lower than in London. “Unless the government has a change of heart, it looks like we will become a Skype family with me in UK and Noy stuck in Thailand,” he said. He added he had persuaded four other Brits in a similar position to sign a joint letter to Sunak headed, “This is an unworthy tax on love”.

Philip Ashby’s problem is rather different. He recently married his Thai wife Nada and they were intending to apply for the initial visa next year. Philip lives on savings and investments and was intending to put up 62,500 pounds in his British bank account, the alternative to 18,600 pounds in salary or earned income. “Now I suddenly find I may need to have more than double the amount in bank cash as the goal posts move to 38,700 pounds.” He doubted he and Nada could now live in UK unless the policy changed.

Home secretary James Cleverly said the current limit had been in force for over a decade and it was a longstanding rule that sponsors must have sufficient funds to cover non-British family members living in UK. He did think though that the unpublished transitional arrangements might assist those already in the system. On this scenario, David (above) might escape the increase whereas Philip would not. The sum of 38,700 pounds is also the sum required as a confirmed salary if skilled workers apply for a job in UK. Why the same figure is being used to assess family members on a very different visa has not been explained.