ubonjoe

The Multiple Entry Tourist Visa Topic (METV)

2,164 posts in this topic

The killer with the metv is the requirements. Most of them such as money in bank and proof of empliyment, while supid , can be satisfied. In time if metv becomes available other than just your home country then it could be a popular usefull visa. All depends if the initial silly requirements are maintained over time

There are two possible explanations as to intended consequences of the introduction of the METV visa and removal of the DETV and TETV.

Possibility A: Reduction of large number of visitors previously using DETV/TETV to stay longterm. If this is the case, requirements will stay in place and we'll see few METV issued.

Possibility B: Attempt to financially qualify long stay visitors. If this is the case, requirements for documentation will be loosened as they prove completely unworkable. Expect to still have to show sufficient funds in a bank or brokerage account.

My guess is on B - you'll see that Portland, Oregon already has this figured out . . . .

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/870290-metv-from-london-embassy/page-7#entry10075516

I just wonder how long it will take other embassies and consulates to come round to this point of view.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 27   Posted (edited)

Sydney seems to still be offering Double Entry Tourist Visas for $90 while Canberra has stopped it & now offers METV for $225, if you look & compare their application forms between the 2 of them.

If you look at their tourist visa page it only mentions a single entry visa and the METV.

See: http://www.thaiconsulatesydney.org/Home/visa

You need to enter your home country to get the info.

Edit: Ooops Entered Australia the first time for above info. Used US and it shows a single and double entry visa with no METV. So perhaps they will do a 2 entry for a non Australian.

I tried AUS, UK, USA and others and the options for tourist visas were only SETV and METV. No doubles.

Edited by elviajero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sydney seems to still be offering Double Entry Tourist Visas for $90 while Canberra has stopped it & now offers METV for $225, if you look & compare their application forms between the 2 of them.

If you look at their tourist visa page it only mentions a single entry visa and the METV.

See: http://www.thaiconsulatesydney.org/Home/visa

You need to enter your home country to get the info.

Edit: Ooops Entered Australia the first time for above info. Used US and it shows a single and double entry visa with no METV. So perhaps they will do a 2 entry for a non Australian.

I tried AUS, UK and USA and others and the options for tourist visas were only SETV and METV. No doubles.

Just checked again and it is the same as you wrote. I might of had a eye error and clicked transit visa which does show the double entry.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 29   Posted (edited)

I think for visitors to Thailand that have the METV visa, they will no longer be more scrutinized by the IO as they passed the embassy requirements to have enough funds to support themselves. Their have been passed reports, specially on the border to Malaysia that even tourists with valid visas have been screened and some even had to pay pocket money to the IO to get admitted into Thailand.

Some how for Digital Nomads or anyone under 50 years, they too can get a METV and can stay up to around 240 Days plus one extension for 30 days, so they can make Thailand their base for up to 270 days and just need to drop over a border every 2 months. I think the employment part can be somehow bypassed by showing more cash in the bank account etc.

Edited by MobileContent
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for visitors to Thailand that have the METV visa, they will no longer be more scrutinized by the IO as they passed the embassy requirements to have enough funds to support themselves. Their have been passed reports, specially on the border to Malaysia that even tourists with valid visas have been screened and some even had to pay pocket money to the IO to get admitted into Thailand.

Some how for Digital Nomads or anyone under 50 years, they too can get a METV and can stay up to around 240 Days plus one extension for 30 days, so they can make Thailand their base for up to 280 days and just need to drop over a border every 2 months. I think the employment part can be somehow bypassed by showing more cash in the bank account etc.

Digital Nomads included as long as they are entering on holiday/vacation for tourism and leisure purpose.

I agree that part of the implementation of this new visa is to better vet the applicants to make sure they have the cash upfront to fund long stays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even funds in a bank is just silly.

Why that? I my country, bank is the place where most people put their money, so it seems rather logical to ask proof that we have enough money "in the bank". That can be on very various ways though: saving, deposit, insurance, stock, investment,... but still "money in the bank".

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The killer with the metv is the requirements. Most of them such as money in bank and proof of empliyment, while supid , can be satisfied. In time if metv becomes available other than just your home country then it could be a popular usefull visa. All depends if the initial silly requirements are maintained over time

There are two possible explanations as to intended consequences of the introduction of the METV visa and removal of the DETV and TETV.

Possibility A: Reduction of large number of visitors previously using DETV/TETV to stay longterm. If this is the case, requirements will stay in place and we'll see few METV issued.

Possibility B: Attempt to financially qualify long stay visitors. If this is the case, requirements for documentation will be loosened as they prove completely unworkable. Expect to still have to show sufficient funds in a bank or brokerage account.

My guess is on B - you'll see that Portland, Oregon already has this figured out . . . .

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/870290-metv-from-london-embassy/page-7#entry10075516

I just wonder how long it will take other embassies and consulates to come round to this point of view.

However from that same now closed topic:

Portland Honorary Consulate still has on its website for applicants applying by mail:

You must be physically in the United States at the time of application.

which when I noted that on a previous METV topic prompted the query: Well how can they tell?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 34   Posted (edited)

Why that? I my country, bank is the place where most people put their money, so it seems rather logical to ask proof that we have enough money "in the bank". That can be on very various ways though: saving, deposit, insurance, stock, investment,... but still "money in the bank".

I agree. When the websites say "in the bank" I think that's generic. It's meant to be the money used to fund the stay so I'm sure that as long as the money is accessible it would be accepted.

Edited by elviajero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 36   Posted (edited)

Appreciate it only came into effect yesterday but does anybody know somebody who's gone in to get one yet or is going to be applying for one soon?

Edited by JB300
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital Nomads included as long as they are entering on holiday/vacation for tourism and leisure purpose.

They're not employed by a resident entity in Thailand, so they're always defined as tourists. See the world tourism organisation's definition, point (9) http://www2.unwto.org/content/testing-collapsed-text

What DN's are defined as is irrelevant. They are restricted under the terms of the visa to the activity of tourism. A holiday/vacation is time taken away from work and no definition of leisure or tourism includes the activity of working regardless of the location of the business/employer.

Someone that lives in a foreign country and operates their foreign based business/employment may well be labelled a tourist, and I'm sure Thailand has no issue with holidaying tourists that keep up with their business/job whilst on holiday; however, someone living permanently in a country is not on holiday and if they are working for any entity they break the terms of the visa and the law that granted it.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

however, someone living permanently in a country is not on holiday and if they are working for any entity they break the terms of the visa and the law that granted it.

If that entity isn't resident in Thailand you can't say for sure if they're breaking any laws or not. Visa terms stating 'employment prohibited' haven't been explicitly defined as including offshore entities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange, the Consulate in Salzburg offers 2 METV. One is valid for 6 Months, the other 1 Year. Both costs 150 Euro. And the requirements looks very lax.

http://www.thaiconsulate-salzburg.at/visabestimmungen.pdf

The one year visa is under the non immigrant visa category It appears to be a non-o visa. Perhaps a mistake or a translation error. It also says that it allows 90 day entries.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital Nomads included as long as they are entering on holiday/vacation for tourism and leisure purpose.

They're not employed by a resident entity in Thailand, so they're always defined as tourists. See the world tourism organisation's definition, point (9) http://www2.unwto.org/content/testing-collapsed-text

What DN's are defined as is irrelevant. They are restricted under the terms of the visa to the activity of tourism. A holiday/vacation is time taken away from work and no definition of leisure or tourism includes the activity of working regardless of the location of the business/employer.

Someone that lives in a foreign country and operates their foreign based business/employment may well be labelled a tourist, and I'm sure Thailand has no issue with holidaying tourists that keep up with their business/job whilst on holiday; however, someone living permanently in a country is not on holiday and if they are working for any entity they break the terms of the visa and the law that granted it.

BUT by the letter of the law, anyone who comes to Thailand for a couple of weeks on the beach and answers a work email is breaking the law and in theory could be deported!

The real problem here is that definitions of "tourist", "employed" and "work" have not kept pace with technology and the increased opportunity for travel.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So where do you stand now on one way tickets here, before ok if had valid visa. but the requirements for METV state different ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So either there is a big difference between Portland and Washington or there is a typo somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital Nomads included as long as they are entering on holiday/vacation for tourism and leisure purpose.

They're not employed by a resident entity in Thailand, so they're always defined as tourists. See the world tourism organisation's definition, point (9) http://www2.unwto.org/content/testing-collapsed-text

What DN's are defined as is irrelevant. They are restricted under the terms of the visa to the activity of tourism. A holiday/vacation is time taken away from work and no definition of leisure or tourism includes the activity of working regardless of the location of the business/employer.

Someone that lives in a foreign country and operates their foreign based business/employment may well be labelled a tourist, and I'm sure Thailand has no issue with holidaying tourists that keep up with their business/job whilst on holiday; however, someone living permanently in a country is not on holiday and if they are working for any entity they break the terms of the visa and the law that granted it.

BUT by the letter of the law, anyone who comes to Thailand for a couple of weeks on the beach and answers a work email is breaking the law and in theory could be deported!

The real problem here is that definitions of "tourist", "employed" and "work" have not kept pace with technology and the increased opportunity for travel.

I'm sure that the Thai authorities and anyone else with a modicum of common sense can see the difference between a holidaying tourist and a tourist living in the country long term.

No, there is no problem with any of those definitions. The problem for, DN's, is that the law hasn't been changed to cater for their ability to work remotely, and until it does they are breaking the terms of a tourist visa issued for the purpose of holiday/vacation, leisure and tourism if they live here and operate their business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting, you have to have 5k in the bank but you don't need to take it with you.

Maybe they assume you'll use your debit card, but there again maybe you won't wink.png

Ridiculous!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 50   Posted (edited)

The problem for, DN's, is that the law hasn't been changed to cater for their ability to work remotely

There wasn't a law against it in the first place, so yes nothing has changed.

Edited by jspill

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.

BANGKOK 31 March 2017 05:37
Sponsors