Does it make a difference during the contact with a immigration officer if we are on a tourist visa vs exempt stamp ?
1,991
views
3
likes
66
all likes
41
replies
1
images
14
users
TLDR : Answer Summary
The discussion centers around whether having a tourist visa or an exempt entry stamp makes a difference when interacting with immigration officers in Thailand. Most contributors agree that the primary factors considered by immigration officers are the individual's travel history and overall compliance with visa regulations. While a tourist visa is seen to typically enhance entry prospects by signaling pre-approval for entry, some commenters argue that immigration officers can still deny entry regardless of this status, based on prior overstays or perceived abuse of the system. Overall, the conversation highlights the nuances in visa regulations and the varied experiences of foreigners entering Thailand.
Alan ********
Yes
Kool *******
Just because you bought a tourist visa from a Thai embassy/consulate does not automatically mean immigration will let you into the country. The fees are not refundable so the embassy doesn't care.
Bart **************
The contact? The conversation might not be much different, assuming your travel history is fine.
Unlike what most of others in this group are telling you though, having a visa makes ALL the difference with regards to your likelihood of getting in. Without a visa the check whether you have not already stayed enough time in Thailand as a tourist comes on the IO. With a visa this check comes on the embassy. The visa means: you have permission to enter the country.
Immigrations officers can still deny entry, like a security officer at an Ed Sheeran concert being able to refuse entry if you show up with a chain saw around your neck. But they're not supposed to refuse entry based on travel history. That check has been done. That's why immigrations officers tell people who approach the end of their reasonable time in the country as a tourist to get a visa: it's so that you know upfront whether you can enter. Why would they advise this if it made no difference and your likelihood of getting refused were the same?
There are some severe misconceptions with the established crew in this group and this unfortunately is one.
Duncanc **********
Yes
Bob *********
No difference, they are looking at total number of days you stayed in Thailand during the year and how many times you left for a day and came right back.
this is checked by the embassy if you have a visa. With an exempt entry the check comes on immigrations. Though overall speaking the odds of entering may indeed look similar, if you focus on passing immigrations only, having a visa makes all the difference.
Reply to
Bart **************
Reply
Man *****
No
Robbie *****
If you have a tourist visa they don’t even look at you, only looking for visa dodgers getting exempt stamps 😛😛
that's because the embassy looked at you. They're indeed not supposed to overrule their colleague's decisions left right and center. They do it, but rarely.
well I would come in 10 days and leave for 10 days. I was working in Singapore and a resident in Singapore. Frequent visitor not abuse. Abuse is staying the whole 60 days then getting an extension for 30 days. Then leave for a day and repeat
well isn't is obvious that if you ask permission upfront from a body legitimized to give you that, and you then get it, that your odds of entering are then not anywhere near the case you enter without pre-arranged permission? The two scenarios could not be more dissimilar.
I did over 2 years including Covid visas. But I would say with all the stamps in my passport I could do. Stay out 3 months, get a tourist visa 60 + 30 and you could do 2 x 60 + 30 both land and that would be max. Go Bangkok airport and they be pulling you up after 180 days.
but that's true right, a visa means that you have been given permission to enter. Let's assume that if you have a ban they'll not give you entry permission (in the form of a visa).
I can categorically say I am speaking from experience here. I personally know someone who obtained a tourist visa for this very reason and was interviewed for 4 hours at suvarnabhumi airport as the IO wasn’t happy with the overstay stamps in his passport. A visa does not guarantee entry is all I’m saying and if you beg to differ that is fine
because usually before you get a visa you need to send different documents and then they need to approve them while the stamp doesn't require any of that.
there's no myth there Jim, the myth is what you are saying. It's a stubborn, strong myth, that unfortunately the entire established crew in this group has come to believe in. Not good.
immigrations is not supposed to refuse people who have already received permission to enter from a qualified body. They can, but they would rarely do that.
the people that issue visas are not connected to immigration and I don't think they can access your immigration history. Having a visa will improve your chances but is no guarantee.
now that's the big misconception here that I want to address.
Of course they are connected. Both are branches of the Thai government, both are involved with entry of foreigners into the country and yes OF COURSE embassies can see your travel history. It is actually the embassies, not immigrations, which is the primary body to determine entry eligibility. And a visa is nothing less than entry permission. De facto immigrations is handling most of the entry requests now, with the majority qualifying for exemption or for visa on arrival, but the default case of entering a foreign country is still that you go to that country's embassy and ask permission (i.e. apply for a visa).
Yes, it can still be overruled. Will it? No. That really isn't supposed to happen. I know excesses have occurred but a visa does more than only "improve" your chances; it means that you have permission to enter.
Reply to
Bart **************
Reply
Jo **********
no difference. There looking at other things like stay history and even the way your dressed.
i’ve heard similar things before in post, but I was wondering if you could clarify what you mean by the way you are dressed? Is it best to dress casual or dress more conservatively or are they looking for something in particular?
yes conservatively long jeans, button dress shirt. if you look classy they will think you have money and leave you alone. Wearing a tank top, shorts etc will get you a problem