This is NOT an official government website. We are an independent resource providing information and assistance to travelers.
What are the application, entry, and extension requirements for the Destination Thailand Visa (DTV)?
Destination Thailand Visa (DTV)Visa application processVisa entry conditionsVisa extension conditionsImmigration rules ThailandLong-stay visa requirementsExpat advice ThailandThai immigration policy
Jan 13, 2026
4 months ago
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERDestination Thailand Visa (DTV): Application vs Entry vs Extension vs Ongoing Conditions
There’s been a lot of confusion about what the DTV actually requires and *when* those requirements apply, so this post lays it out clearly based on official wording and standard visa structure.
The information below is current as of 10 January 2026. As with any visa, rules can change, and if they do, Thai Immigration will formally publish updated guidance.
To be clear, this post is based on official sources, not second-hand stories, assumptions, or “someone heard from someone else” accounts. Personal anecdotes and rumors are not policy.
In my own experience, Thai Immigration officers whether at entry or during reporting have been consistently professional, knowledgeable, and reasonable. I’ve also seen no verified evidence of DTV holders being “hassled” at airports due to the visa itself. When issues occur, they are almost always unrelated to the DTV conditions.
I will post the links to the official sources I have used in the comments.
APPLICATION CONDITIONS (One-time assessment)
These are checked only when you apply for the visa:
• Proof of ฿500,000 THB (or equivalent) in savings
• Proof of eligible activity, e.g.
– Remote work / digital nomad evidence OR
– “Soft power” activity (Muay Thai, cooking course, medical treatment, etc.)
• Passport, photos, location outside Thailand, etc.
Important:
The financial requirement and activity proof are application criteria, not stated as ongoing conditions.
There is no official wording that says the ฿500,000 must be maintained after approval.
ENTRY CONDITIONS (Each time you enter Thailand)
When you enter Thailand on a valid DTV:
• You are granted up to 180 days per entry
• Immigration may (at discretion) ask basic questions about your stay
• There is no published requirement to re-prove:
– ฿500,000 in savings
– Active participation in your original activity
Entry is based on holding a valid visa, not re-qualifying for it. Technically, DTV holders must still comply with standard entry requirements applicable to all travellers; however, in practice it is uncommon for Immigration officers to request additional proof from DTV holders at entry.
EXTENSION CONDITIONS (Inside Thailand)
If you apply for the 180-day extension at Immigration:
• Extension is tied to your current lawful stay, not re-adjudicating the visa
· Extensions are an immigration process, not a visa re-application.
As of 1 Jan 2026, Immigration policy is that if you want to apply for the extension one must have funds in a Thai bank account, however currently DTV holders are not able to open Thai bank accounts.
Save yourself the headache and go for a nice long weekend out of country. There are plenty of cheap flights around SE Asia and some really beautiful places to see.
ONGOING REQUIREMENTS (What you must continue to do)
These *are* real, ongoing obligations:
- Respect stay limits (180 days per entry + optional extension)
- Complete 90-day reporting as required (in person or online, depending on eligibility and current immigration policy)
- Exit Thailand when required
- Do not work for Thai companies or earn Thai-source income without a work permit
- Comply with Thai law and immigration rules
- Be aware of tax residency rules if staying long periods
What is NOT officially stated anywhere:
- No rule requiring you to keep ฿500,000 untouched for 5 years
- No rule requiring continuous soft-power activity beyond the application period
- No requirement to submit ongoing proof of activity after approval
Key takeaway
The DTV works like most long-stay visas worldwide:
You qualify once → the visa is issued → entry and extensions follow visa rules, not application rules.
If Thailand wanted ongoing balance or activity requirements, they would be explicitly written, as they are for other visa types (retirement, student, etc.). They are not.
If anyone has official Thai government wording or document(s) that states otherwise (not agent opinions or assumptions), feel free to share it ill be happy to read it.
There’s been a lot of confusion about what the DTV actually requires and *when* those requirements apply, so this post lays it out clearly based on official wording and standard visa structure.
The information below is current as of 10 January 2026. As with any visa, rules can change, and if they do, Thai Immigration will formally publish updated guidance.
To be clear, this post is based on official sources, not second-hand stories, assumptions, or “someone heard from someone else” accounts. Personal anecdotes and rumors are not policy.
In my own experience, Thai Immigration officers whether at entry or during reporting have been consistently professional, knowledgeable, and reasonable. I’ve also seen no verified evidence of DTV holders being “hassled” at airports due to the visa itself. When issues occur, they are almost always unrelated to the DTV conditions.
I will post the links to the official sources I have used in the comments.
APPLICATION CONDITIONS (One-time assessment)
These are checked only when you apply for the visa:
• Proof of ฿500,000 THB (or equivalent) in savings
• Proof of eligible activity, e.g.
– Remote work / digital nomad evidence OR
– “Soft power” activity (Muay Thai, cooking course, medical treatment, etc.)
• Passport, photos, location outside Thailand, etc.
Important:
The financial requirement and activity proof are application criteria, not stated as ongoing conditions.
There is no official wording that says the ฿500,000 must be maintained after approval.
ENTRY CONDITIONS (Each time you enter Thailand)
When you enter Thailand on a valid DTV:
• You are granted up to 180 days per entry
• Immigration may (at discretion) ask basic questions about your stay
• There is no published requirement to re-prove:
– ฿500,000 in savings
– Active participation in your original activity
Entry is based on holding a valid visa, not re-qualifying for it. Technically, DTV holders must still comply with standard entry requirements applicable to all travellers; however, in practice it is uncommon for Immigration officers to request additional proof from DTV holders at entry.
EXTENSION CONDITIONS (Inside Thailand)
If you apply for the 180-day extension at Immigration:
• Extension is tied to your current lawful stay, not re-adjudicating the visa
· Extensions are an immigration process, not a visa re-application.
As of 1 Jan 2026, Immigration policy is that if you want to apply for the extension one must have funds in a Thai bank account, however currently DTV holders are not able to open Thai bank accounts.
Save yourself the headache and go for a nice long weekend out of country. There are plenty of cheap flights around SE Asia and some really beautiful places to see.
ONGOING REQUIREMENTS (What you must continue to do)
These *are* real, ongoing obligations:
- Respect stay limits (180 days per entry + optional extension)
- Complete 90-day reporting as required (in person or online, depending on eligibility and current immigration policy)
- Exit Thailand when required
- Do not work for Thai companies or earn Thai-source income without a work permit
- Comply with Thai law and immigration rules
- Be aware of tax residency rules if staying long periods
What is NOT officially stated anywhere:
- No rule requiring you to keep ฿500,000 untouched for 5 years
- No rule requiring continuous soft-power activity beyond the application period
- No requirement to submit ongoing proof of activity after approval
Key takeaway
The DTV works like most long-stay visas worldwide:
You qualify once → the visa is issued → entry and extensions follow visa rules, not application rules.
If Thailand wanted ongoing balance or activity requirements, they would be explicitly written, as they are for other visa types (retirement, student, etc.). They are not.
If anyone has official Thai government wording or document(s) that states otherwise (not agent opinions or assumptions), feel free to share it ill be happy to read it.
TLDR : Answer Summary
The post clarifies the requirements for the Destination Thailand Visa (DTV), including application conditions (e.g., proof of funds and eligible activity), entry conditions (180 days per entry), and extension conditions (applying inside Thailand). Ongoing requirements are also outlined, emphasizing that there are no ongoing proof requirements for funds or activity after initial approval. It stresses the importance of up-to-date official sources and provides insights into the practical enforcement of these visa rules.
DTV VISA RESOURCES / SERVICES
- Take the basic DTV Qualification Test to see if you're eligible for the Destination Thailand Visa (DTV).
- For immediate assistance, contact Thai Visa Centre directly via LINE at @ThaiVisaCentre or Email them.
- Explore recent discussions by using the DTV Visa tag in the search box at the top of the page.
- Join the Thai Visa Advice Facebook Group to ask your questions, and get advice from others.
Pelle Eriksson★★★★★
Absolutely Bangkok's best service I highly...recently on Facebook
Luca G.★★★★★
I used this agency for my DTV Visa...recently on Google
Trusted DTV Visa Agent
OVER 100,000 EXPATS SERVED
#1 VISA AGENT IN THAILAND
Ben *******
John *****
Some long discussions going on in here. In a way, they're missing the point: Thai law should be viewed as case law more so than statute law. I.e. how is it enforced in practice? (And how much more likely are you to die in a road traffic accident or something like that?)
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERIf there were real cases of people being fined, denied entry, or deported solely for offshore remote work while holding a valid DTV, there would be verifiable examples by now. There aren’t.
Every confirmed enforcement case I’ve seen involves something else: working for Thai companies, servicing Thai clients, operating a business in Thailand, or visa abuse.
Until someone can point to an actual documented case showing otherwise, claims that DTV holders have “issues” from lawful offshore work remain unproven.
Every confirmed enforcement case I’ve seen involves something else: working for Thai companies, servicing Thai clients, operating a business in Thailand, or visa abuse.
Until someone can point to an actual documented case showing otherwise, claims that DTV holders have “issues” from lawful offshore work remain unproven.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
This is not a specific DTV issue, Thai labour law says foreigners can not work unless stated different, but in real life it is not a problem, as long as you don't have an enemy in your neighbourhood who is informing authorities.Even Thai embassies will tell on visa exemption you can do remote work.
These rules are not actively enforced.
But that does not change the fact that only DTV workcation and LTR are also officially allowed to do remote work.
John *****
@Luit ****************
can you give one example where someone has been reprimanded for remote work on visa exempt where no Thai clients or employers were involved?Luit *****************
@John ****
I just tell what the rules are, nobody has to report with me when they are reprimanded for remote work on visa exempt, so I cannot give you examples.It just is not allowed, but when you ask Thai embassy in your country, most likely the will say it will not actively be enforced, and for a short time tolerated.
But officially is is prohibited.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERNo it's not
@Lu**
stop making things up. You can not prove a single point you have tried to make. I have picked apart every single bit of nonsense you have stated as fact. Your final argument was to "Google it" and even Google proved you wrong 🤣Luit *****************
@Chris *********
I guess you asked Google the wrong question then, I will provide the link so that you don't have to type in the question, which seems too difficult for you.************************************************************************************************************
The answer is telling exactly what I did say before.
Even Google proves that you are completely wrong!!
John *****
Luit van der Linde all I can see is an AI overview. AI is notorious for its hallucinations and lack of accuracy......
If a law is never enforced then it is not really a law in any case. The UK has hundreds of old unenforced laws for example.
If a law is never enforced then it is not really a law in any case. The UK has hundreds of old unenforced laws for example.
Luit *****************
@John ****
That a law is not really a law if it is normally not enforced is your opinion, the discussion was about the law, not about enforcement.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
since when has this been about visa exempt? We are talking about the DTV 🤣Luit *****************
@Chris *********
I answer @John ****
and he is talking about visa exempt.If you really have to get involved, then read what it's about first or stay out of it, nobody asked you anything
John *****
@Luit ****************
well I'm saying it's not going to be a problem on either DTV or visa exempt. Unless I see real life cases that show otherwise....Luit *****************
@John ****
I agree with you, there will be no problems with remote working as long as you keep low profile.John *****
@Luit ****************
how about all the YouTubers who don't seem to be low profile at all? (Although, personally, I wouldn't want to take the risk of doing some of the more directlyThailand related content)Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERUntil someone can point to a written statute, visa condition, or documented enforcement case that actually prohibits offshore remote work for DTV Soft Power holders, this remains opinion, not law.
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
John *****
Chris Mitchell I pretty much agree with you. I think some people in here are projecting their farang mindset onto how they imagine things to work in Thailand. I'm hoping to see more practical advice in here. The term visa abuse kind of rubs me the wrong way - seems like an overly dramatic term.
Reply to
John *****
Reply
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThat’s a fair point, and I don’t actually disagree with you on enforcement reality.
Thai immigration and labour law are absolutely enforced pragmatically and unevenly, and risk in practice is a separate discussion from what is written in statute or policy.
My point here hasn’t been “nothing can ever be enforced” or “there’s zero risk.” It’s about what the written obligations and prohibitions actually are, because that’s what people keep misstating as hard rules.
Enforcement discretion ≠ written visa conditions.
Both can exist at the same time, and confusing the two is where a lot of the misinformation comes from.
So yes, people should always be sensible about risk. But that’s a different question from whether the DTV (or Thai law generally) contains explicit, ongoing prohibitions that simply aren’t written anywhere.
Thai immigration and labour law are absolutely enforced pragmatically and unevenly, and risk in practice is a separate discussion from what is written in statute or policy.
My point here hasn’t been “nothing can ever be enforced” or “there’s zero risk.” It’s about what the written obligations and prohibitions actually are, because that’s what people keep misstating as hard rules.
Enforcement discretion ≠ written visa conditions.
Both can exist at the same time, and confusing the two is where a lot of the misinformation comes from.
So yes, people should always be sensible about risk. But that’s a different question from whether the DTV (or Thai law generally) contains explicit, ongoing prohibitions that simply aren’t written anywhere.
John *****
@Chris *********
I'm pointing out that instead of discussing whether online work for a foreign entity can be done on soft power or a regular multi entry tourist visa or whatever, we really need to look for examples where someone has gotten in hot water over doing these things and the outcome. (Or any other activity)Reply to
John *****
Reply
Bobbi ****************
I'm following this. Thank you.
Kool *******
You are not required to have your bt500,000 in a Thai bank account if you apply for the extension. It has to be in the same foreign bank you originally used, and updated.
Luit *****************
@Kool ******
Immigration office told me it does not need to be the same account, any direct accessible account will do.Litterally "For extending DTV VISA, you need to hold 500K for 1 month before applying for the "extended VISA" and it does not matter which account you want to prove to us."
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTEREssentially it just shows the goal posts being moved around as the extensions have always been a grey area. I've read multiple accounts of people seeking the extension, doing everything right etc only to be denied for no reason. Now there is a reason, albeit a silly one that doesn't make sense
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThis is a recent development at immigration and has been brought to light by a person seeking an extension. If it is entirely true, immigration will announce the details mate. And if it is true it could possibly be setting the stage for DTV holders to be able to open Thai bank accounts which would be nice
Kool *******
@Chris *********
nope. After March 31st, and seeing how many dtv holders actually file Thai income taxes for last year, with have a big determination on whether dtv holders can get Thai bank accounts, under the thinking that if they don't file Thai income taxes they don't need a Thai bank account. Wait and see.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERSpot on mate totally agree. And legally we should be filling a tax return as part of our ongoing requirements if we meet the criteria (ie in country +180 days in the year).
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
In fact 180 days is enough to become tax resident.Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Trevor *******
Good job - thanks
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERNo worries at all mate. Just trying to help people understand the difference between application, entry and ongoing requirements for the DTV as there seems to be a lot of misinformation being spread online. Please feel free to share it far and wide
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Anonymous ******************
You’re turning something unwritten into a rule (“there’s no requirement for continuous activity”), while admitting that the written right to extend a DTV is not always followed by immigration, since by your own admission, a bank account is now required and DTV holders cannot obtain one.
In Thailand, rules, rights and duties are not always applied consistently, and predicting the future based on the absence of a clear rule is even more risky.
In Thailand, rules, rights and duties are not always applied consistently, and predicting the future based on the absence of a clear rule is even more risky.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThat’s a fair point, and I agree with part of what you’re saying. Thailand does exercise discretion, and practice is not always uniform.
The distinction I’m making isn’t “this will never be questioned,” but rather what is a written obligation vs what is discretionary practice.
Saying “there is no requirement for continuous activity” isn’t inventing a rule, it’s acknowledging the absence of a written, ongoing condition in DTV documentation. Where Thailand intends continuous compliance (student enrolment, retirement funds, etc.), it is explicitly stated.
On extensions: you’re right, Immigration practice can evolve, and requirements like Thai bank accounts can appear even where they are not clearly described in advance. That’s exactly why I’ve said extensions are an immigration process, not a re-assessment of visa eligibility, and why many DTV holders choose exit/re-entry instead.
So my point isn’t that outcomes are guaranteed it’s that obligations must be written to exist, and discretionary enforcement doesn’t retroactively turn application criteria into visa conditions.
Rules can change, practice can vary, and discretion exists but until something is formally published, it remains practice, not policy.
The distinction I’m making isn’t “this will never be questioned,” but rather what is a written obligation vs what is discretionary practice.
Saying “there is no requirement for continuous activity” isn’t inventing a rule, it’s acknowledging the absence of a written, ongoing condition in DTV documentation. Where Thailand intends continuous compliance (student enrolment, retirement funds, etc.), it is explicitly stated.
On extensions: you’re right, Immigration practice can evolve, and requirements like Thai bank accounts can appear even where they are not clearly described in advance. That’s exactly why I’ve said extensions are an immigration process, not a re-assessment of visa eligibility, and why many DTV holders choose exit/re-entry instead.
So my point isn’t that outcomes are guaranteed it’s that obligations must be written to exist, and discretionary enforcement doesn’t retroactively turn application criteria into visa conditions.
Rules can change, practice can vary, and discretion exists but until something is formally published, it remains practice, not policy.
Anonymous ******************
@Chris *********
Just to add a bit to the original content of your message and not to start a new debate I saw that post this morning. As I mentioned, consistency isn't the rule in here unfortunately. Feel free to contact that person (I don’t know him).Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThe IO is correct in this situation mate. That is legally one of the entry conditions for all tourists coming to Thailand. It's just usually unlikely to be asked to show an outbound ticket
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Written is that your purpose of stay should match the purpose of stay of the visa you have, and that is clearly a visa requirement, not just discretionary practice as you suggest.And it is indeed not the same as continuous activity, but it means that on moment of entering the kingdom, you should have any kind of proof you are coming for a soft power activity.
What proof is needed and how much activity is needed is at the discretion of the IO.
Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Ogi ***************
So, what is new?
Or what changed from 2025?
Or what changed from 2025?
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThe "reported" possibly needing funds in a Thai bank account for extensions is new, but nothing else has changed so far
Ben *****
@Chris *********
I just entered again, wasn't asked for anything. I am on Remote Work DTV and came in with Visa printed and TM30 printed. No issues, no questions. I agree there has been a lot of misinformation and my guess is they are probably making sure people entering on soft power visas aren't trying to look for work after their intended course is over, thus, want to make sure they still have sufficient funds to accommodate their stay.
Reply to
Ben *****
Reply
Luke *******
very helpful!
although tomorrow someone new will post asking about these same questions anyway hahaha
great job though!
although tomorrow someone new will post asking about these same questions anyway hahaha
great job though!
John **********
As I mentioned on your other post the critical information you omit is that applying via the soft power route doesn't provide permission to work remotely from Thailand. Oh and that link still doesn't work
Khun ******
He told the officer he plans to work remotely and got approved via soft power. No wonder John Stanners has left the chat 😆
Luit *****************
@Khun *****
Why should plans after the first year be a reason for not approving the visa for the first year? He might use savings to continue training or return to Taiwan, both not a reason to reject a visa.Khun ******
@Luit ****************
You've got it now bud. A DTV is a DTV and there's not three separate ones. 👍Luit *****************
@Khun *****
That just is not true, there are 3 separate ones with different conditions and different purposes of stay, just look the official documents I posted here before.There are also a lot of different non-o visa, and when you applied for one of them, you don't get the conditions of the other, same with DTV subtypes.
Khun ******
@Luit ****************
The DTV is a tourist visa and not comparable to Non Os which clearly state the category on the visa. Now you might understand why they give a 5 year visa for a 6 month course. They know your plans change and you're free to do something else. Just like me now my course has finished. Perfectly legal.Reply to
Khun ******
Reply
Luit *****************
@Khun *****
Not what? I only see questions, not any statement from embassy.Maybe you posted wrong picture SeAnny boy?
Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Khun ******
Stop trolling now Luity even John Stanners has admitted defeat.
Luit *****************
Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Luit *****************
@Khun *****
So what? Doing anything wrong in the past does not mean the application is always denied, look at all the people with overstay that get approved.Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER"When you enter with a different purpose of stay, that simply is illegal."
@Lu**
in a previous commentLuit *****************
@Chris *********
"I plan to focus on training" sounds to me as a legitimate purpose of stay for a soft power DTV.Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Khun ******
@John *********
Do you think he should have been rejected for planning to work on a "soft power" DTV? And admitting to doing so previously without any visa.*************************************************************************************************************
**********
*****
*****
*****
9/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6vLuit *****************
@Khun *****
I do not read he wants to work in Thailand during the training, he only says he will "work on his skills for a next carreer", that means training, not working.You should work on your skills to read.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERIf you ask Luit he should be in the Muay Thai gym
****
and nothing else 😂Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Where did I say that, please don't accuse me of things I never said@Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERSection 4(7) does NOT say what you're claiming
It does not say “all foreigners are banned from all remote work unless a visa says otherwise.”
It defines work for permit purposes, not visa compliance, and it does not mention:
- offshore employers
- foreign clients
- remote digital work
- DTV holders
- enforcement outcomes for such activity
@Jo**
.It does not say “all foreigners are banned from all remote work unless a visa says otherwise.”
It defines work for permit purposes, not visa compliance, and it does not mention:
- offshore employers
- foreign clients
- remote digital work
- DTV holders
- enforcement outcomes for such activity
John **********
@Chris *********
don't be obtuse. It says all foreigners need a permit to work, that covers all types of work, including remote. Section 4.7 provides the ability for the government to provide an exception. Look at the definition of work in Section 5 and explain to me how this doesn't cover all aspects of work, regardless of visa, who the work is carried out for, remote digital, or whatever. It's not a definition for permit purposes, it's a legal definition of what constitutes work. I don't know what else I need to show you so I probably won't respond furtherChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThe Working of Aliens Act defines “work” for work-permit enforcement inside Thailand; it does not create visa-specific prohibitions or DTV conditions, and it says nothing about offshore remote work for foreign employers.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
, Section 5 defines “work” for work-permit enforcement, not visa compliance, and nothing in the Act states that offshore employment for foreign entities—without Thai clients, income, or economic activity in Thailand—constitutes prohibited work for DTV holders; absent a DTV condition, immigration regulation, or enforcement case saying otherwise, you’re asserting an implication, not citing a prohibition.John **********
@Chris *********
there's none so blind as those that cannot seeChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
When a legal argument ends with a proverb instead of a citation, the law is no longer doing the work.Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Khun ******
Have you been on the sherry Luit?
Luit *****************
@Khun *****
no, but you obviously had something that harms your brains.Khun ******
@Luit ****************
Yes reading your posts harms my brain. Luckily no one is taking any notice of yours and Johns opinions about the DTV.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Khun Sean his argument evolved from absolute prohibition, to discretionary risk, to practical tolerance with theoretical illegality, without ever grounding the claim in DTV-specific written law.
That evolution happened because the original claim couldn’t be sustained once challenged on written conditions and real-world cases.
That evolution happened because the original claim couldn’t be sustained once challenged on written conditions and real-world cases.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Not allowed to be working as a foreigner has nothing to do with DTV so why should it be in law about DTV.You are good in using all kind of statements with a lot of words, but completely without any meaning or sense.
If you are not already in politics, you should start a carreer there.
For politics it is also not a requirement you can read.
You talk and talk and talk, but in the meantime you cannot show why it should be allowed to work with a DTV softpower visa.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThis discussion has ALWAYS been about the DTV 😂
I’m not claiming DTV “authorises” work.
I’m pointing out that there is no written DTV condition prohibiting offshore remote work, no requirement to continuously match application activity, and no verified enforcement cases against DTV holders for foreign-sourced work with no Thai nexus.
If there’s a statute, regulation, or official notice that explicitly prohibits that activity for DTV holders, I’m happy to read it.
Until then, you can keep changing your argument and I'll be happy to pick it apart 😂
I’m not claiming DTV “authorises” work.
I’m pointing out that there is no written DTV condition prohibiting offshore remote work, no requirement to continuously match application activity, and no verified enforcement cases against DTV holders for foreign-sourced work with no Thai nexus.
If there’s a statute, regulation, or official notice that explicitly prohibits that activity for DTV holders, I’m happy to read it.
Until then, you can keep changing your argument and I'll be happy to pick it apart 😂
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Why should there be a statute that explicitly prohibits work for DTV holders when it is prohibited for every foreigner unless explicitly stated it is allowed?Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
it's very simple mate. Law works by stated prohibitions and conditions, not assumptions. And none exist for offshore remote work by DTV holders.John **********
@Chris *********
the point you continually ignore is that work is defined elsewhere in Thai law. That's why you don't see "remote work forbidden" for ANY visa unless your visa gives specific permission to do soChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERBack it up with a reference
@Jo**
. Because If “work” elsewhere in Thai law prohibits offshore remote work for DTV holders, please cite the exact statute, section, or enforcement case. Assertions without references don’t establish legal prohibition.John **********
@Chris *********
it bans ALL work foreigners unless you have specific permission to do so. Nothing specifically bans remote work because it is already banned under the definition of work. There are only 2 visa options that give permission for foreigners to work remotely, the DTV Workation option and the LTR Work From Thailand Professional option. Look at Section 4 Point 7 in the link below in particular
***************************************************************************************
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
That Act governs work-permit requirements for Thai-nexus employment; it does not cite, prohibit, or show enforcement against offshore remote work for foreign employers, and no DTV-specific statute or case law supports your claim.Luit *****************
@Chris *********
What makes you think remote work should be explicitly stated, the definition of work fully covers it.When somewhere is stated you should not drink alcoholic drinks, there is no reason to mention you should not drink gin.
The definition of work in Thai law fully covers remote work.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
please show me the law you're talking about.Luit *****************
@Chris *********
I will try to make this understandable, even for you.Do you think there is an additional sign necessary to prohibit a motorcycle for driving on this road?
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
A road sign is the explicit prohibition. I’m asking you to show me the legal equivalent for DTV holders, and you still haven’t.Luit *****************
@Chris *********
I think @John *********
already gave you the link.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERLuit *****************
@Chris *********
familiar with it you might be, but understanding clearly not.The description of work does not make any exeption for remote work, or working for foreign companies, or working with your hands, or working with your head, or working at factories, or working at home, or...
So remote work for a non Thai company just is work for this law.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
A definition is not a prohibition. You still haven’t cited a statute, immigration regulation, DTV condition, or enforcement case that applies it to offshore remote work by DTV holders.Luit *****************
@Chris *********
ALL WORK is prohibited for foreigners without permission.That is what the law is telling.
That includes remote work for offshore companies.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERAsserting “ALL work is prohibited” still isn’t a citation. Show the statute or immigration condition that applies the Working of Aliens Act to offshore, foreign-sourced remote work by DTV holders or acknowledge you’re arguing interpretation, not law.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
You get all information and links by now, but just don't have the ability to understand or you are just trolling here.Why should the Working of Aliens Act not cover offshore, foreign-sourced remote work by DTV holders?
I don't see it exempted, when you do, just show .
Ask a Thai lawyer, maybe he is able to let you understand this. Or ask Google if remote working in Thailand is allowed and you will get the conditions.
I stop spending my time on you, it is useless.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
you had me curious as to what Google would say 🤣Luit *****************
@Chris *********
You rephrased the question to get the answer you like.An answer with " some users say" is not an answer based on facts.
You should only ask if remote work is allowed in Thailand to get a better answer about conditions for remote work.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERI don't think Google is the friend you think it is
@Lu**
🤣 but again, Google isn't law.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERI didn’t rephrase anything to prove legality. I followed your suggestion to “ask Google.”
Google isn’t law, and neither is your interpretation. The statute, regulation, DTV condition, or enforcement case still hasn’t been cited.
Google isn’t law, and neither is your interpretation. The statute, regulation, DTV condition, or enforcement case still hasn’t been cited.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
If the law were as clear as you claim, citing it would be trivial. Telling someone to “ask Google” isn’t a legal reference.John **********
@Chris *********
you're obviously not familiar enough or simply refuse to accept what is Thai lawChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
, saying “that’s Thai law” isn’t an argument. If you can’t quote a specific section that actually states the prohibition you’re claiming, then you’re asserting belief, not citing law. I am very familiar with law, although I will concede my experience doesn't extend to Thailand. I have spent far too many hours in court rooms arguing on behalf of governments in multi-billion dollar contract negotiations than I care for. I know how to read and interpret law, and the Act you are referring to does not state what you think it does.
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Jef ********
Oh so you mean it’s an application route ?
The exact same we are saying about the DTV ?????????
We are all saying you you don’t need a DTV to work remotely.:..
Anyone on any visa can work remotely.
However working remotely is an application route for DTV.
So under your theory now that closely followes our evidence.
A person that applies under DTV soft power -
Can in fact ,
Work remotely, train Muay Thai, learn Thai cooking , get a medical plan: get married and retire.
That’s the point we are saying 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
There is no DTV 1-3 what every you were drinking or smoking when you thought about that please give it up 🙏🏽
The exact same we are saying about the DTV ?????????
We are all saying you you don’t need a DTV to work remotely.:..
Anyone on any visa can work remotely.
However working remotely is an application route for DTV.
So under your theory now that closely followes our evidence.
A person that applies under DTV soft power -
Can in fact ,
Work remotely, train Muay Thai, learn Thai cooking , get a medical plan: get married and retire.
That’s the point we are saying 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
There is no DTV 1-3 what every you were drinking or smoking when you thought about that please give it up 🙏🏽
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
What should I think from a guy who cannot even read "DTV1", "DTV2" and "DTV3" in an official MFA document.I understand for such a person it is impossible to understand that working in Thailand is not allowed for foreigners, unless you get a permit for it.
The discription of work includes also remote work, not a single hint it should not be considered work.
Only for the visa for which is remote working a requirement there is made an exeption.
And for DTV this means yyhat for the DTV workcation is made an exception in this law.
For the other 2 DTV types there is no exception because remote work is not a requirement.
And because you obviously were not able to read the document, here again a link.
***********************************************************************
Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Arto ****************
@John *********
any tourist visa holder can work remotely from within Thailand, just as with the DTV. No visa can stop you from working, people have always remotely worked while traveling. You're not allowed to work for a Thai company registered in Thailand, or physically working for anyone in Thailand.John **********
@Arto ***************
and yet people have been deported for doing exactly thatChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERthis supports the point that Thai law does not treat all activity that could be called “work” as illegal by default.
Thailand explicitly allows certain business and ad-hoc work activities even on visa exemption, which contradicts the claim that any remote work is unlawful unless a visa expressly authorises it.
That doesn’t mean all remote work is risk-free, but it does confirm the legal distinction we’ve been discussing: Thai labour law targets local economic activity, not offshore employment with no Thai nexus.
Thailand explicitly allows certain business and ad-hoc work activities even on visa exemption, which contradicts the claim that any remote work is unlawful unless a visa expressly authorises it.
That doesn’t mean all remote work is risk-free, but it does confirm the legal distinction we’ve been discussing: Thai labour law targets local economic activity, not offshore employment with no Thai nexus.
John **********
@Chris *********
what on earth does local ad hoc work do with remote work? The ad hoc work is very specific and still has to be notified.Jef ********
Correct mate.
It’s pretty common thing around the word to do adhoc work or business on standard exempt/ basic visa’s.
People get hung up on the word “tourist”
It’s pretty common thing around the word to do adhoc work or business on standard exempt/ basic visa’s.
People get hung up on the word “tourist”
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
your statement about adhoc work and urgent work on visa exemption just proves that an exception has to be made.Regular work or remote work is not covered under this exception.
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
That it is common around the world to work remotely does not make it legal, I suggest you consult a Thai lawyer about this and he will explain you that @John *********
is right.Jef ********
You pair have never fronted with proof only arm chair advice…..
My self , Arto , Chris , Khon Sean have all stated and shown numerous amounts of facts.
I’m not going to waste my energy any more on you.
If you don’t get it that’s on you. 🙏🏽
My self , Arto , Chris , Khon Sean have all stated and shown numerous amounts of facts.
I’m not going to waste my energy any more on you.
If you don’t get it that’s on you. 🙏🏽
Jef ********
Luit , I’m going to leave this here …. You and John are a pair of clowns. 🤡
Arto ****************
@John *********
post scriptum, even the workcation DTV does not let you work in Thailand for a Thai company open business in Thailand service customers in Thailand etcArto ****************
@John *********
tell me who's been deported for remotely working to a foreign company doing business outside of Thailand on their holiday? People have been deported for abusing the stamp system with excessive border runs, paying for fabricated visas, fraudulent applications, working within Thailand physically while on a tourist visa, opening a business in Thailand without a permit, servicing customers in Thailand, remotely working for a Thailand based company, online business opportunities in Thailand servicing customers in Thailand, etc. If I'm working for a European company, checking my email and making some calls and having some meetings, running drop shipping business from China to Europe and working on it or letting it generate income, daytrading while on holiday etc. are all fine, obviously.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERDo you have any proof of that claim?
John **********
@Chris *********
this article may help you understand although it is specific to the LTR visa**************************************************************************************************
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
thanks for linking the memo, I’ve read that.That document is explicitly LTR-specific, as it states multiple times. It analyses remote work within the BOI / LTR framework, including why the LTR visa was created to provide certainty and work-permit exemptions for high-value foreign professionals.
It does not state that remote work for a foreign employer is illegal on other visas, nor does it say that visas like the DTV Soft Power prohibit such activity.
In fact, the memo repeatedly distinguishes:
Immigration status (visa class), from
Labour / work-permit law, which focuses on who you work for, where the business is located, and who the clients are.
The enforcement examples cited in Thailand relate to: • working for Thai companies
• servicing Thai clients
• operating businesses in Thailand
• physical or economic activity inside Thailand
None of which applies to offshore employment paid abroad with no Thai nexus.
So this memo supports the well-established distinction we’ve been discussing, it doesn’t contradict it.
If you have a Thai statute, Immigration regulation, or MFA publication that explicitly states foreign remote work is prohibited unless the visa expressly authorises it, I’m happy to read that.
Absent that, this memo doesn’t establish what you’re claiming.
John **********
@Chris *********
it pre dates the DTV so of course doesn't mention it. I don't know how many times I have to say this but work is work in Thai law, that includes remotely working from Thailand.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
this is exactly where we keep talking past each other.Yes — Thai law uses a broad definition of “work.”
No one is disputing that.
What you have not shown is the next, required step:
A Thai statute, regulation, or MFA / Immigration publication that says
“any form of work, including offshore remote work, is prohibited unless the visa explicitly authorises it.”
That rule exists for:
working for Thai companies
servicing Thai clients
operating a business in Thailand
physical or economic activity inside Thailand
It is not written anywhere that simply performing offshore employment for a foreign employer, paid abroad, with no Thai nexus, is unlawful by default on all visas unless carved out.
The LTR visa does not “legalise” remote work that was otherwise illegal, it provides certainty and exemptions (work permit, BOI framework). That is a policy choice, not evidence of a blanket prohibition elsewhere.
So we’re back to the same point:
You’re asserting a rule
But the rule itself is not written
If you can point to a specific legal provision that states foreign remote work is illegal unless expressly authorised by visa class, I’ll happily reconsider.
Absent that, we’re discussing interpretation and risk tolerance, not black-letter law.
Luit *****************
@Arto ***************
The fact that you are working while in Thailand does not make it legal, just ask a specialized Thai lawyer?Why do you think that before DTV so many people set up a company to get a NON-B visa to work remotely?
Jef ********
I think Fossil has left the chat 💬….. 😹🤣😹
Reply to
Jef ********
Reply
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER100% correct mate
John **********
@Chris *********
Google itChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTEROk mate there's the answer. Sorry but you're completely wrong and it just seems like you're arguing for the sake of it now. Until you can provide actual proof to support your claims, I'll just wish you well and leave it at that mate
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Jef ********
Coming from the guy who doesn’t even have a DTV 😂🤣 we have been over this before old boy you are wrong
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERI'll give you a scenario and you tell me what is the lawful way to proceed.
My income is earned in Australia, paid into an Australian account but I applied for and received the DTV soft power Muay Thai. Should I have ceased my source of income to come to Thailand or should I just comply with Thai tax law and do a tax return each year?
My income is earned in Australia, paid into an Australian account but I applied for and received the DTV soft power Muay Thai. Should I have ceased my source of income to come to Thailand or should I just comply with Thai tax law and do a tax return each year?
John **********
@Chris *********
that depends on whether you want to legally work remotely from Thailand or illegally work remotely from Thailand. Thai tax law regarding overseas income brought into Thailand has nothing to do with how you earned that income.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERJohn, you’re still collapsing three separate legal regimes into one, which is where the confusion is coming from.
Visa law
My DTV (soft power) governs my right to stay in Thailand. It does not regulate foreign employment, nor does it contain a condition requiring me to cease overseas employment after approval.
Work permit law
Thai work permit law regulates participation in the Thai labour market: Thai employers, Thai clients, Thai-source income, or activities performed for Thai entities.
It does not contain a written prohibition on earning income from a foreign employer, paid offshore, with no Thai market involvement.
If it did, millions of tourists, retirees, Elite holders, and long-stay residents answering emails or managing overseas businesses would be committing an offence which is clearly not how the law is applied or enforced.
Tax law
Thai tax law governs whether foreign income is reportable or taxable based on residency and remittance.
That is a Revenue Department issue, not an immigration or work-permit issue.
So to answer my own question plainly:
I do not need to cease my Australian income to lawfully remain in Thailand. My obligation is tax compliance if I am tax-resident and remit assessable income.
If you believe otherwise, please point to a specific Thai statute, regulation, or official Immigration / MFA publication that states foreign remote work is illegal unless explicitly authorised by the visa.
Absent that, this is opinion, not written law.
Visa law
My DTV (soft power) governs my right to stay in Thailand. It does not regulate foreign employment, nor does it contain a condition requiring me to cease overseas employment after approval.
Work permit law
Thai work permit law regulates participation in the Thai labour market: Thai employers, Thai clients, Thai-source income, or activities performed for Thai entities.
It does not contain a written prohibition on earning income from a foreign employer, paid offshore, with no Thai market involvement.
If it did, millions of tourists, retirees, Elite holders, and long-stay residents answering emails or managing overseas businesses would be committing an offence which is clearly not how the law is applied or enforced.
Tax law
Thai tax law governs whether foreign income is reportable or taxable based on residency and remittance.
That is a Revenue Department issue, not an immigration or work-permit issue.
So to answer my own question plainly:
I do not need to cease my Australian income to lawfully remain in Thailand. My obligation is tax compliance if I am tax-resident and remit assessable income.
If you believe otherwise, please point to a specific Thai statute, regulation, or official Immigration / MFA publication that states foreign remote work is illegal unless explicitly authorised by the visa.
Absent that, this is opinion, not written law.
John **********
@Chris *********
the definition of what constitutes work is very clearly written in Thai law, it doesn't differentiate between local and remote work. Thai law also makes it clear one can't work without permission to do so. Permission to do so comes via a work permit for work inside Thailand and via a visa for work outside Thailand. Only 2 visa options provide permission to work remotely from Thailand that I am aware of, the LTR Work From Thailand Professional and the DTV Workation.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
this is the exact point where your argument stops being supported by written law.There is no Thai visa that grants “permission to work outside Thailand.”
That concept does not exist in statute, regulation, or official MFA/Immigration wording.
Visas regulate entry and stay.
Work permits regulate work in Thailand.
LTR and DTV Workcation do not contain language that “permits remote work” , they simply make clear that the holder is not engaging in Thai employment. They do not create exclusivity, and they do not imply that all other visa holders are therefore working illegally if they earn foreign income.
If “permission to work remotely” truly existed as a legal construct, there would be: • a statutory definition, and
• explicit prohibitions on all other visas.
Neither exists.
So once again, the request is simple:
Please link the specific Thai statute, regulation, or official MFA/Immigration document that states foreign remote work is illegal unless explicitly authorised by the visa.
Absent that, this remains interpretation, not written law.
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Brian *********
@Chris *********
that “no employment” refers to the visa not being a work permit, or entitling you to work for Thai companies or clients.Many countries visas contain that same line to distinguish between work visa.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERYep I just clarified that point mate, thank you for pointing that out
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
Todd *********
@John *********
Does it need to provide permission? It doesn't explicitly state that you cannot. And inevitably life changes over 5 years. And we have not seen a case of anyone needing to have one DTV rescinded and another iDTV issued for 'remote work'. Would be pointless waste of time for all concerned.John **********
@Todd ********
yes of course it does. The definition of work in Thai law is all encompassing, and if you don't have a visa that specifically provides permission to work remotely then you are working illegally.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERJohn there is no Thai visa that explicitly states “remote work permitted,” including DTV Workcation.
Thai law restricts employment in the Thai labour market and Thai-source income. It does not contain a written prohibition on remote work for foreign employers paid offshore, and enforcement reflects that distinction.
If you have an official Thai government document that explicitly states remote work is illegal unless expressly authorised by the visa, please link it. Otherwise, this is interpretation, not written law.
Thai law restricts employment in the Thai labour market and Thai-source income. It does not contain a written prohibition on remote work for foreign employers paid offshore, and enforcement reflects that distinction.
If you have an official Thai government document that explicitly states remote work is illegal unless expressly authorised by the visa, please link it. Otherwise, this is interpretation, not written law.
John **********
@Chris *********
just look up the definition of work in Thai law and you might start to understand. It makes no differentiation between remote work and work in Thailand. Is volunteering without pay work in the sense you understand it? Yet you need a work permit to do so. You need explicit permission to do any sort of work in Thailand, remotely or otherwise, and the DTV workation option along with the LTR Work From Thailand Professional option are the only visas that provide permission to work remotelyChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
you’re conflating the definition of “work” with how Thai law is applied and enforced, and you’re also making a statement that is factually wrong.No Thai visa explicitly states “remote work permitted.”
That includes: • DTV Workcation
• LTR Work-From-Thailand Professional
• Elite
• Tourist
• Any other visa
Those visas regulate stay, not work permission. Remote work permission does not appear as explicit wording on any Thai visa.
Work permit law targets work in Thailand, not location of a laptop.
Yes, “work” is broadly defined — but enforcement and legal interpretation focus on: • Thai employers
• Thai clients
• Thai-source income
• Participation in the Thai labour market
That is why: • answering emails on a tourist visa is not prosecuted
• Elite visa holders work online openly
• DTV holders are not questioned at entry about laptops
• no DTV has been cancelled for switching qualifying basis
If your interpretation were correct, millions of people would be illegally working in Thailand every year, which is not the case.
Volunteering is not comparable.
Volunteering involves activity for Thai entities inside Thailand, which is why it requires permission. Remote work for a foreign employer paid offshore does not.
Your final claim is simply incorrect.
DTV Workcation and LTR do not contain explicit legal permission language for remote work, they are policy frameworks recognising an already tolerated and lawful distinction. They do not create exclusivity.
If you have a Thai statute, regulation, ministerial order, or MFA/Immigration publication that explicitly states:
“Remote work for foreign employers is illegal unless explicitly authorised by the visa,”
please link it. Otherwise, this is interpretation not written law.
Todd *********
@John *********
Obviously, he definition is not 'all encompassing' at all. The DTV visa does provide permission to work remotely. We can wait until someone is forced by immigration to change their DTV soft power to DTV remote work. Safe bet we will be wating a LONG timeReply to
Todd *********
Reply
Luit *****************
@Todd ********
Very strictly @John *********
just is right about working remote as an exception, explicitly has to be mentioned in law.That is also the reason that most DTV visa workcation or not just tell "employment prohibited"or similar.
In practice remote work is tolerated more or less on any visa, and even without visa, certainly when it is for short periods.
Authorities will not actively hunt remote workers, and practically it will be difficult to see what you are doing in your own home.
And about change of DTV type, it might indeed be neccessary, but I doubt if anybody will do and if any officer will check.
Time has to tell this. The fact that it is a waste of time just is not an argument, the whole TM47 procedure is a waste of time, TM30 can show all address data and when somebody has no TM30 he also will not do TM47 so no added value there.
Thai just like bureaucracy, see what steps you have to do when you want to pay your electricity bill automatic...
Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Khun ******
Everyone should be aware that John Stanners does not have a DTV. So has no application expertise or any experience of entering on one. He also has no evidence of his opinions about the DTV. FYI.
James ********
Frankly, I welcome reading the helpful and informative replies from John Stanner. I don't have the DTV Visa either but do have many years as a Moderator on Thai Visa Advice and 3 other Facebook forums.
Suggest you don't read the posts or replies from Non DTV visa holders if that will help you make it through each day.
Suggest you don't read the posts or replies from Non DTV visa holders if that will help you make it through each day.
Khun ******
@James *******
I'm more concerned about him spreading misinformation to new people. He has no evidence of his opinion of not being allowed to work on a soft power applied for DTV.James ********
REALITY IS that it's a grey 🩶 area of the DTV visa. There's mixed opinions. John has his and others have theirs. Frankly, silence is golden in this issue.
Key to tripping one up will be reportedly doing business with those who are in Thailand.
And in the coming months and years of the DTV visa, we await the evolution of its application.
Key to tripping one up will be reportedly doing business with those who are in Thailand.
And in the coming months and years of the DTV visa, we await the evolution of its application.
Paul *******
@James *******
Agreed. It's the exact same visa, regardless of what category you applied under, thus there is no definitive answer to whether remote work is "permitted" or not. In practice, it seems to be OK.Luit *****************
@Khun *****
@John *********
is just right about the remote working, but practically remote working is just tolerated for every visitor.It also is extremely difficult to tell what exactly is remote working.
When your boss calls you with a question while you are on holiday, is that remote working?
Thai law forbids working, also remote working for foreigners unless they have a visa that explicitly allows it.
Khun ******
@Luit ****************
So where is this evidence of not being allowed to remote work on a soft power applied for DTV?John **********
@Khun *****
it's quite simple. There are 2 options with a DTV, remote work and soft power. One provides the facility to work remotely, the other doesn'tKhun ******
@John *********
There are 3 application routes actually John. And all three obtain a DTV which allows remote work. When you do your application let me know and I'll give you a hand.John **********
@Khun *****
the 3rd is only for family to accompany the primary holder. Please show me where it says any of the other routes allows remote workChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
you’re still mixing up application pathways with visa conditions.There is one DTV visa class.
There are multiple eligibility routes to qualify for it (workcation, soft power, dependents).
Once issued, the visa does not fragment into different rule sets depending on how you qualified. There is no “remote-work DTV” vs “soft-power DTV” in law or policy.
Also, there is no official DTV document anywhere that says:
“This route allows remote work”
—including the workcation route.
That’s because visas don’t grant remote-work permission by route; they prohibit Thai employment and Thai-source income. Foreign income and tax treatment are handled separately under tax law.
So asking “where does it say the other routes allow remote work” is the wrong question, no route explicitly does, and none explicitly prohibit foreign remote work either.
That’s the point that’s been made repeatedly.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Chris there are clearly 3 different DTV visa.John **********
@Chris *********
without you going and reading the definition of work in Thai law you will not understand. If you want to get into visa classes there is only 1 Non-O visa class as well but it is issued for many different purposes, retirement, marriage, dependant and so on. Do you think these are interchangeable?Jef ********
So under your theory John , you are saying if you have a marriage visa you can’t retire ? Or if you are retired you can’t get married?
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
You don't need a visa to retire or marry, so that is just a stupid remark, just like you don't need a visa to marry.It is just the other way around, the marriage is one of the conditions for the marriage visa, like retirement is a condition for a retirement visa.
But actually you can change your extension of stay between those visa from one type to the other type, so you can change non-o marriage stay to non-o retirement stay at immigration office as long as you comply with all the conditions of the type you want to change to.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Jo**
you keep asserting this but still haven’t provided any reference.I’m not disputing that Thai law defines “work” broadly, I’m asking for the specific statute, regulation, or official MFA / Immigration publication that states:
foreign remote work is illegal unless explicitly authorised by the visa,
or that only DTV Workcation and LTR permit it.
So far, no such wording has been produced.
Until there’s a written source to support that claim, this remains your interpretation, not published law.
John **********
@Chris *********
Work of any sort is illegal for foreigners without them having permission to work. That's the point. There is nothing specifically addressing remote work because it just falls under the definition of work.Jef ********
@John *********
.I will give you credit you are pretty persistent for someone who is constantly wrong
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThis isn’t “partial information”, it’s directly relevant information.
The document explicitly shows that Thai law recognises lawful business and ad-hoc work activities without a work visa. That directly contradicts the claim that all work in Thailand is illegal unless a visa expressly authorises it.
No one is arguing that unlimited local employment is allowed. The point is that Thai law already distinguishes between local labour and offshore or incidental activity.
Until someone can cite a Thai statute, Immigration regulation, or MFA publication stating that foreign remote work paid abroad is prohibited unless explicitly authorised by the visa, this remains an assumption, not written law.
The document explicitly shows that Thai law recognises lawful business and ad-hoc work activities without a work visa. That directly contradicts the claim that all work in Thailand is illegal unless a visa expressly authorises it.
No one is arguing that unlimited local employment is allowed. The point is that Thai law already distinguishes between local labour and offshore or incidental activity.
Until someone can cite a Thai statute, Immigration regulation, or MFA publication stating that foreign remote work paid abroad is prohibited unless explicitly authorised by the visa, this remains an assumption, not written law.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@J**
I'm just wondering how he thinks people on the DTV soft power are supporting themselves for 5 years in Thailand if they're banned from working... The argument just doesn't make sense 😂Luit *****************
@Chris *********
In the first place people on soft power are not expected to stay continuous for 5 years, so supporting can be done by working in their home country in the rest of the year.You seem to forget that DTV is not meant to stay full time in Thailand.
Jef ********
He is talking nonsense it’s all the same tourist visa , just the qualification process is different. There is no different visa category.
It’s not like a DTV-A / DTV-B
It’s just DTV.
In John’s rules ( ideology). If someone does a 6 month Muay Thai course then lands an online ( remote work) they need to re apply.
The embassy/ consulate would laugh you out the building 😂 they wouldn’t even take your 10,000 baht if you tried
It’s not like a DTV-A / DTV-B
It’s just DTV.
In John’s rules ( ideology). If someone does a 6 month Muay Thai course then lands an online ( remote work) they need to re apply.
The embassy/ consulate would laugh you out the building 😂 they wouldn’t even take your 10,000 baht if you tried
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
It is indeed not DTV-A and DTV-B, but it is DTV1, DTV2 and DTV3 in the official documentation.Jef ********
Mind showing me the DTV1-3 in the official documentation?
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
I am disappointed you are so distrusting and to lazy to lookup yourself, but I will give you the link.***********************************************************************
Jef ********
The Destination Thailand Visa (DTV) is specially designed for foreigners who are on a
tourist trip and working remotely. This includes highly skilled individuals, freelancers, remote
workers, as well as foreigners wishing to stay in Thailand to participate in activities such as
Muay Thai and martial arts, cooking classes, sports courses and practice, medical
treatments, training, seminars, art and music exhibitions. Dependents, including the spouse
and children under 20 years old, can also benefit from this type of visa.
tourist trip and working remotely. This includes highly skilled individuals, freelancers, remote
workers, as well as foreigners wishing to stay in Thailand to participate in activities such as
Muay Thai and martial arts, cooking classes, sports courses and practice, medical
treatments, training, seminars, art and music exhibitions. Dependents, including the spouse
and children under 20 years old, can also benefit from this type of visa.
Jef ********
💯 he also thinks that if you get approved under remote work you can’t join a cooking school , or Muay Thai😂
It’s all the same visa just different qualification routes
It’s all the same visa just different qualification routes
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
There are clearly 3 DTV visa types, what makes you think that after application it will all be the same?John **********
@Jef *******
you can sign up to a cooking school or a Muay Thai gym without any visa at all. You can't conflate that with working remotelyJef ********
Exactly the same as work remotely even on visa exempt
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
Work remotely on visa exempt is forbidden, but not actively enforced.John **********
@Jef *******
which is not legalJef ********
Johnny boy , anyone can enter Thailand on Visa exempt …. You can even do business on visa exempt…..
Suggest you do some reading up chief
Suggest you do some reading up chief
Luit *****************
@Jef *******
If you can do business on visa exempt depends on your definition of business.Working is strictly prohibited on visa exempt.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERPlease provide your reference material to support your claim mate.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERSorry John but that is entirely incorrect
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Why should what @John *********
say be incorrect? Why would Thai authorities make an exception in labour laws for a visa type that is not meant for working.Luit *****************
@Khun *****
A foreigner is not allowed to work in Thailand unless the visa states an exception, that exception exists for DTV Workcation, not for the other types, so if you think it also exists for other types of DTV, just show us.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERYou are so incorrect about every single claim you have made that is actually embarrassing now Luit. Just stop mate
Khun ******
@Luit ****************
A DTV is a DTV. And now you're asking me to find proof for your claims again!Luit *****************
@Khun *****
A DTV is indeed a DTV as you say, but there are 3 variations, and only one is about remote work.Luit *****************
@Khun *****
First of all, there are 3 types of DTV, only for one is an exception foreseen in labour laws of Thailand, if you claim for the other 2 is also an exception, just show me that.John **********
@Khun *****
you apply for a visa for a purpose, the visa is granted for that purpose, it's not granted for you to select some other purpose of your choosing. If you apply for a DTV based on soft power that is the purpose you get granted the visa for. There is nothing different about the DTV than any other visaChris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThere is absolutely nothing official supporting his claim.
John **********
@Chris *********
it's not a claim, it's reality. If you look even at the information you posted yourself it clearly says you can apply for a DTV using either soft power *OR* workation, you can't apply using both or a combination of the two.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERThey are only application conditions mate, they are not assessed any further beyond application
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
So you think that after you apply for one type of visa you can change it to another type of visa without immigration or embassy changing it officially?You have a lot to learn then
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERI've asked for you to prove me wrong and all you do is go around in circles and say "trust me bro" 🤣
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
James ********
Thank You for your helpful Post.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERMinistry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) — Official checklist PDF
This is a real Thai MFA document listing DTV required documents for workcation and soft-power categories:
👉
Official Thai Government Portal (policy announcement)
This is a Thai government release introducing the DTV visa and basic visa structure:
👉
Thai e-Visa official application system
This is Thailand’s official e-visa portal operated by the Thai government (used to apply for mainstream visas including DTV):
👉
This is a real Thai MFA document listing DTV required documents for workcation and soft-power categories:
👉
****************************************************************************
Official Thai Government Portal (policy announcement)
This is a Thai government release introducing the DTV visa and basic visa structure:
👉
*****************************************************************************************
Thai e-Visa official application system
This is Thailand’s official e-visa portal operated by the Thai government (used to apply for mainstream visas including DTV):
👉
****************************
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
The checklist you link is just from one embassy, each embassy has own checklists for documents needed.It also does not say anything about the visa requirements.
Missing in the list is also the general rules for entering the kingdom, which specifies that visa requirements and matching purpose of stay can be checked.
It is a nice story, but mainly shows your interpretation and is certainly incomplete as
@John *********
already mentioned.I am curious on which of the links I should find that Immigration wants the money in a Thai bank account.
My local immigration office said any bank account was OK, as long as the money is direct accessible, which also matches the official visa requirements.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERA couple of clarifications, because you’re mixing three different things together.
The MFA checklist
The PDF I linked is hosted on image.mfa.go.th, which is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs domain. It’s not an agent document and not “just a random embassy opinion” — it’s an MFA-issued checklist that embassies use as a baseline.
Yes, individual embassies may request additional documents, but that does not change the underlying visa conditions.
Application requirements vs visa conditions
You’re correct that the checklist lists documents, not “visa conditions” — that is precisely the point.
Those documents are used to assess eligibility at application, not to impose ongoing obligations unless explicitly stated. There is no official document that says application criteria must be continuously met after approval.
General entry rules
General entry powers allow Immigration to verify purpose of stay, they do not create new ongoing requirements unless written into the visa conditions.
If continuous compliance with application criteria were required, it would be explicitly stated (as it is for retirement, student, or business visas). It is not.
Bank account point
You’re actually confirming what I already said. There is no official requirement that funds must be held in a Thai bank account, and Immigration practice varies by office.
Local statements ≠ nationwide written policy.
If you have an official Thai government document that explicitly states: • DTV holders must continuously meet application requirements, or
• ฿500,000 must be maintained post-approval, or
• Soft-power activities must be ongoing beyond application
please link it, I'll be happy to read it.
Otherwise, this remains a discussion of interpretation vs published policy, and I’m sticking to what’s actually written.
The MFA checklist
The PDF I linked is hosted on image.mfa.go.th, which is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs domain. It’s not an agent document and not “just a random embassy opinion” — it’s an MFA-issued checklist that embassies use as a baseline.
Yes, individual embassies may request additional documents, but that does not change the underlying visa conditions.
Application requirements vs visa conditions
You’re correct that the checklist lists documents, not “visa conditions” — that is precisely the point.
Those documents are used to assess eligibility at application, not to impose ongoing obligations unless explicitly stated. There is no official document that says application criteria must be continuously met after approval.
General entry rules
General entry powers allow Immigration to verify purpose of stay, they do not create new ongoing requirements unless written into the visa conditions.
If continuous compliance with application criteria were required, it would be explicitly stated (as it is for retirement, student, or business visas). It is not.
Bank account point
You’re actually confirming what I already said. There is no official requirement that funds must be held in a Thai bank account, and Immigration practice varies by office.
Local statements ≠ nationwide written policy.
If you have an official Thai government document that explicitly states: • DTV holders must continuously meet application requirements, or
• ฿500,000 must be maintained post-approval, or
• Soft-power activities must be ongoing beyond application
please link it, I'll be happy to read it.
Otherwise, this remains a discussion of interpretation vs published policy, and I’m sticking to what’s actually written.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
The DTV visa mentions a purpose of stay, when that is soft power and you enter the country for another purpose, that does not match and is a valid reason to deny entry. Seems very logical to me. What more proof do you need?And why should your opinion be more than just an opinion. What is that for delusions of grandeur and narcissism?
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
let’s separate logic from law.Yes, a visa lists a purpose of stay.
No, that does not mean Immigration requires continuous, exclusive activity matching that purpose unless it is explicitly written as a condition.
Thailand already has visa types where this is explicitly enforced (student, retirement, business).
The DTV does not contain wording requiring continuous participation in the qualifying activity, nor does it require re-assessment of application criteria at entry.
General entry discretion exists for all visas, but discretion is not the same thing as a written, ongoing requirement otherwise it would be published as such.
So again, this isn’t about what “seems logical.”
It’s about what is actually written.
If you have an official Thai government document that states DTV holders must continuously match their application activity or be denied entry, please link it.
Absent that, this remains assumption, not policy.
I’m going to leave it there with you mate because your argument is circular and now your bringing personal attacks into it. All the best with it mate
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
What do you not understand in purpose of stay and IO can check if purpose of stay matches visa?You write nowhere is written "Soft-power activities must be ongoing beyond application"
That would mean you apply for a visa and visit the country for another purpose.
Of course you can try, and checks certainly are not done very often, but when they are done it is a good reason to deny entry.
Your example that checks for purpose of stay are done at entry for retirement is a bit stupid, when you are over 50 at the moment of apply, you also will be over 50 when you enter the country.
That checks for purpose of visit can be done by IO are actually written in law.
Nobody says DTV holders must continuously match their application activity, but entering the country without scheduled activity just makes the purpose of visit different from the visa.
I am not doing any personal attack omn you, but you keep suggesting that your opinion is worth more than that of other people.
You absolutely don't have to agree with my opinion, just as I don't have to agree with your OPINION.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTER@Lu**
we’re actually much closer than you think.You’ve just said the key sentence yourself:
“Nobody says DTV holders must continuously match their application activity.”
That is exactly my point.
Where we differ is that you’re talking about possibility and discretion, while I’m talking about obligation and written conditions.
Yes, Immigration has discretion to question anyone at entry on any visa.
Yes, purpose of stay can be checked in principle.
And yes, there is always some degree of risk in any long-stay scenario.
But discretion ≠ requirement.
The DTV does not contain a written condition requiring:
continuous participation in the qualifying activity, or
re-assessment of application criteria at entry.
That’s not me inventing a rule, it’s acknowledging the absence of one. Where Thailand intends ongoing purpose compliance (student enrolment, retirement status, business activity), it is explicitly written and enforced as such.
So we’re not debating facts anymore, we’re debating risk tolerance vs legal obligation. Both views can coexist, but they’re not the same thing.
I’m not saying “nothing can ever be questioned.”
I’m saying “there is no written rule requiring continuous activity.”
And on that point, we actually agree.
I’ll leave it there.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
The discretion of the IO is only that he can decide if he wants to check or not.But the immigration law for foreigners entering the country clearly states that the purpose of stay should match the purpose of stay of the visa.
If it matches might be at the discretion of the IO, but wehn an IO asks you why you come to Thailand and you tell something different than what the visa is for he might just deny you entry. When you say you come to do soft power, he might ask for proof.
When you enter with a different purpose of stay, that simply is illegal.
That the risk is not high, I also know.
And I am still curious about your idea ongoing purpose compliance for retirement status. Once 50 plus means 50 plus forever, so when you comply at application time, you will comply forever.
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERI think this is where the last bit of wires are crossing.
I fully agree that an IO may ask about purpose of stay at entry. That’s true for every visa.
Where I disagree is the leap from “may be questioned” to “entering for a different purpose is illegal.”
Thai immigration law does not say that a foreigner must exclusively and continuously engage in the qualifying activity of their visa on every entry, unless that obligation is explicitly written as a condition. For DTV, it is not.
Purpose of stay in this context means:
lawful stay under the visa class, and
no prohibited activities (Thai employment, Thai income, overstaying, etc.)
It does not require exclusive, ongoing performance of the application activity unless stated which is why:
DTV holders are not re-assessed at entry,
application documents are not re-requested,
and no published rule requires “scheduled activity” on each entry.
On retirement: that’s exactly the contrast I’ve been making.
“Over 50” is a status-based condition, not an activity-based one. It’s inherently ongoing by nature, which is why it doesn’t need continuous proof of doing something. Education and business visas, by contrast, explicitly require ongoing activity and DTV does not.
So again, this comes back to the same distinction:
discretion and risk exist, yes
written obligation does not
We’re not really disagreeing on facts anymore, just on how much weight to give hypothetical edge cases versus what is actually written and enforced.
I fully agree that an IO may ask about purpose of stay at entry. That’s true for every visa.
Where I disagree is the leap from “may be questioned” to “entering for a different purpose is illegal.”
Thai immigration law does not say that a foreigner must exclusively and continuously engage in the qualifying activity of their visa on every entry, unless that obligation is explicitly written as a condition. For DTV, it is not.
Purpose of stay in this context means:
lawful stay under the visa class, and
no prohibited activities (Thai employment, Thai income, overstaying, etc.)
It does not require exclusive, ongoing performance of the application activity unless stated which is why:
DTV holders are not re-assessed at entry,
application documents are not re-requested,
and no published rule requires “scheduled activity” on each entry.
On retirement: that’s exactly the contrast I’ve been making.
“Over 50” is a status-based condition, not an activity-based one. It’s inherently ongoing by nature, which is why it doesn’t need continuous proof of doing something. Education and business visas, by contrast, explicitly require ongoing activity and DTV does not.
So again, this comes back to the same distinction:
discretion and risk exist, yes
written obligation does not
We’re not really disagreeing on facts anymore, just on how much weight to give hypothetical edge cases versus what is actually written and enforced.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
I never said you should not do anything next to the soft power activity, but no soft power activity at all during a stay just means you enter with a purpose of stay different from the purpose of stay of the visa.The purpose of stay should match.
Personally I think one soft power session can be enough to stay 180 days, but that is up to discretion of the IO.
No (planned) activity at all means you enter for another purpose
Khun ******
@Chris *********
You'll have a very long wait for Luit to back up any of his claims.Luit *****************
@Khun *****
What claims? You are always the one claiming things and don't proof anything.Khun ******
@Luit ****************
Many people are starting to notice your overactive imagination now Luit. You really should take up creative writing instead of wasting it in here.Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERNo point replying to him anymore mate
Luit *****************
@Khun *****
Imagination? Where? Did you take your pills in time?Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERJust stop man you're embarrassing yourself
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
The fact that you cannot understand written immigration law about purpose of stay is not embarrassing for me but just shows your lack of knowledge of law.That law just is enough, no need to explicitly describe for every visa what exactly is needed.
When the law says purpose of stay should match with purpose of stay of visa, there is simply no additional statement necessary to tell that not matching means illegal.
Not matching is not equal to matching so you not comply to the condition.
Luit *****************
@Chris *********
Most of embassy documentation is hosted on mfa domain, but that does not make it generic.Your link is for the specific Malaysian embassy, but obviously you did not read it very well, otherwise you should have seen that yourself.
Where see you difference in wording for financial requirements of retirement visa and DTV visa?
In your opinion your soft power DTV visa purpose of stay matches without doing soft power activity?
Your interpretation of this info is different from my interpretation, but that does not make your interpretation any better than my interpretation.
You are not sticking to what is actually written, you give your interpretation.
I confirmed my interpretation with embassy and local immigration office, why should they be both spreading the same incorrect information?
Chris **********
ORIGINAL POSTERTo clarify, that checklist is the standard MFA DTV checklist used by all embassies.
It’s hosted on the MFA domain and circulated to posts as the baseline document for DTV applications.
Individual embassies may add post-specific cover pages or request additional documents, but the core DTV checklist itself is not unique to Malaysia and is not a “local interpretation.”
More importantly, regardless of which embassy issues it, the checklist defines application documentation. It does not impose ongoing visa conditions after approval and no official DTV documentation does.
If there were ongoing requirements to: • continuously maintain ฿500,000, or
• remain enrolled in soft-power activities indefinitely,
those obligations would be explicitly written, as they are for retirement, education, and business visas. They are not.
So the discussion isn’t “my interpretation vs your interpretation” it’s what is written vs what is assumed.
If you have a published Thai government document that states otherwise, please link it. I’m happy to read it.
It’s hosted on the MFA domain and circulated to posts as the baseline document for DTV applications.
Individual embassies may add post-specific cover pages or request additional documents, but the core DTV checklist itself is not unique to Malaysia and is not a “local interpretation.”
More importantly, regardless of which embassy issues it, the checklist defines application documentation. It does not impose ongoing visa conditions after approval and no official DTV documentation does.
If there were ongoing requirements to: • continuously maintain ฿500,000, or
• remain enrolled in soft-power activities indefinitely,
those obligations would be explicitly written, as they are for retirement, education, and business visas. They are not.
So the discussion isn’t “my interpretation vs your interpretation” it’s what is written vs what is assumed.
If you have a published Thai government document that states otherwise, please link it. I’m happy to read it.
Reply to
Chris **********
Reply
19 comments
4 months ago
27 comments
5 months ago
3 comments
5 months ago
9 comments
5 months ago
1 comments
a year ago
38 comments
a year ago
28 comments
a year ago
35 comments
a year ago
26 comments
a year ago
40 comments
a year ago
105 comments
a year ago
2 comments
a year ago
150 comments
a year ago
98 comments
a year ago
32 comments
a year ago
10 comments
2 years ago
113 comments
2 years ago
1 comments
2 years ago
30 comments
2 years ago
5 comments
2 years ago
11 comments
2 years ago
187 comments
2 years ago
134 comments
2 years ago
503 comments
2 years ago
193 comments
2 years ago
7 comments
a month ago
9 comments
a month ago
21 comments
a month ago
16 comments
a month ago
8 comments
a month ago
The ask:thailand community, consisting of multiple Q/A groups with over 100,000 members, powers this platform. It is not an official government resource. Our members actively contribute to this resource, and while we strive for accuracy, we cannot guarantee its complete reliability. Assistance to travelers is provided as a community service.