I am fortunate to have a sister in law, a lifetime higher up in the civil service anti-corruption agency in Chaing Mai. Her friends in government including in

immigration are all English speakers as well, and they have told me the purported aims of the new law are rooted in raising new revenue to replace China visitor losses since COVID and rid themselves illegal businesses violating labor and visa law and squeezing Thai jobs.

Regulating the boarder runners with long term stays on short visas is being eliminated with the discretion of the airport IO personnel.

Violence, crime and lawbreaking from visa holders is also bothersome and costs them excessively in police and judicial matters.

Collecting tax revenue from legal long term visa holders who are working digitally is viewed positively for a future state revenue and is being facilitated they hope.

They are catering and indirectly saying they prefer tourists that spend more. They will have the least difficulties.

Remember that Chinese visitors did not yet return in full after Covid and they make up 35% of entries with the least problems with the law. Thai gdp dropped considerably with loss of this group so the new laws are not favorable to long term short visa persons who don’t spend and don’t pay tax on income like the DTV nomad can contribute in return for staying.

Illegal business that violate work rules and steal jobs is high on the list for prosecution and prohibition for return visa of any kind

Exactly

You likely have no trouble. Frequent short visits are legitimate and welcomed

I don’t know the Chinese airlines but I’m not impressed by the airports I went through

Thanks. I’m doing my own research.

My sister in law is a highly placed civil servant in Chiang Mai.

She informs me from her immigration sources of the overall Thai intent with the new changes is seeking to weed out and deny low spenders as much as IO can make that determination at airports.

The frequent boarder runners who abuse short term visas to stay longer are first on the list.

Then those who abuse rentals with 8 to a room in places like Pattaya or sleep on beach and spend little money.

The objective is revenue from tourism.

Troublemakers in the low budget hostel/hotels who cause trouble requiring police attention with excess drinking or fighting or abuse of prostitution trade are likely to be deported and denied future entry.

I advocated for a small $20 fee with the 60 day visa to raise money and leave the low spenders alone since they fill a niche for local low price lodging and food places.

Gaining tax revenue or banking deposits serves a goal for Thai govt also so that nomads that can earn and stay longer and pay tax are being courted.

Russian and Israelis and Indians operating illegal business against law and visa status are in for the biggest prosecution and tracking from immigration.

Just what I hear from Thai citizens with influence and ability to make decisions.

Not everyone will be happy.

Some will benefit and some will no longer be living long term cheaply in Thailand

Were there any couples or individuals with dreadlocks and looking tattered and not clean?

Excellent question.

I still believe that how you present: clean with decent clothes etc factors into the IO decision to ask more questions to deny you or pass you in without comment.

Any comments or opinion?

$1000 one way seats for 2 in coach and $200 for both seat upgrades I meant to say