Don't make multiple visa runs

[Jun]

Tourist arrivals ars expected to be under 34.5 million this year, compared with a peak of 39 million.

If they want to improve that, having efficient and reliable immigration would be one item to fix.
Process visas promptly
Have sensible and consistently applied rules
Ensure short queues at the airports

[Dodger]

That's very clear in immigration rules, and has been for a long time, but rarely enforced: 20,000 THB per person......

Great...this should significantly reduce the number of Indian tourists.

Maybe that's their plan...

[Gaybutton]

That's very clear in immigration rules, and has been for a long time, but rarely enforced: 20,000 THB per person

That doesn't seem like very much - certainly not even close to how much the average farang holiday maker would need for a 1 or 2 week stay, let alone 60 or 90 days. I would have thought the required amount would be much more. 20,000 baht does not seem even nearly enough for Cheap Charlies or Indian tourists unless they are not staying more than 1 or 2 days.

[Jun]

20,000 baht isn't much, but if they expect you to carry that in cash, it's more of a problem.

My record was bringing £6000 in cash, but since I started using Wise, there is usually barely more than 10,000 in cash in my wallet upon arrival. So that would be a fail, if they chose to enforce the outdated cash rule.
Even if, like most farang tourists, I have access to orders of magnitude more than the 20,000 baht.

Too much discretion is given to people in uniform here.

[Gaybutton]

20,000 baht isn't much, but if they expect you to carry that in cash, it's more of a problem.

That's the part I'm still not clear about. Does it have to be cash? If not, what is (or at least is supposed to be) acceptable evidence that you do have access to 20,000 baht or more?

[pong]

In the times there were guidebooks (perhaps you even remember, Lonely Planet! but also in german, french=Routard, I know one of the guys who did the research on budget-guesthss in BKK here, he also still comes yearly)-and people read those even, it was also always stated that a credit card would also do-IN the rare cases it was asked for. BUT: Perhaps a bit outlandish for USAers- for the average and certain young/budget EURopean a cred.cd was a very rare thing to have. One had a bankcard that would also allow payments-and after a while even also in other EU-countries. For going to such outlandish places like Thailand etc. one would buy AmEx Trav.cheques- and these would also do.
In the by now >88 times I have entered Thailand in >33 years, I have never ever been asked for money to show or the like.
It has always been known/accepted there are several ´sticks to hit´ for cases were Thai immigration suspected foul play or other mishaps.
I assume (did not read it all) this topic is about the by now some 2-3 weeks ago refused entry big group of VNese (apparently from Chinese descent)-Thai media mostly suspect these were also on visa-avoiding multiple trips-though for ASEAN nationals it should even be easier. Just by chance I also note that here in big city BKK are now several areas where it seems one is in Vnam - or Laos - or Myanmar/Burma and not so much in Thailand.
Also-but the usual first time tourists does not note- those friendly and good English speaking vendors/servers etc in touristy areas are not Thai, but Khmer=Cambodian or Burmese/Myanmar.
AND this week coming up to today XMas here in touristy ´riverside´ BKK no sign at all of less tourists-except that indeed the NR of Chinese seems much lower as last years. And statistics: IF many long-term stayers on multiple visa-exempt entries now choose a proper visa, then NR of tourist arrivals sinks, but not NR of factual tourists.
But this may all be different in Pattaya, not been there since some 2-3 years for a try-out and then decided it would not be for me.

[christianpfc]

"Does it have to be cash?" Yes. Only cash is accepted as proof of funding.

Both the requirement of cash and the amount of at least 20,000 THB seem outdated by decades.

[Gaybutton]

Thailand’s immigration crackdown at airports

By Victor Wong (Peerasan Wongsri)

February 4, 2026

When “Proof of Funds” becomes a barrier to entry and why expats are concerned

Over the past week, reports have emerged from several major Thai airports Don Mueang, Chiang Mai, and Phuket involving foreign travelers who were denied entry into Thailand after failing to demonstrate sufficient financial means upon arrival. While the incidents appear sudden, they do not stem from any new immigration law. Instead, they reflect a stricter enforcement of existing immigration discretion, particularly regarding the long-standing requirement that visitors must be able to support themselves financially during their stay in Thailand. The result has been growing anxiety among tourists and expatriates alike.

Not a new rule but a revived one
Under Thailand’s Immigration Act B.E. 2522 (1979), immigration officers are empowered to request proof that a foreign national has adequate funds to support their stay. Traditionally, this amount has been cited as approximately:

֍ THB 20,000 per person, or
֍ THB 40,000 per family

In practice, however, this requirement had been rarely enforced in recent years, particularly during the post-COVID period when Thailand was actively encouraging inbound tourism. What has changed is not the law itself, but the willingness of immigration officers to exercise their discretion more rigorously at the point of entry.

Reports from Don Mueang and Chiang Mai
At Don Mueang Airport, several cases have been reported in which travelers were questioned extensively, detained temporarily, and ultimately refused entry after failing to show sufficient funds or supporting documentation. Similar accounts have surfaced from Chiang Mai, largely through traveler networks and online forums. While not every passenger is questioned, the inconsistency in enforcement has contributed to uncertainty and concern, particularly among repeat visitors and long-term residents who are accustomed to relatively smooth entry procedures.

Phuket Airport: A First-Hand Account
In the case of Phuket International Airport, the author was contacted directly by a Russian tourist, not by immigration officials. The traveler had been presented with a document at immigration and asked whether it was safe to sign. Upon review, the document was identified as a standard “Refusal of Entry” form issued by Thai Immigration. Crucially, the document did not contain any language indicating blacklisting, permanent exclusion, or long-term immigration penalties. It merely recorded that entry was denied on that specific occasion.

The tourist was advised that signing the document would not result in a blacklist and would not prejudice future travel to Thailand. Once adequate funds or supporting documentation are available, re-entry remains possible under normal immigration procedures. This episode underscores a recurring issue: many travelers misunderstand the legal effect of refusal-of-entry documents, leading to unnecessary fear and speculation.

Refusal of Entry Is Not Blacklisting
One of the most damaging misconceptions circulating among expat communities is the belief that being refused entry automatically results in a blacklist. That is not generally the case. A refusal of entry is an administrative decision made at the border, based on the officer’s assessment at that moment. It does not, by itself, amount to a ban, nor does it permanently bar future entry unless accompanied by a separate blacklisting order which would be expressly stated. Unfortunately, this distinction is rarely explained clearly to travelers at the airport.

Why the Expat Community Is Uneasy
The concern among expats and frequent visitors does not arise from the existence of immigration discretion that discretion has always existed. The concern lies in:

1. Lack of clear, official communication about renewed enforcement
2. Uncertainty over what constitutes acceptable proof of funds
3. Confusion over whether funds must be held in cash or may be shown digitally
4. Fear that signing immigration documents may have long-term consequences

When rules appear to be applied unevenly and without clear guidance, confidence erodes even among those who respect the law and intend to comply.

A Matter of Communication, Not Policy
Thailand remains entitled to control its borders, as every sovereign state does. However, predictability and clarity are essential, particularly for a country that relies heavily on tourism and long-term foreign residents.

Clear guidance especially in English confirming that:
֍ Proof of funds may take multiple forms,
֍ Refusal of entry is not equivalent to blacklisting, and
֍ Compliance restores eligibility for future entry, would go a long way toward restoring confidence.

What we are witnessing is not a legal shift, but an operational one. Immigration officers are exercising discretion that has always existed but doing so more visibly and more strictly. For travelers and expats, the lesson is simple: be prepared. Carry accessible proof of funds and supporting documents, even if such proof has not been requested in the past. For policymakers, the message is equally clear: law enforcement works best when paired with transparency. Without it, even lawful discretion can feel arbitrary.

https://www.pattayamail.com/latestnews/ ... rts-534662

[Jun]

The concern among expats and frequent visitors does not arise from the existence of immigration discretion that discretion has always existed.

When rules appear to be applied unevenly and without clear guidance, confidence erodes even among those who respect the law and intend to comply.

That's what the author thinks. Although how much thought has gone into it is unclear.

Surely the "discretion" is the problem and that's what leads to uneven application of rules?
Without discretion, you would have consistency.

As an example of inconsistency, I know one person who was denied entry at DMK.
After booking a flight out at short notice, he entered Thailand two days later at a land border. What's the purpose of that decision making?

[Jun]

I was again questioned, but this time at Suvarnabhumi airport. The female immigration official looked at all the passport stamps and said "you come to Thailand a lot".

Well, there are 12 Thai immigration stamps, in a passport that is just over 5.5 years old. So just over 2 stamps per year.
About 3 with visas and the remainder were visa exempt.
There are fewer stamps for other countries, partly as these include visits to advanced countries like Cambodia that don't stamp passports.
On average, I've spent 97 days per year in Thailand in the last 5 years, with a maximum of 124. So clearly I'm not a disguised resident.

Now, I would think immigration ought to be checking my record on their computer screen, rather than counting stamps.
If counting stamps is the way they work, I can easily circumvent that by getting a new passport more frequently. About £98 for a 10 year passport. So if I replace it every 5 years, it is just an extra £10 on my travel costs.

I'd be quite happy if they replaced "discretion" with some consistent rules. Then I can follow the rules.