You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

June 18, 2020

Thailand to Relax Rules on T.M.30 Immigration Requirements

Subscribe to Updates

The Royal Thai Police has issued a notification which relaxes the requirement for property owners or hotel managers in Thailand to notify an immigration office every time a foreign national stays in their property. Titled “The Royal Thai Police Notification on Residence of Heads of Household, House Owners, Landlords, or Managers of Hotels, Who Accommodate Foreign Nationals on a Temporary Basis,” the notification was published in the Government Gazette on June 16, 2020, and will take effect on June 30, 2020.

Under the notification, there will still be a duty for landlords or hotel owners to submit a T.M.30 form to an immigration office within 24 hours of a foreign national staying at their premises. However, they are no longer required to resubmit a T.M.30 form every time a foreign national returns to stay at the same place, which was an onerous requirement under the previous version of notification, issued in 1979.

Under the new notification, when the head of a household, property owner, landlord, or hotel manager submits a new T.M.30 form to the immigration office, they will also be required to indicate the period that each foreign national will stay at their premises, i.e., the arrival and expected departure dates.

In the event that a foreign national travels and stays in another place on an occasional basis, and then returns to stay at the same premises within the period of stay specified in the T.M.30, then a new T.M.30 will need not be submitted each time they arrive. The new rules are applicable to all foreign nationals who stay in Thailand on any type of visa, including holders of multiple-entry visas and re-entry permits which enable the holders to leave and return to Thailand within their visa validity period.

Where to Submit the T.M.30

The T.M.30 must be submitted at the local immigration office where the residence or hotel is located, or to the Immigration Office Headquarters for residences and hotels in Bangkok. It can be submitted in person, by post, online at www.immigration.go.th, or via the Section38 Android or iOS application (subject to the requirements of the immigration office).

For more information on immigration and work permit matters in Thailand, please contact Penrurk Phetmani at [email protected] or +66 2056 5509.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 11, 2023
Can computer programs resolve legal disputes? For decades, the answer from much of the legal community has been no. However, developments in artificial intelligence (AI), and in particular natural language processing and machine learning, have led to renewed discussions of this possibility. Increasingly, tools are being developed to assist parties with litigation outcome prediction and judges with litigation outcome determination. However, while some argue that the use of AI in legal disputes can reduce the length of proceedings, cut costs, and improve access to justice, others raise concerns that “black box” AI systems could reduce transparency, entrench bias, and harm the development of the law. Litigation Outcome Prediction The use of computers to predict the outcome of legal cases is not new. As early as the 1980s, researchers developed outcome prediction tools, often in the form of decision-tree algorithms. However, developments in AI have allowed the creation of more sophisticated prediction models. In 2017, a model built by Katz et al. predicted US Supreme Court decisions with an accuracy of 70.2%, while in 2019, a model built by Medvedeva et al. predicted decisions of the European Court of Human Rights with an accuracy of 75%. In various studies, AI tools have been able to predict case outcomes more accurately than expert lawyers. Companies such as Solomonic and Lex Machina, owned by LexisNexis, now provide commercial litigation prediction and analytics tools. Outcome prediction tools can be used by parties and their legal representatives to craft arguments and facilitate settlement negotiations, or by third-party litigation financers to assess the risk of providing funding. More broadly, outcome prediction may be used by the likes of insurance companies to help calculate claim payouts. However, those using such tools must take care to ensure that they do not breach any professional or legal obligations.
Read More
July 7, 2023
Tilleke & Gibbins is pleased to announce the release of Employment Law Basics in Southeast Asia. This publication serves as an indispensable resource for businesses navigating the complex landscape of employment law in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. Authored by Tilleke & Gibbins’ regional team of employment law specialists, the guide provides a detailed overview of key employment law topics essential for businesses operating or planning to expand their operations in Southeast Asia. From employment contracts to termination procedures, each topic is examined in depth to ensure businesses are well-equipped to comply with local regulations and protect their interests. Key topics covered in the guide include: Employment contracts Probationary period Minimum wage Social security and statutory payments Working hours Leave and holidays Work rules Termination Foreign employees Data protection Remote work AI and automation Our guide offers multinational corporations establishing a presence in the region and local enterprises alike practical insights and actionable advice tailored to the unique regulatory environments in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. To access the full guide, please download the PDF below.
Read More
June 23, 2023
April and May witnessed intriguing developments within Vietnam’s intellectual property community. On the legislation side, of particular note was the issuance of Decree No. 17/2023/ND-CP on April 26, coinciding with World IP Day. Decree 17 provides guidance on implementation of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law with regard to copyright and related rights, and has garnered significant attention due to several issues, especially the liability of intermediary (internet) service providers and copyright violation in the digital environment. Additionally, two noteworthy IP cases have emerged, albeit with limited public disclosure and awareness of specific details. Nonetheless, these cases are expected to have far-reaching implications. Copyright: Criminal Case Against Unauthorized Broadcasting of Football Matches For a considerable period of time, Vietnamese football enthusiasts have enjoyed being able to watch matches on TV and online from numerous top global football leagues. While many of these broadcasts were legitimate, with the rights purchased by Vietnamese and regional broadcasters, the unauthorized transmission and broadcasting of football matches on the internet has become increasingly prevalent. Authorities have seemingly faced challenges in curbing this issue through criminal action. In a positive development, in early May the Hanoi police decided to open a criminal proceeding against the unauthorized transmission and broadcasting of high-profile overseas football matches after a rigorous two-year investigation. Prior to this decision, authorities encountered difficulties in accurately determining the relevant laws and the nature of the violation to meet the requirements for prosecution. Specifically, they grappled with the question of whether a football match, or more specifically, a recorded video of a football match, could be considered a copyrighted work. If copyright protection extended to football matches and/or recorded videos, then transmitting and broadcasting these matches directly through the internet could be deemed illegal acts of copying or distributing (copyrighted) works, as outlined in Article
Read More
June 8, 2023
Arbitration specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution team in Bangkok contributed the Thailand chapter to the recently published Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards Guide from Global Arbitration Review (GAR). The Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards Guide addresses the evolving realities of today’s legal landscape, in which enforcement of arbitral awards is a growing concern. It also offers guidance on challenging awards in different jurisdictions. Part I of the guide offers a comprehensive thematic overview to provide readers with a clear understanding of the intricacies involved in the arbitration process. Part II then explores the specifics of challenging and enforcing arbitration awards in 29 different jurisdictions. The Thailand chapter—which was authored by counsel Michael Ramirez, partner Noppramart Thammateeradaycho, and associate Anyamani Yimsaard—covers the following topics: Requirements for the form of arbitral awards; Recourse against an award; Setting aside; Recognition and enforcement of awards; Procedure for service of judicial and extrajudicial documents; Identification of assets; Enforcement proceedings; Interim measures; Attachment proceedings; and Recognition and enforcement against foreign states. The Thailand chapter can be downloaded through the button below, or visit the GAR website to explore the full guide.
Read More