BANGKOK, THAILAND – Thailand’s post-pandemic 60-day visa-free entry scheme faced renewed scrutiny as officials weighed tourism revenue against rising security concerns.
Expansion under review amid abuse fears
The visa-exemption programme had been expanded from around 50 to 93 countries, and the permitted stay increased from 30 to 60 days, with the option of a further 30-day extension. Authorities said they were increasingly worried that some foreign nationals were using visa-free entry for purposes other than tourism. Officials cited cases of visitors setting up businesses or engaging in illegal activities, including unauthorised work, cross-border fraud and organised crime.
The Foreign Ministry proposed halving the visa-free stay to 30 days to curb abuse and improve the “quality” of visitors. Tourism operators questioned whether this would address the root problems. Chamnong Bootsong, president of the Hua Hin-Cha-am Tourism Association, said a shorter stay would barely affect short-term visitors who already spent less than a month in the country.
European long-stay visitors in the firing line
Industry representatives warned that the proposed change would mainly hit long-stay tourists, particularly Europeans who travelled to Thailand during the winter and often stayed for several weeks or months.
“Many are retirees who rent apartments instead of staying in hotels and remain for one or two months, with regular, if modest, daily spending,”
said Bootsong. He noted that visa extensions were often seen as a nuisance by foreign visitors.
In destinations such as Hua Hin and Cha-am, long-stay guests accounted for about 30% of all arrivals. Revenue from this segment could fall by as much as 50% if the visa-free stay was shortened, Bootsong said. He added that a cut in the permitted stay would not resolve core issues such as overstaying or illegal employment.
“A more effective solution would be targeted inspections. Authorities know which areas over-stayers live in. If they carry out spot checks there, they can identify those who have stayed too long,”
he said.
Tailored rules instead of one-size-fits-all
Sanga Ruangwattanakul, president of the Khao San Road Business Association, supported tightening visa-free entry. He argued that the current system made access too easy without sufficient screening. A 30-day limit would help filter out visitors with genuine tourism intentions, he said, adding that those staying beyond a month often did not travel purely for leisure.
Ruangwattanakul said some groups entering under the scheme contributed little to the economy while creating social and labour problems. Those wishing to return for longer stays should be required to obtain an appropriate visa instead of repeatedly relying on visa-free entry.
“That would not affect real tourists but those who come to work,”
said Ruangwattanakul. He also called for stricter requirements for travellers planning extended stays, including proof of accommodation, employment status and sufficient financial means.
He urged authorities to adopt a more selective approach. Visa exemptions should not apply uniformly to all countries but be tailored to specific groups, he argued. A clearer distinction between tourists and jobseekers would help regulators manage entry more effectively, reduce illegal migration and prevent foreigners from competing unfairly with Thai workers.
Phuket pushes ‘quality over quantity’
Naridee Pongnarisorn, vice-president of the Patong Hotel Association, stressed that long-stay tourists remained an important segment for destinations such as Phuket. She said a reduction of the visa-free stay to 30 days could help clarify travel purposes, as genuine tourists typically did not need to stay longer than a month. Visa-free entry itself was not new, she noted; the most recent changes mainly extended the benefit to more nationalities.
The problem did not lie in visa-free rules as such, she said. Instead, illegal activities should be tackled through stricter screening rather than blanket restrictions. Authorities should focus on better classification of visitors rather than imposing a uniform stay limit. For high-risk or blacklisted groups, checks should begin at immigration control.
“Businesses are not aiming for mass volume. We want quality and agree with the government’s tougher policy. But there are still details that need to be clarified instead of simply cutting the stay to 30 days,”
said Pongnarisorn.
Security concerns versus economic gains
Police Major General Choengron Rimpadee, deputy commissioner of the Immigration Bureau, said the programme had originally been designed to boost foreign arrivals and tourism income. However, he noted that some foreigners had abused the scheme by working or running businesses without proper permits. More worryingly, certain groups were linked to illegal activities such as money laundering and call-centre fraud.
In an interview with the Bangkok Post, he said these groups relied on so-called “visa runs” — repeated exits and re-entries to prolong their stay without applying for the appropriate visa. Thai immigration officers usually questioned travellers who had entered at least twice in a row for at least 45 days each time. Those unable to substantiate their travel plans were turned back. Since early 2025, more than 20,000 people suspected of carrying out visa runs had been refused entry at the border.
Protecting Thailand’s premium image
Choengron backed shortening visa-free stays to 30 days, saying it would reduce incentives for abuse. Tourists wishing to remain longer could apply in advance for a tourist visa allowing stays of up to 60 days, with a possible 30-day extension.
“Anyone entering visa-free for 30 days can apply for an extension at local immigration offices in tourist areas, as is already the practice. In my opinion, this change will have no impact at all,”
said Choengron.
He dismissed fears that stricter visa rules could undermine Thailand’s competitiveness compared with neighbouring countries. Every country had its own identity, he argued, and Thailand’s appeal lay in its cultural, social and natural characteristics, making direct comparisons with other destinations inappropriate.
“The question is whether the tourists who enter the country actually bring in significant revenue — or whether we see high visitor numbers with low spending and problems arising. If that is the case, it is not worth it,”
he said.
The government’s decision to review the scheme was driven primarily by security concerns, he added. Many foreigners arrested in criminal cases had entered under visa-free rules, including a recent group of 68 foreign nationals allegedly involved in fraud networks. Thailand still depended on tourism, Choengron said, but the country’s long-term reputation as a premium destination also had to be safeguarded.