Thailand intends to put an end to improper constructions by foreigners that enable them to become owners of land in Thailand. Violators should be deported from the country. These menacing words come from the Thai ombudsman Siracha Charoenpanij.
He intends to eradicate abuses “root and branch” and is going to introduce a bill to that end.
Land ownership by foreigners prohibited
Under current Thai law, foreigners cannot own Thai land. On the other hand, it is possible to buy a house, such as a condo, under certain conditions.
It is possible to buy a detached villa, but a foreigner only buys the house. The land cannot be owned. The building land can only be rented in a lease construction for a period of 30 years.
Constructions to circumvent the law
To avoid these laws, many expats have entered into complicated constructions. For example, by setting up a company and thus still being able to own the land. A stooge who has Thai nationality and owns a majority of the shares is then used. In reality, however, this person has no financial interest in the company.
It is precisely these constructions that the Thai government wants to tackle. Charoenpanij has even promised a reward – 20 percent of the value of the land at the time of sale – for those who information information about illegal ownership of land by foreigners. His plans also include sanctions for lawyers or consultants who advise foreign buyers to enter into such arrangements.
Prevent buyers from being cheated
Richard Pentreath, owner of Accent Overseas, an international brokerage, says closing loopholes is actually good for overseas buyers. “This prevents buyers from being cheated. Some 'intermediaries and lawyers' advise people to enter into such arrangements, but when someone dies, it turns out that he has nothing.”
“Foreign house buyers should not set up a company or come up with shady constructions. One simply has to abide by the letter of Thai law.
Marcus Collins, manager at real estate law firm DFDL, says not all constructions should be abolished because some are interesting to Thai investors. “It is clear that certain constructions are illegal. But there are also examples where Thai individuals or Thai companies have invested money in real estate shares and receive an agreed return on it. These constructions are in the interest of the Thai economy.”
“We also want clarity about what is and what is not allowed. Hopefully this will now happen soon when this issue is brought to the attention of parliament.”
The ombudsman plans to submit a draft bill on this issue to parliament later this year.
Source: The Telegraph
Many “illegal” homeowners will talk themselves into courage, along the lines of “it won't go that fast, they've been talking about it for so long and nothing has ever happened”. But you can bet that someday (I don't know when) the loopholes in the law will be closed, and then a lot of people will be left with the baked pears. Mark my words!!
On the other hand, people have been talking for a long time that Farangs can buy land.
On Thai TV there was a conversation according to Maem that a Farang could own 70%….
I think that if the law were changed that a Falang could own maximum 1 Rai, there would be an explosive growth in house buying and selling.
That was also possible in Spain at a given moment, resulting in enormous growth.
It's fine that they tackle illegal constructions (such as stooges), but then it would be so neat if foreign private individuals could simply buy a house with some land (let's say the size of a maximum of 1 football field). I can also understand that people are afraid of companies or rich foreigners buying up huge pieces of land, but then you set up the law in such a way that that cannot happen?
But they can also wait another 5-10 years because I can't afford a land / house for the time being. :p
I wonder if the Thai will also tackle the Japanese who live in Thailand. I don't think so because without Japanese investments Thailand would be 20 years back in time.
In addition, I think it makes sense if Holland would also impose some more restrictions on the Thai. For example, 5-double prizes for Keukenhof, just to name a few. Or also set pin costs for Thai cardholders to 5 euros per transaction.
My construction is watertight, so I have nothing to fear from changes in the law, but I do get tired of all those tricks they come up with to deal with the farang. Malaysia, for example, is much more attractive to buy a house than Thailand and soon Burma will also be a competitor.
I know several CEOs of multinationals in Thailand who have also bought large houses through constructions. I bet that these gentlemen will always be too quick for the Thai legislature. Bribe here, envelope there and everything is settled again for 10 years.
Dear Pete,
The how and why the Keukenhof should charge 5 double prices for Thais
eludes me…
I am also very curious about your "watertight" construction.
And about getting tired of tricks to deal with the farang? Could that be because the farang, and certainly the "us ben zuni" farang, does everything not to pay for normal things?
Wouldn't it be completely normal if the farang who wants to buy/build a house here, etc.
agree with a good one! lawyer talking? , but yes, that costs money, right?
Donald if you want to go to the Thai waterfall or nature reserve (or the Bayoke sky-hotel buffet) as a white tourist you also pay double or sometimes 5-double prices. They find that quite normal in Thailand. They would like to go to Keukenhof themselves, so let's ask for a different price for Thai as well. Or we ask them an entrance fee if they want to view our waterfalls (tulip fields).
I talk to good lawyers almost every day, that's why I live next to a family of lawyers. And no, it doesn't even cost me money because good neighbors help each other where needed.
And about getting tired of tricks to deal with the farang? Could that be because the farang, and certainly the "us ben zuni" farang, does everything not to pay for normal things?
— I'm willing to pay for everything, but don't be put off because I have white skin, I call that pure discrimination. I am married to a Thai woman so why do I have to pay to see her country while she can see the waterfall for free.
http://www.bangkok.com/restaurant-offers/baiyok-sky.htm
Look here is the price for the Baiyoke buffet, Above rate not applicable for domestic (Thai).
Dear Pete,
strange huh? that if I show my ID, Thai driver's license, I can enter for the same price as the Thai, at the waterfall for example.
Whether I would want to do that and/or do that is another matter: a Thai with his so-called salary (we all know what that means) is cheaper at a waterfall or something like a rich tourist
is, at least for me, completely normal!! Jan with the Cap comes to Thailand and wants to be immediately and immediately put on the same page as the Thai, what nonsense! The NL'er not only wants the multiculti club in NL to adapt to NL, no! the Dutchman wants the whole world to adapt to the schoolmaster!
I can go on about that for a long time, about the why, but I don't feel like it.
That as a Dutchman in my "own" country at the Keukenhof and museums etc etc etc
is completely taken out, shall we forget? Or for parking in the center
have to pay a euro or 4 per hour, and a 30 euro to park alone! at the zaanse schans!
Not to mention discriminating against the NL'er in "own" country!
We came here because we like it, climate, cheap, good food, good medical care, etc etc etc
and especially with the Germans and NL'ers I see on all kinds of forums a complaining and whining and moaning about everything and something, a constant trying to make everything even cheaper!!
or preferably get it for free! a constant attempt to piss off and swindle the Thai, our host! A General AND a gardener come to my house for breakfast on the terrace, and I get invitations from the Thai families for anything and everything and that's how it should be!
(and I don't have the "advantage" of having a Thai wife)
Sorry Sorry!! But that may be said once in a while on a so-called Thailand “enthusiasts” blog! And you don't like it? EVA, KLM and ChinaAir fly daily to the expensive, cold, cozy country, wave wave….
Moderator: We have already written something about the double prize system. This is off topic. Comments that are not related to the topic of the posting will be removed.
The general and the colonel also visited me regularly until they found out that there was nothing for them to get from me.
I often get things from the Gardener and other poor people and vice versa.
Sounds like that.
There is certainly something wrong with my driver's license, if I show it, I have already had to pay the farang price 3 times.
Not to mention road checks where as a farang, especially near Korat, you have to take into account that you will be stopped again after a few kilometers.
The boys let them know that the loot is on its way.
You drove on the right too long there.
The post for this happened to me to be allowed to pay a fine of THB 800 in April to be allowed to continue driving again.
They said my insurance had expired 1 day.
That was already strange to be allowed to continue uninsured.
In hindsight I now have a Dutchman as an insurance agent who now shows that I was insured until the end of May.
Have fun with your general but watch out .
The law of reciprocity should apply, just like in Taiwan, Turkey and South Korea. Thais cannot buy land there. And the excuse that it is not to drive up land prices is a lot of bullshit. I see here in Chiangmai how the land has gradually become unaffordable for the local people, because many rich Bangkokians flee here and buy land.
As usual, the story in the Telegraph is not complete. The construction via a company that was only set up for the purpose of owning land is no longer or hardly used. Yes, if it concerns an active company that also develops other activities. Then it's perfectly legal. In addition, the company must meet a minimum number of shareholders, with 51 percent of the shares in Thai hands.
It is curious that no one mentions the usufruct construction, in which the lease is concluded on the lives of the people who sign. Let your adult children (or even grandchildren) sign and the land will remain in your possession for much longer than 30 years. Perfectly legal, but rarely enforced, because foreigners don't know the ins and outs.
In certain circumstances, the BOI, the Board of Investment, can also authorize 100 percent foreign ownership of a piece of land.
By the way: Marcus Collins is a Dutchman…
The minimum number of shareholders of the company is currently 4 persons
with 51 percent in Thai hands.
These should meet once a year for a “meeting” and a
make a “report”, those persons are paid for it. How much is in advance
consulted.
The land comes into ownership after a period of 3 x 30 years.
For the first 30 years it is a “purchase” construction with a right to the next
period.
This is what I have understood so far to be allowed to buy land as a foreigner.
If not, I'd like to hear about it.
Another possibility is to have your Thai partner buy the land.
(possibly to rent)
Sincerely,
Lodewijk
I have never heard of the fact that land comes into ownership after 3 times 30 years. A suspected case of wishful thinking.
The maintenance of a company costs about 10.000 baht annually. The construction is hardly or no longer used due to the ban on nominees.
The first thirty years are more or less guaranteed, after that you just have to wait and see what the owner of the land wants or does.
Mr. Piet, there are no watertight constructions!! Or you would have leased for thirty years. Are you tired of all the tricks they invent to deal with the farang? Well Thailand is getting tired of those tricks that the farang invents to slip through the loopholes of the laws. Farang just has to comply with the law, and not bleep if he gets “caught” if he does not comply with the applicable rules!!!
Dear Peter ,
i find it extremely strange that you suddenly seem to want to represent thai law, this for a country where laws are by definition bound by corruption and arbitrariness
Perhaps you should look into a job here with the government can be very profitable in your case
As you read I get a bit pissed off with your moral knight reaction and that even as someone who doesn't own a house in a so-called construction!
It is quite normal that people always take advantage of the loopholes all over the world and are not willing to invest their money without any security
If you think that's normal, you just put up a house with rented land
Kind regards Ton
Ton what's wrong with wanting to respect the laws. After 10 years here I've never had a problem worth mentioning with the authorities, I just stick to the rules, bitch huh?
What bothers me about the law is that it assumes that every foreigner is a land speculator. Pietje who is married to Moo cannot buy a house with the accompanying land. What are the Thais afraid of? That Pietje, if the marriage fails, takes a shovel in hand, shovels the soil in his suitcase and takes it to Roosendaal? Absurd of course, especially when you consider that Thais can just buy land and a house in Europe, America and Australia and that many have already done so.
I understand that the Thais are reluctant when it comes to land in tourist areas, land that can quickly increase in value in a short time. If that were to go on sale, there is a good chance that wealthy foreigners would buy up the entire Thai coastline. But to now be afraid of Pietje, who wants nothing more than to settle down with Moo in Isaan, but also does not want to run the risk of Moo throwing Pietje out on the street after a kitchen dispute, is completely idiotic.
This probably stems from stupid nationalism and misplaced pride that Thailand has never been colonized.
Don't forget that the current law allows the wealthy Thais to buy up the land for low prices, after first lending the farmers money at extortionate prices. Raw capitalism in practice.
@Hans,
That's also something. Many Thai farmers and fishermen (on the islands) have received a tip for their land from the Sino-Thai speculators and now work for a dog tip as a waiter in a resort built on land that previously belonged to them. Count out your profit. Or Sino Thais who buy up farmland for 50.000 baht per rai and then leave it fallow. No, a wonderful law, to protect the Thai population.
The principle that laws are made to favor big corporations has nothing to do with capitalism (free market) but with corporatism and fasicme (collaboration of state and corporations). Please know what you are talking about when you talk about capitalism, thanks in advance.
Who is talking about big companies? These are wealthy Thai families who can buy land for little money from farmers who are over their heads in debt. That is capitalism: the right of the most wealthy, perhaps even exploitation of the weakest. I have no idea what corporatism and fascism (that's how you write) have to do with buying up land. Know what I'm talking about?
Mmm, don't argue guys! If there is an -ism at all, misguided nationalism is the culprit here!
Boy, if everyone just follows the law then it's done. Why do we Dutch people always have to come up with constructions to be the owner. As the innkeeper is, he trusts his guests. The comparison with the prices of Keukenhof also eludes me. If you can't get by on the minimums you get from the NL state, you should stay home and don't complain.
In any case, it clarifies what is and what is not possible.
'Why do we Dutch people always have to come up with constructions to be owners'…well, I'll give you a good reason. If you put millions of baht on the table to buy something, it's nice to know that you see something in return, instead of just a vague rental structure. Therefore. This applies to all buyers, not just the Dutch.
Everyone must obey the law, yes I have a 30 year lease.
The house is on 2 rai land, which is owned by my Thai family.
Pretty normal to arrange, lease is on the channot! And a separate lease contract included, at the land office, tax paid, everything ok!
All that difficult stuff about the law, it's supposed to be like that and then stick to it.
@Olga,
If you were to delve into the how and why of this law, you might not be so casual about it. A thirty year lease is nothing more than a thirty year lease. If the Thais in Europe had such a 'separate status', many wealthy Thais would be 'not amused'.” Jeez, they treat us the way we treat the Farang in Thailand. Snie fair” (cry, cry)
Like Olga, I have a lease of 30 years, with the right to extend,
I am now working on my 4th house (building)
I can sell with that “rental contract”,
I can bequeath it, heirs whoever
I can extend it
i can renew it,
I can choose the owner from whom I lease, friends e.g.
the owner cannot burden it with debts,
the owner can't sell it,
so what's wrong with it? nothing!
For example, a rental contract exists in NL, can I sell? No!
can I fail? No!
That's a lease!
In addition, there are plans to extend the lease term and/or enable farangs
to buy max. 1 rai, and no! don't say we've been hearing that for ten years!, those plans are now there!
And if you have a good lawyer put together the lease contract, you have a reasonably good guarantee.
Those are the facts and just like everywhere in the world, those who think they can arrange it themselves "just a little bit" and thus save a lawyer and other necessary things cheaply, yes, they come with their water to the doctor and then cry doing!
Not quite complete. you can indeed sell your house with land, but with the remaining lease. It is up to the owner of the land whether he wants to extend it to 30 years upon sale.
The same applies to omissions.
For renewal you really need the permission of the owner of the land. If you have a good relationship with your Thai partner, that's no problem, but oh well if that's not the case.
And of course you can choose the owner in whose name you put the land and of course the owner cannot sell or tax it.
The rest is wishful thinking. I will no longer see Thai land in foreign hands, otherwise through a construction of the BOI. the Board of Investment. in Thailand.
My friend had an excellent lawyer and yet he has been litigating over the lease for over a year because his girlfriend kicked him out. I hope you never cry.
Hans Bos,
absolutely not right!
The lease contract, which is submitted to the land department and is official, contains clauses
which excludes the landowner in advance!
Experienced in practice myself, when selling my first 3 houses, the landowner was not even involved!
2nd, when I sold my first 3 houses there was 1 buyer who wanted to start a new lease of 30 years, same story as above!
no landowner was involved, all that is involved is a corporate tax that must be paid on the declared value of the house, and that is only payable if you sell within 5 years!
3rd, if you continue to live in your house and you come close to the, say, 28 year lease, you can simply renew the lease at the land department! the landowner is not involved there either!
the closules in the lease contract are simple and official, the landowner gives his consent in advance and without intervention!
As I have said several times here, get a good one!!! lawyer!!, and after more than 30 years in the international real estate business, I still do not understand the amateurism of the buyer or the real estate agent! When I hear what buyers do, or rather don't do, and where they transfer the money for the purchase, for example, my hair stands on end!
If you buy a car in NL, you get a contract and for what? a goggo of 20 or 30K euros? And abroad, when buying a house or whatever of 1,5 or 2 or 3 tons or more euros, the farangs will “arrange it themselves”
to save 120000 baht (in my last case to the laywer)??
What do the English call it again? penny wise pound foolish, or something like that.
BOI, I know someone here who owns many rai's, farang, that's possible! but with an investment of more than 40 million baht and some other strict conditions,
Is this a reaction, or a sales talk to find a new “buyer”.
Dear Peter,
a/ I have owned a construction company and real estate agency!
for nearly 40 years,
b/ because I am now retired and don't feel like sitting behind palm trees
I travel a lot, and occasionally build a new house so that I
I feel a bit like myself in “the old profession” again! walking around construction
pick out tile, furniture and kitchens etc etc etc
c/ should not think about selling to a Dutchman, they want everything for nothing
so no! no sales pitch!
@ cor,
No, I'm not being laconic, the spot where my house is is perfect for me! And my Thai family are my heirs, and yes the “rental contract” is just a little security built in for me!
And I must say that I do not cry, but live here daily with a big smile, without falangs around me! If I want to speak Dutch, I'll skype to the Netherlands!
Fortunately, it doesn't feel like a "status separate" to me.
Ps Lakoniek you write with a C (use spell check).
@Olga,
It's not about how you feel at all. The point of this article is that the Thai government is playing a double game. Many politicians own land in New Zealand, England, Australia and many countries in Europe (Montenegro suddenly bubbles up).
The fact that foreigners are not allowed to own land, not even half a rai to build a house on, has nothing to do with the idea that all those scary foreigners would otherwise buy up the whole country, but with an idiotic nationalism that has sprung from the idea that Thailand has never been colonized and that a foreigner who buys a house with land in Nakhon Sawan is seen as a settler.
That the Thais have indeed been colonized (by Japan) and more recently by the Chinese, who settled here two, three generations ago and now have all the power - check it out, every Thai politician or every Thai influential business family is 100% Chinese .
Of course, the brown skins of children do not read that in the history books at school, because otherwise a completely different Thailand could arise.
Tip for Olga. Before you start pointing out silly spelling mistakes to others, I would first have a look at that lease contract. Who knows, you might come across another surprise.
Dear Cor, I don't often laugh at all those comments, but now I thought it necessary to respond. Who or what is cremated in that lease contract?
Cor,
I'm sorry, but that story of yours really makes no sense, not at all that story of colonization,
been occupied by the Japs would be better, that there are a large percentage of Thai Chinese, the word says it all, is a thing colonized?
How many races/groups/the like live in Burma? Laos? and we have Chinese here who settled here hundreds of years ago, itinerants, nomads or whatever you want to call them, the so-called Thai-Chinese, and I also know 100% Thais who are filthy rich.
What you could blame the Thai for is that because they have not been colonized, they have a reasonable disadvantage with, for example, foreign languages, of which English is the most important, especially in a country with tens of million tourists.
And also because they have missed being a colony, they are somewhat “worldly”
But I can live with it very well, I have been living outside NL for more than 40 years, in various countries, so my spelling will also suffer 🙂
@ cor,
In the meantime I now know how many blog writers and also some readers, but especially the moderators think about politics in Thailand, in many cases I completely agree.
But accepting the fact that “there is a law” that prohibits a foreigner from owning land is clear as day for me! And most foreigners are married to a Thai partner, then it is no problem for these foreigners and their Thai partner to buy half a rai and have their house built there.
And most foreign couples who buy a house here like to stick together at a resort-like event, with all the same goose in front of the kitchen window. No, that's not my thing, hence my reaction "how I arranged it", and then I get all the fuss over me again, which can annoy me, because yes the history book I know that now. As you may also remember, I also know a Dutchman from Thai education, and I hear enough about that, and of course I do not agree with that.
But accepting that there are loopholes in the law, and then just abusing them, no, that's not my thing!
And yes, you as a moderator and teacher must of course set a good example in terms of Dutch language, especially after the discussion of the statement of the week about moderating this blog, which was stopped very quickly due to the large number of responses!
But despite these differences of opinion, I continue to find this blog educational and read it with pleasure, and I am happy when around 15.00 p.m. in Thailand my mail box is filled again with the latest news and fun stories made by the editorial members of this blog!
@ Olga, there are only two moderators: John and Peter. Those are the two editors. Cor is not a moderator but a guest blogger and has nothing to do with the statement, it comes from my hat (Peter)
The posting was not about the Dutch language but about the level on many forums. Unfortunately it degenerated into a yes / no about capitals and periods. Like so many discussions here, we keep drifting off topic. That is annoying for the readers. A reason for me to end the discussion. Nobody writes flawlessly, mistakes in comments are allowed. But we ward off slobs and easygoers. Then they should discuss it elsewhere.
It's not about complying with the law, it's about the principle of equality within the legal frameworks. Just as everyone in the world tries to slip through existing loopholes within the bandwidth of the law, so do foreigners in Thailand. There is nothing wrong with that.
Incidentally, a lease in Thailand is by no means watertight, as witnessed by the experiences of a Dutch friend with a lease contract, who has been litigating for over a year now to get his point.
And then another thing: when the lease has ended, you have lost your home and hearth. Given your age, that may not interest you, but do any heirs think so lightheartedly about it?
What is not watertight about a lease contract?
yes it leaks if it is not put together properly, so by a good lawyer!
I have never had 1 problem in all these years, see my answer above.
Same story when the lease has ended, you can do it!! extend expiration!
And idd 1 thing, I no longer experience the end of my lease, but it simply passes to the heirs, and that is all recorded and also officially at the land department!
Read my response elsewhere in the response. You can indeed extend the lease before it expires, but you always (!) require the cooperation of the official owner. And furthermore, I wish you much wisdom and a stable relationship.
What's so great about owning land? If I buy a piece of land in my girlfriend's name, then "rent" the land from her for the next 30 years (I've never lived anywhere that long), I'll be 85 when the lease ends. When I get to that age.
In the meantime we can build our dream house (or have it built).
This seems to me to be a legal and fairly safe way, doesn't it?
here you also run a big risk: Your girlfriend can have an accident or break up.
Out of contract and the rest of her family collapses into (their) house. Farang day!
It is better to rent (an existing) house then you can always get rid of it if the neighbor starts a disco or a repair workshop or something like that.
I still don't get that possession; you gamble that everything will go well and at the same time lose part or all of your capital if you want something different in the future.
Isn't it about living instead of owning?
Frank F
That is why not only a lease contract, but also have wills drawn up. If your girlfriend/wife/owner of the land dies before then, you can still continue to live.
The Dutch like rules, so we refer once again to the laws, of which we clearly have too many and the Thai too few.
Everyone has their own opinion, but what's the point? Is it fear? Are the Thai afraid that we will take their land? It is not impossible for a foreigner to own land in the Netherlands and build a house and leave it to heirs. Has the Netherlands become worse as a result?
In the meantime, it is no problem at all if, for example, an entire island is deforested for the construction of resorts and hotels, as long as money flows in.
Quite right if one uses the loopholes in the law. If they close this one, they will find another one. Learned nothing again.
Today there was an article at thai visa forum, 30% of thailand is foreign owned. Trust me this can't go on forever. How would they feel in the Netherlands if 30% of the Netherlands were owned by foreigners?
I read Thaivisa several times a day, but can't find the story. Can you provide the url.
By the way, this story was already doing the rounds in Thailand many months ago. Turns out to be a crazy story. One third of Thailand…do you know how big the country is?
Dear Peter,
If you think logically for a moment, you will know that this cannot be true. As far as I know, about 65 million Thais live there. Let's assume that there are another 10% foreigners. So we are talking about 6,5 million foreigners of all nationalities.
One should therefore think first of all of the Burmese, Laotians, Cambodians and Chinese. And – except maybe the last group – I don't think the other groups mentioned will have a lot of Real Estate.
I would then like to see the substantiation of this percentage of 30%. Even in the much more liberal (?) Netherlands with about 1,5 million (= about 10% of the population) foreigners, it is certainly not the case that 10% of Dutch territory is in foreign hands.
And I do have some difficulty with the reliability of this kind of data provided when 30 % is in the hands of foreigners. The total area of Thailand is approximately 515.000 km2. That would mean that approximately 155.000 km2 of it is in foreign hands.
Then each (!) foreigner would own 100.000 m2 of land. (so also every Cambodian, Burmese etc). That simply cannot be true. And if it is true, then please substantiate this nonsensical assumption.
I also see it happening here in CM, land is sold cheaply by mostly older people where 1000 bth is a lot of money in their eyes. And later you see that quite a few houses are being built on it. A million bth for people from Bangkok.
I have 1 question regarding this issue. -If my Thai wife buys land in Thailand, does she have to prove that the money does not come from a “farang”? And is it true that someone else can get this land if my wife is little present
on her piece of land? Thanks for your answer.
Let me list it one more time (Sunbelt Asia via Thaivisa):
Foreigners are not legally allowed to own land although with a few exceptions they can own one rai of non-inheritable land.
That said, many foreigners started majority Thai owned limited companies with the sole reason of buying land and this loophole is now being closed as more land offices are cracking down on non-active companies that purchase land. The Thai government has issued guidelines for local Land Offices to follow in regards to partially foreign owned companies buying and holding land. The use of nominee shareholders is being eliminated and this is not a wise way to obtain land.
Current regulations require that the company be an actively trading business with money flowing through the books, shareholders meetings must be held, minutes taken and annual audits filed. Additionally the company must have a legitimate business purpose that is registered with the Business Registration Department.
The Land Office will investigate all Thai shareholders of a company wishing to purchase land and ensure that they are legitimate investors with enough financial resources to actually invest the required amount of capital in the company.
The Thai spouse of a foreigner can purchase land but he or she must show there is no foreign claim to the money. While a foreign spouse can give the money to their Thai spouse they will most likely be required to sign a paper at the Land Office stating they make no claim on the money or the land, that it is personal property (Sin Suan Tua) and not common property (Sin Som Rot).
This can also be recorded at the Thai Embassy overseas if the foreign spouse is overseas or by a qualified notary.
The Thai spouse is the sole owner of the land and can mortgage, transfer or sell it without requiring the permission of the foreign spouse as it is not joint marital property. It is only the country that this regulation applies to and not any structures built jointly upon the property.
Foreigners can obtain management of the property either through a 30 year lease that may be renewable at the discretion of the owner or through a usufruct that can be given for life.
With a 30 year lease the foreign tenant does not own any interest in the country. This is generally completely acceptable with the Thai government and the foreigner can have a wide spectrum of rights to the country during the term of the lease. The Foreigner may, if the lease provisions stipulate it, even be able to own any building structure on the land in his name.
If the Lessee is renting an undeveloped piece of land and he or she intends to build his or her own structural building (house) on the designated land, it is best to specify the ownership of the building in the original agreement. If it is not specified and the lease expires, then the building will be considered the property of the landowner.
If the tenant would like to transfer his rights to the land he will be limited to assigning those rights to the land to a third party (if allowed by the Lessor or the lease). In order to be valid, any lease longer than a three year period must be registered with the local Land Office where the land is located. Leases for up to three years may be entered into with a simple contract and do not need to be registered. Any lease longer than 3 years would be registered at the local Land Office and on the back of the title deed or Certificate of Use. Registering the lease at the local Land Office allows any potential third party purchasers of the land to know of the tenant's rights to the land during the period of the lease. If a third party buyer was to buy it, the tenant's rights would be acquired for the remainder of the term of the lease.
Many foreigners are told by sellers or developers that they can get the initial 30 year lease plus a second term of 30 years plus an additional third term 30 year lease option. However, under the Civil Commercial Code only the first 30 years is guaranteed valid for the tenant's rights to the lease (once the lease is registered at the local Land Office). There are court decisions which indicate that the renewal clause is personal to the landlord and thus may not be binding on his heirs or future landlords (Lessor).
Also a lease contract can contractually bind the lessor to agree to a second term of 30 years, but again this is only enforceable after the owner of the land goes with the tenant to the Land Office and registers a 2nd term of 30 years. If the owner of the land does not wish to register the second term of thirty years, the tenant could file a lawsuit with the civil court against the owner, reason being breach of a contract between two individuals.
A lease for industrial or commercial purposes can be granted for a term of up to 50 years and this may also include an option to renew for a further 50 years.
A usufruct is a right granted by an owner of land in favor of a usufructuary where the usufructuary has the right to possess, use and enjoy the benefits of the property. The usufructuary can also have the right of management of the property.
A usufruct may be created for your natural life. You also can lease the land to a third party which would not end if you died. Example: If you died, you can lease out the property to a third party before your demise as per the Supreme Court ruling 2297/1998; “the lessor does not have to be the owner of the property. Therefore the usufructuary can rent out the land. In the event of death of the usufruct within the lease term, only the usufruct will be terminated but not also the lease.” However, any lease agreements longer than 3 years must be registered with the Land Office and with the title deed.
A usufruct can also be given to more than 1 person at the time. With the usufruct, you are registered on the title deed. The land can never be sold or transferred by the owner of the land until the servitude is terminated. You can also get a yellow book which is a House Registration
Owning 1 rai of non-inheritable land refers to an investment in Thailand of at least 40 million baht. Almost never happens…
Sunbelt Asia is a business, better, a real estate business and every broker/agent/web lays down the law? different, in other words everyone has their own explanation(s)
what is in my lease contract broadly corresponds, but with some more closules, which are therefore officially registered with the land department!
they have proven their usefulness in recent years, and therefore also the lawyer's fees!
After 3 sales, I have no ownership, and I don't have a Thai partner who leases me the land! The house is in my name and the Chanote (land title of Nor Sor 4.Jor) also has my name on it. This is the absolutely only country title that did! All others still have a risk because they cross “state land”!
Without a yellow book you can also register your house in the lease AND separately, with the land department, many do not do this because they then have to pay, a little, tax. Same story with the application for a yellow book.
And my wisdom I leave to my lawyer in all such cases,
who charges me a huge amount, but what is that compared to the purchase or construction of a house costing several hundred thousand?
I have forgotten about penny wise pound foolish for a long time, and after 40 years of real estate and building I still don't know anything about it? it's sad 🙂
The bottom line is that after paying for the land you waive your rights. The money should come from you. See my response elsewhere. I've never heard of the latter problem.
Lease then you pay an amount per month for the rent, right?
You do not pay the purchase amount and then hope that you can use it.
The legal owner then has an interest in you getting the hell out of there.
Because then he can do the game again.
Why don't foreigners stop doing these (nonsense?) practices.
People stop throwing away your good money in (illegal) constructions.
And when things go wrong, people often keep their mouths shut out of shame.
If all foreigners in Thailand stop giving money away to what they call "I buy one in another man's name" or I put it in a Thai company, you should see how quickly the law changes. Or, just like for foreign companies, you get a region where foreigners are allowed to own property. Because the Thai government (just like any government) naturally wants to get money flowing to their country.
Very often I am asked by the locals why don't you buy a house in someone else's name.
My answer is then I can't buy land I can only give my money away.
When I then ask to put the new apartment or the new car they want to buy in my name, they look very surprised. When I say if they don't put the car or the apartment in my name that they certainly don't like me or don't trust me, they get annoyed. Strange, they liked me so much anyway (when I spent money).
I am curious if there are non-Muslim countries in Asia where a foreigner may legally own land. does anyone know?
A very negative reaction. Of course you don't give your money away. You lend the purchase price of the land to your Thai partner/wife. You then agree that you will rent the land (for 30 years + option 30 years by exercising it without the consent of your wife/partner).
You also agree that the rent to be paid for the land will be offset by the interest paid on the loan. And finally: you agree that you can cancel the loan at any time.
Of course these are not oral agreements, but contractual agreements.
And finally you agree that – in case you die before your partner/wife – she can continue to live in the house until her death.
In her will she declares to leave the land to your heirs (children). They can then sell the house + land.
Everyone happy.
well,
it's not hard to give stupid comments, especially if you just don't want to know any better!
lease is not rent! however you spin it!
I lease a piece of land, for 30 years, and pay an amount for it! In 1 try!
Then I let the lawyer put together a lease contract where I already have enough
wrote about it above and you're done!
I can “take” the lease from anyone I don't have a Thai partner, wife or girlfriend!
I lease from the landowner and above is, again, exactly how that works!
So before you react negatively again I would first go google on various sites how it really works!
I think you're just a trader.
Yes, just look at Google.nl and search: lease means Wikipedia then you read
“ In the strict sense of the concept of lease, a contract contains a purchase option that gives the lessee the opportunity, without obligation, at a price determined when the contract was concluded (the residual value), to return the leased equipment at the end of the term. to buy.
If this option is not provided, then it concerns a lease (where ownership does not transfer from lessor to lessee at the end)
Yes, you read that right, if that option is not provided then it concerns a RENTAL CONTRACT!!
You will find good information here http://www.samuiforsale.com/
Take a look at Lease-law, among other things, then you can read.
Enforceability of a rental with a fixed term and consecutive leases
Thai Lease Registration
REGISTRATION OF LEASES LEASEHOLD RENTALS EXCEEDING A 3-YEAR TERM
Under hire of property laws in Thailand any property lease (rental with a fixed term) exceeding 3 years must be in writing and recorded on the ownership title deed (land or condominium title deed) as kept in the registers of the provincial or local land office section 538 Civil and Commercial Code. If the lease agreement between the parties is not registered with the Land Department the lease is enforceable by action for a 3 year term only. The term of a registered lease agreement cannot exceed 30 years (section 540) and is automatically extinguished at the end of the registered term (section 564). A short term contract does not have to be registered but must be in writing to be Term of the lease in the contract
Real estate lease agreements in Thailand cannot exceed 30 years. Any longer term will be reduced to 30 years pursuant to section 540 Civil and Commercial Code. Pre-agreeed renewals, pre-signed consecutive contracts or even registered contracts suggesting a longer term are not enforceable by legal action under Thai contract law because of the conflict with section 540 Civil and Commercial Code. It is possible to include such terms based on the general freedom of contract between the parties but having it in writing says nothing about the future enforceability of such terms.
I think you don't want to know any better, why? As you mentioned you build and sell
Those who want to sell real estate, their interest is to sell.
As far as I know, there is 1 country in this region, namely Malaysia, where you can own real estate as a foreigner, so this is not an option for those who really want to own something here as property! I would leave quickly in that case, there are already many people who are going there, let those Thais just shoot in the foot in their own country, in the near future it could be the case that they will be very hard will have to shout about the current developments in neighboring countries. In neighboring countries, a lot can be learned from Thailand's mistakes, which can still benefit us foreigners.
siamese ,
not sure, all sorts of conflicting messages.
if you can buy it is a/ not that simple b/ certain types of real estate,
lengthy and complicated, c/ I believe the “lower limit” is also at least 50.000 euros
lease there is 99 years and you get, with sufficient income and / or bank account
a visa for 10 years
but do you want to live in a muslim country?
Malaysia is not Iran either I think, I have not been there yet but I have heard many positive things about it, what I do know is that it is all a bit more expensive and more developed there. And what is very important in my opinion, based on what I know less discrimination against farangs, so interesting.
Donald, otherwise you should google Malaysia my second home program, or MM2H on the English Wikipedia, also available under this title, here I think you will find the most truthful information, I think good luck if it interests you. Salute.
Siamese,
Thank you!
But I have been there many times, beautiful country, not expensive and good infrastructure and quite nice people.
But I don't want to live there, stay here 😉
Even if you have a watertight contract and things go wrong in your relationship because the Thai family becomes too greedy and your relationship breaks down, it doesn't matter whether you have 10 lawyers or none, they will just bully you out of your legally occupied house. One day no water, the next day no electricity, neighbors no longer look at you and that's just the beginning.
So never buy more in Thailand than what fits in your suitcase, you lose the rest.
After selling the owner-occupied house, where I still got about 80 percent of my investment back, I am happy in my rented house here and it is unthinkable for me to ever embark on the owner-occupied house adventure for myself here.
It depends a bit on where you buy, of course, but with a freehold condominium you don't have all this misery. But in the Isan countryside you don't have that choice of course.
I actually wonder how big the problem is in Thailand. How many foreigners own land through some construction? And how much is that of the total Thai land area.
And how many Thais cannot buy land because foreigners have land? I have heard that it is less than 0,5% of the total thai land area.
And the fact that land prices may be on the high side is certainly not due to foreigners, but to Thai project developers, who largely build house projects. In addition, approximately 98% is sold to Thais. So who is actually driving the price up?
Finally. The Thai government could consider allowing only those foreigners to buy land where it is also possible for Thais to acquire land in their country of origin.
Moderator: don't tar all Thai with the same brush, that's not allowed according to our house rules.