khunPer

More important would be to teach folks to stop throwing their used plastic and styrofoam – and other stuff too – the wrong places, but dispose of it in proper garbage bins.

4 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

Yeah they actually raided a whole "law office" because of dodgy nominee structures there:

 

Wasn't the first time tho: https://www.samuiforsale.com/real-estate/samui-nominee-shareholder-investigations.html

 

 

There are many many of these cases, most don't make it into the news.

When they caught that german running a hotel a  few weeks ago they also complained about his nominee structure: https://thethaiger.com/news/samui/raid-on-18-foreign-owned-koh-samui-hotels-owners-arrested

 

 

samui and pha ngan are extremely hot on this, my lawyer always has nice stories about those 2 special islands ????

 

 

Simple rule... Your shareholders should be well known to you, either friends, family or business partners and should have an actual interest in the company.

Also pay your taxes and do something, companies just holding land without doing anything are a nogo.

 

Not sure what happens if they investigate you and find misdoings, guess there's a chance to fix it either restructuring or selling the property. For sure going to get expensive tho...

Yes, the authorities checked a Samui branch of DFDL, but we never heard about anybody in problems on the island because of using a Thai company limited as owner for a private home. So far the checks have been for larger projects using nominee shareholders, not for single homes, and that's what I ask examples for, because that is what this thread is about.

Nominee shareholders in small companies – for example names of employees in a law firm placed as shareholders, which were common practice until about a decade ago when setting up a company limited for property ownership – have been illegal for long time. If someone use nominee shareholders, or haven't changed their nominee shareholders in a old company, they could face problems. However, they don't loose property, but are given a time frame to bring things in order. Its typically the older company limiteds with seven shareholders, when the law changed to minimum three shareholders only, they began to check proof of funds for the Thai shareholders upon registration to eliminate nominees. 

The story with the German man – Kiran is his name, and he is well known to many of us on the island – has nothing to do with deed and owners, all his documents showed to be legal, and in good order, but he had no hotel-permission for renting out for shorter terms than one month, that was his problem. It has nothing to do with a company limited. Kiran thought that he had the hotel-permission cleared it by paying some money, the mentioned 800k baht, but the story is not crystal clear. The hotel permission problems is not only for him, but also for others, caused by local hotel, or resort, owners that feel they loose business to the growing popularity of villa rentals. Miskavan is another, and much bigger case.

Knowing the shareholders in a company limited has already been mentioned for OP...

–and OP replied here...

5 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

Extremely dangerous and dodgy, same reason people are losing their property all over samui and co.

Do you have any examples of people on Samui loosing their property because of this "structure"..?

2 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

Would add that you can get a building permit without real land "owners" written permission if you have a usufruct or lease in your name tho.

Thanks for your reply.

Lease is depending of the text in the leasing agreement.

Not all land offices will issue usufruct for foreigners.

????

IMO a pity that they didn't manage to get a 30-day extension-of-stay, including a complimentary accommodation at Bangkok Hilton...????

3 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

Then you get superficies for the house in your own name, i am not sure this is possible when the house is already on there tho - ask  a lawyer.

Not possible to my knowledge, a superficies is issued before building a house. If a house is already registered together with the land, it normally cannot be separated.

Its also depending on what assets are listed in the company limited's books, if the house is listed there, its a company asset.

If the house is already separated, it can be sold separate from the land, and only when re-sold registered separate. When building a new house, the building permission – together with other documents with the owner's name – is proof of ownership, eventually together with a superficies; a written permission from land owner is always needed to obtain a building permission in another name than the land owner.

????

4 hours ago, BillBilous said:

Not good at all, boring and a total waste of time sitting around Samui Immigration. Many other places in Thailand operate an online system why not Samui ?

Boring? 90-days address report normally takes 10-15 minutes.

More a pity for those living at Phangan that need to travel over every 90 days.

Some times I really mis a wow-????-emoji , this is one of them...

22 hours ago, MikeN said:

Use his name or you will have problems....

Keep using your name or you will have problems....

Simple, keep both names; one as the middle name, for example the Thai family name...????

2 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

4 hours ago, khunPer said:

You can read more about requirements for non-immigrant A-O here "Retirement Visa Non-Immigrant Visa “O-A” (1 Year Visa)".

????

 

14 hours ago, BritManToo said:

It's just about the length of stay, not the reason for stay.

Correct for non-immigrant O, but not for non-immigrant A-O, which is only issued to people over 50 years, and officially called "retirement visa" (se above link).

http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84508-Non-Immigrant-visas.html#7

Non-Immigrant Type O- A (Long Stay) 1 Year per entries/Multiple entries/ 1 year validity 

 

The Thai Embassy in London don't agree with you.

It's officially called the Non Imm O-A Visa.

It's issued for the purpose of 'long stay' or 'retirement'.

The title and link is The Thai Embassy in Copenhagen, so I'm correct, but the embassy in Copenhagen states a different "name" from the embassy in London...????

2 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

So incorrect, I know where to start ☹️

What is incorrect – appreciate correction – did you at all read the link..?

2 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

5 hours ago, khunPer said:

The non-immigrant O visa can be extended on 1-year periods based on retirement.

You cannot extend a Visa.

The Visa expires on it's 'enter before' date

You extend your permission of stay.

Yes, of course ...O visa "permission of stay" can be extended, like I wrote in following paragraph, thanks for adding that...????

On 6/4/2019 at 6:17 AM, revgreen said:

Suggestions?

Cash payment...????

If your question was about finance, find a guarantor, or buy a cheap second hand temporary car, or long-term rent/lease a car, until you can prove bank records...????

8 hours ago, JTXR said:

OK, 90 days vs. 1 year.  Got it.

But what are the differences (financial requirements and police background check) when applying for the visa in one's home country?  Can the Non O be applied for in Thailand?  Can the Non O be extended again and again like the Non OA?

Yes and no, and yes.

The Non-immigrant O visa is for 90-days; however, you can apply for a 1-year multiple entry non-immigrant O, which will give you a 90 day stamp on entry, and you can re-enter up to 1 year, i.e. if you re-enter Thailand just before expiration, you can in total have something like 1 year and 90 days, but never stay more than 90-days before you need to exit Thailand (visa run).

The non-immigrant O visa can be extended on 1-year periods based on retirement.

The non-immigrant O-A is the so-called "retirement visa" issued to people over 50-years in a limited number of foreign countries' Thai embassies (must apply in one's home country). It require almost same documentation as an annual extension based on retirement, and similar financial proof, but the fund don't need to be inside Thailand. Furthermore criminal record, and a health insurance is required, which has lately been much discussed. You will get a one year entry, but shall do 90-days reports, like when having an annual extension of stay. You can extend your stay on the non-immigrant A-O visa for one year, same conditions as when extending stay based on retirement of a non-immigrant O visa.

You can read more about requirements for non-immigrant A-O here "Retirement Visa Non-Immigrant Visa “O-A” (1 Year Visa)".

????

9 hours ago, BritManToo said:

It's just about the length of stay, not the reason for stay.

Correct for non-immigrant O, but not for non-immigrant A-O, which is only issued to people over 50 years, and officially called "retirement visa" (se above link).

2 hours ago, BadSpottedDog said:

The new rules are as follows, just so you know. We were told this directly by immigration officers, and read it on the immigration website. I'm assuming that you must one of the people that can keep 800k in the bank year round, otherwise, you would know this too. 
1. 800k in a Thai account 3 months prior, PLUS 400k in the bank the rest of the year. They are trying to get rid of the use of agents "loaning" money for 3 months.
2. 65k "from a FOREIGN source" deposited in her bank every month, with a certified bank letter to confirm drafted within 24 hours of renewal. The money CANNOT come from a Thai bank. 
3. They have done away with the "combination of the two" allowance

 

As for the US Embassy discontinuing the affidavits, it was not just the US. It was multiple countries. I would be surprised if the decision to do away with the affidavits were a joint effort / decision by multiple countries, all at the same time. Just some food for thought.

Thanks for update me on the "new rules", however I believe I'm quite confident in the rules...
1. 800k baht 2 month before, instead of 3 month before for renewal – some few immigrations might still wish 3 month before – and 3 month after application for extension of stay, the remaining 7 month not under 400 k baht in the bank deposit.

2. 65k a month has not been changed, but a few embassies only are no longer issuing an income guarantee letter; however US-embassy letters issue before 2018 year-end is valid for 6 month.

3. According to Thaivisa's visa-expert its still valid, but unclear how much shall be kept in bank deposit, 400k baht or equivalent to relative share of combination.

No, its not in number, but only a few embassies that have changed the affidavits, including USA, and Britain together with Australia and Canada, and the Danish (my home country) embassy also; however they can still issue for governmental retirement pension. I don't instantly recall having read about any others in Thaivisa forums.

In principle, you should always have transferred your mum's retirement pension into her account, however that's easy to say in the unbearably crystal clear light of hindsight...????

PS: Your saved $7,000 a month instead of Atalanta equals around 200k baht, so the 800k bank deposit is only 4 month saved cost. We knew about the change of affidavits from the US-embassy since last year, and affidavits issued before year-end was said to be valid for 6 month...

Quote

I want to renew my visa in 2019. How can I verify my income for the application?

• Thailand provides information about visa application and extension requirements on the Royal Thai Embassy in Washington, D.C., and the Thai Immigration Bureau websites. These include minimum savings and income amounts and types of evidence required.
• As of October 26, 2018, U.S. citizens can verify they meet the income requirements for retiree visas directly with Royal Thai Immigration by providing a local bank statement indicating a minimum deposit of 800,000 Thai Baht or evidence of having an income of at least 65,000 Thai Baht per month. Applicants should refer to the above-referenced websites for specifics regarding the timing and conditions associated with these deposits.
• We will continue to notarize income affidavit forms through the end of 2018. Thai Immigration Bureau officials confirmed to us that they will support early visa renewals for U.S. citizens during the transition period. The income affidavits are currently valid for six months.

Source: US Embassy Bangkok, 26 Oct. 2018.

6 hours ago, Lungstib said:

Out here in the countryside we dont make too many visits to the big supermarkets but buy most of our daily needs from the local market. Sadly the market that once offered goods mostly wrapped in leaf is now the great contributor to the plastic collection. One small serving of noodles gets a bag for the dry contents, a bag for the liquid and a small carrier to hold it by. Or there is the Styrofoam box plus a plastic spoon or fork, or the cold drink in the plastic cup with a bag to hang on your m'bike handle bars. Plus of course anywhere from the market to the villages you will find a trail of these items as they are discarded after consumption. Its going to take a revolution to change these habits and sellers dont care and schools are not tackling it.

This is the real problem: "...anywhere from the market to the villages you will find a trail of these items as they are discarded after consumption."

12 minutes ago, Delight said:

23 hours ago, khunPer said:

With condos, to my knowledge from other posters, the whole building, or complex, is regarded as "one company", and the 51% Thai shareholders have voting majority of the management of the condos (there are no preferred votes). Using a Thai company limited to own a condo only makes sense, if its a condo outside the 49% allotment allowed for foreign holding.

????

 So you are saying that owning a condo which is in a company makes sense.

By extension are you  also  saying that using a company for a house/land purchase makes no sense and is potentially dangerous?

Thanks for your comment.

No, I said: Using a Thai company limited to own a condo only makes sense, if its a condo outside the 49% allotment allowed for foreign holding – not that it makes sense to use a Thai company limited to own a condo, especially since there is a legal way for full foreign ownership of a condo, when within the 49% allowed for foreign ownership.

The situation could be that the foreign buyer insist on a condo in a building, where the 49% foreign allotment is already used, the only option might be a company limited.

When buying Land & House there is no legal alternative for us mobs – you need a 40+ million baht investor visa for being allowed to own up to one rai of land – and if you wish to use something else than the wife/girlfriend method, which in some reports have been mentioned as "potentially dangerous", a company limited might be an option, and might even be slightly less "potentially dangerous"...????

2 hours ago, BadSpottedDog said:

You really think I would choose a place for my Mom based on price? I know you don't know me, but it's sad that you would jump to that conclusion. You must be battling your own demons.

Actually "yes", I presumed that – and that's why I postet it – as you chose Chiang Mai for $3,000 instead of Atalanta for $10,000, and now Manila for $1,000 instead of Chiang Mai for $3,000.

There is no change in the financial requirements by immigration for staying as retired in Thailand, 65,000 baht transferred a month, or 800,000 baht in a bank deposit, or a combination of both, has been unchanged for years. But the US-embassy stopped issuing income letters, and that doesn't fit with the previous Thaivisa headline that said: "Alzheimer's patient forced out of Thailand: Daughter tells Thaivisa they love Thailand but immigration rule changes mean mum must go".

However, I sincerely hope your mom will be happy in Manila, and have a good long time there; and that you will be happy with their service, and at the same time have little extra funds for disposal. No need to blame That immigration.

????

PS: Do you know US Doctor Mary Newport's book "Alzheimer's Disease: What If There Was a Cure?: The Story of Ketones"?

Coconut oil is easy to get both here, and presumable also at Philippines, so might be worth a try – you could also check Mary Newport's home page here. 
 

9 hours ago, casualbiker said:

The house would be mortgaged in my wife's name.

I wouldn't think that is possible with property owned by a company limited – please correct me, if I'm wrong – but if your wife has assets, she might be able to be guarantor for a loan to the company.

9 hours ago, casualbiker said:

I would use myself (obviously) and my wife and her sister. Therefore keeping the company in the family.

You can for example give yourself 49% ordinary shares; your wife 48% ordinary shares; and your wife's sister 3% preferred shared with a guaranteed annual dividend of 4% of the nominel share value against no voting rights on the preferred shares. That will give you voting majority for 4% of 3% of the company's nominal shareholder capital; i.e. if 2 million baht (normal capital, as a company should include one work permit for a foreigner) then 3% is 60,000 baht, and 4% annual dividend is 2,400 baht.

You need to check with your lawyer, if you can change existing shares into preferred shares, or you need to extend the shareholder capital, which will cost a small registration fee for each 200,000 baht extra shareholder capital.

7 hours ago, HHTel said:

13 hours ago, khunPer said:

Singapore is an excellent example...????

But but but, this is Thailand.  Have you ever seen a Thai change their habits?

The only way to get rid of plastic here is enforcement.  Nobody here will change off their own bat.

"Enforcement" is to my knowledge exactly what Singapore did, and that successfully changed the habits of the people both living there, and those visiting; so it seems like you agree in such a solution...????

I first time read about Singapore's way to get rid of littering in the beginning of the 1970'ies when I was working with planning in an airline. We were going to have crews on stop in Singapore, so I made a local information folder for that route about the littering penalties, so we didn't loose a crew member for a flight, due to throwing garbage, or chewing gum – chewing-gum was then, and still is, to my knowledge, prohibited – as there was no way around it. Besides fines the offender would be forced to several days work, or even a week, by cleaning streets or like public areas; the article told that even American tourists – ladies with blue colored hair – were seen cleaning streets.

I was searching Google for documentation, but stuff from that time is not easily found; however, it seems like it hasn't changed that much, this article from Singapore's The Strait Times in 2015 shows, that its still valid:

Quote

On April 1 last year [2014], the Environmental Public Health Act was amended to deter those who continue to act irresponsibly.

 

Under the revised Act, the maximum fine for littering offenders has been doubled to $2,000 for a first conviction. Those who persist can be fined $4,000 for their second conviction, and $10,000 for their third and subsequent convictions.

 

The courts may also impose Corrective Work Orders (CWOs) requiring offenders to clean public areas for up to 12 hours.

Source: "Current measures against littering in Singapore"

If similar laws are enforced in Thailand – especially the cleaning job on top of fines – I believe we would see a change of habits; and less plastic bags, and plastic bottles, and other litter...

However, first step should be public trash bins, and of course maintain and service these bins...????

2 hours ago, Delight said:

 The whole point of going down the company route is for the foreigner to control 100% of the voting rights.

The other directors are obliged to sign over their votes.

If what you say is correct and 51% of the votes are with Thais then they can vote to sell the house/company and divi up the proceeds as per their share allocations.

 

That applies to all condos and houses in Thailand where the company route is used.  That is  alot of real estate.

Maybe I have misread your statement.

 

Are you convinced that your statement is correct?

Thanks for your comment.

And yes, I'm sure I'm correct, because I say »how voting rights are distributed between the shareholders, as with normal shares you can only hold 49% of the votes«; i.e. if your 49% percent shares, or part of them, are not preferred shares with higher number of votes; or some of the other shareholders don't have preferred shares without voting right – for example with a guaranteed annual dividend in return – the 51% shareholders own "your house".

You don't need to control 100% voting rights, just you can control 51% for simple majority, and 66% if qualified majority is needed.

In the paragraph just above your quote, I said:

»...so engaging in property owned by a Thai company limited, one shall be aware of the 51% ownership risk. However, many law firms makes set-up with controlling votes of shares, for example by using "preferred shares"...«

»The other directors are obliged to sign over their votes« has no meaning, its the general meeting, and shareholders votes that count. One director can have full power to single handed control the company; other directors might need to sign together to gain similar power; and a director can also be limited in power, and for example not be able to buy or sell property without approval from a shareholder's meeting. Using nominees, directors or shareholders – which were commonly used until about a decade ago – is illegal.

With condos, to my knowledge from other posters, the whole building, or complex, is regarded as "one company", and the 51% Thai shareholders have voting majority of the management of the condos (there are no preferred votes). Using a Thai company limited to own a condo only makes sense, if its a condo outside the 49% allotment allowed for foreign holding.

????

4 hours ago, HHTel said:

You have to read it through to understand it.  The above is comment from Bjorn Lomborg (the author) and he's correct if that's what happens in the rest of the world.  We all know that it doesn't hence the overpowering reason to get rid of single use plastic.

Yes, if not incinerated, the figures are smaller – reused up to 1,400 times for normal cotton, and up to 3,800 times for ecological cotton – but Thailand actually also has an increasing number garbage incinerators, some of them also produce electric power, and numerous other countries use incinerators. A link to the full report is here.

The problem is not plastic bags, but how plastic bags are disposed, and preferably reused before disposal. And the disposal problem is not only for bags, but plastic in general.

Don't focus so much on, if 7-Eleven and Tesco-Lotus, and like, offers plastic bags, but focus on having the plastic bags users to change their behavior when disposing their used bags – and plastic waste in general – Singapore is an excellent example...????

4 hours ago, Tradewind777 said:

Bring back the old fashioned shopping bags our mums used to use to go shopping. The good old days!!

But only if its reused 7,100 times, otherwise the thing plastic bags are more environmental friendly, if reused once, like for example in the garbage bin, and thereby disposed properly.

Quote

Bjorn Lomborg‏ @BjornLomborg

FølgFølg @BjornLomborg

Mere

Plastic bags best for the environment: You must reuse a regular cotton bag 7,100 times to make it better for the environment Organic cotton bag needs 20,000 reuses Paper needs 43 reuses

Source: New Danish EPA analysis (Bjorn Lomborg on Twitter)

17 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

...the best is to download them from some torrents ..

That's also counterfeit...

4 hours ago, Assurancetourix said:

Any good movies worth watching in bin #3..?????

10 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

I believe some Land Offices will not allow more than 39% if the company owns land.

Sure, but that is a minor detail, and normally cleared by a lawyer by reducing the foreign share to 39% before registration, and raised to 49% the day efter registration...????