THAIJAMES

The re-entry permit for a PR-holder is indeed different and it costs more. In addition you can not get it at the airport, as far as I'm aware.

You also use a different form to apply.

Thanks for the info, so much for having more rights as a PR holder. But I guess it would only be once a year. It is still done at immigration?

Whilst I have all the info I need on the requirements for applying for PR (immigration website). I cannot find anything that stipulates the conditions in maintaining a PR once successful.

There are a number of different methods of application (investor, business, spouse) and it would be really helpful if there was a list/ policy on how each of them are successfully held.

Regarding the lawyer I accept that I can do it myself and he is just not interested now. I will look at trying to agree a reduced fee with him to cut off his services from now.

once you've got it, the only real condition is that you effectively make Thailand your home and remain a law abiding citizen.

You can not for instance, leave Thailand for more than 364 days - as your re-entry permit is only valid for one year. So you must return for at least one day and renew the re-entry permit if you are looking to leave again. Stay away for more than one year and your PR effectively lapses and you are back to square one.

If you never leave Thailand again, you can stay forever with no further conditions attached to your stay apart from remaining a law abiding citizen.

The only thing to be careful of is having a re-entry permit in your passport if you need to travel at short notice. From friends who have PR it can take 2 or 3 days to process. If you leave with no-rentry permit, your PR is cancelled.

Is the Re-entry process for a PR different than a non - PR, if so who provides re-entry permits and can these be had at the airport on the way out of the country like for non - PR?

I was there a couple weeks ago and I can say that the service and food were excellent!

jbrain,

Thanks for the links. I have spent a number of hours reading material on the excellent site. My conclusion is that it is should be viable option depending on your circumstances. I could not find any information to the contrary.

I agree with Langsuan Man that there is a lot of misinformation on Thai Visa. The samui for sale web site does answer a majority of the questions if you read carefully.

Basically my conclusion until someone can prove otherwise is that anyone that has a legitimate company and wants to add extra protection can have both a land lease and part ownership in the land through a company.

Nothing wrong but somewhat redundant.

Why go the company route in the first place? Have a Thai individual buy the property and issue a 30 year lease, or better yet, an usfruct at the same time

That way you will save the approximately 15,000 THB fee for the annual company audit.

By the way, those who set up these companies are smart enough to insure that they have control by limiting the strength of the thai shareholders by diluting their voting rights by keeping 49% for themselves and the remaining 51% spread out over other shareholders

I recall a thread only a few days ago that mentioned that a company needs to have a Thai director.

I know these companies are all registered with only a foreign director, but according to tha tthread it's illegal.

Also the thing about double voting rights is not legal inn Thailand.

There is so much mis-information about these company structures here at TV since no one appears to understand how the loop holes in the Thai laws are worked by the lawyers here

Yes, the company must have a Thai director to purchase property here in Thailand. BUT , after the property is purchased then the company (and it assets) can be transferred and a new non-Thai director can be named. A simple process that is usually covered in the cost of setting up the company in the first place

Also don't see where my post said anything about double voting rights, all I said is that you control the board by having 49% and splitting the remaining 51% by several other board members, to prevent them from getting together and seizing control (by naming one of themselves to be the managing director)

I tend to agree with your views, I am trying to find opposing information as there are always benefits and pitfalls to any investment decisions and it is so hard to get the real facts here in Thailand even from professionals.

Sorry for not providing all the information up front.

I already have a 30 year lease on a property, which I hope to develop either into a condominium or apartments. I also have an idle company, which is not yet being used.

The owner would sell his land to the company and also become one of the share holders.

Since I already have a lease on the property, any legal problems that the company might have would not affect the existing preexisting lease.

I would think that changing ownership of the land from sole to company would add extra protection in that it would ensure that the lease is renewed at the end of the 30 year period, or if the property needs to be sold.

The Land owner can sell the land to your existing Company or sell it on the open market.

Why would he sell it to your company. What's in it for him?

Delight,

I don't want to reveal too much personal information on a public forum, however it would be simply that he would earn his share of any future business earnings. While at the same time allowing to protect my investment as best as I could.

Of course at some point the whole project needs to be converted to a condominium, which has its own rules, if I do go that route. I am at this point trying to get information to make more informed decisions.

Thanks for your input.

Nothing wrong but somewhat redundant.

Why go the company route in the first place? Have a Thai individual buy the property and issue a 30 year lease, or better yet, an usfruct at the same time

That way you will save the approximately 15,000 THB fee for the annual company audit.

By the way, those who set up these companies are smart enough to insure that they have control by limiting the strength of the thai shareholders by diluting their voting rights by keeping 49% for themselves and the remaining 51% spread out over other shareholders

I recall a thread only a few days ago that mentioned that a company needs to have a Thai director.

I know these companies are all registered with only a foreign director, but according to tha tthread it's illegal.

Also the thing about double voting rights is not legal inn Thailand.

jbrain, thank you for your contribution. I could not find any info that a company needs to have a thai director. (i am currently the signing director of a number of companies) and yes I do have a work permit!

I understand that any new company that has foreign shareholders needs to show where the money from all the partners came from. However my company is already established quite a few years ago.

Also from what I understand there is still in effect the options for foreign share holders to have preferential shares which have more voting powers, in effect allowing foreign control of the company.

While there has been a lot of talk, I don't think the laws were ever changed, only more strictly enforced. Mainly that companies must have paid up capital and all thai partners must show their source of capital.

This more strict enforcement is not applicable to existing companies. Even if it was, the existing land owner is putting their land in exchange for being a share owner. So there is no problem of existing capital.

Any information or links contrary to the above would be greatly appreciated.

Sorry for not providing all the information up front.

I already have a 30 year lease on a property, which I hope to develop either into a condominium or apartments. I also have an idle company, which is not yet being used.

The owner would sell his land to the company and also become one of the share holders.

Since I already have a lease on the property, any legal problems that the company might have would not affect the existing preexisting lease.

I would think that changing ownership of the land from sole to company would add extra protection in that it would ensure that the lease is renewed at the end of the 30 year period, or if the property needs to be sold.

Nothing wrong but somewhat redundant.

Why go the company route in the first place? Have a Thai individual buy the property and issue a 30 year lease, or better yet, an usfruct at the same time

That way you will save the approximately 15,000 THB fee for the annual company audit.

By the way, those who set up these companies are smart enough to insure that they have control by limiting the strength of the thai shareholders by diluting their voting rights by keeping 49% for themselves and the remaining 51% spread out over other shareholders

Thanks for your comments,

In my case I already have a company that is sitting idle and I only pay 9K for the audit every year.

What is the benefit of this approach as distinct from the simpler approach of buying land in a Thai Company-a Company which you control?

I guess the idea is that if there is ever a problem with the company, at least you still have a lease on the land. Sort of double protection.

There is a lot of information about renting land for 30 years and a lot of information about how to purchase property using a Thai company.

I have not seen any information that someone has done both on the same property.

That is to partner with Thai nationals to purchase a property using a Thai company. Then have the company rent out the land to the Farang partner for 30 years.

Having signature rights for the Thai company, the Farang minor shareholder would then if needed be able to extend the rental period of the rental contract as needed.

Does anyone see any problem with this idea?

A good amount of the excess money being printed by our home countries is being brought into thailand for investment. This money is then reinvested locally by the bankers, who often provide easy money (credit) to their friends and big business partners. Basically there is an over supply of money in the world and unfortunately it is all going to people at the top.

Nothing to do with demand, they are borrowing that money while it is available. Most of the time, they structure their investments so that even if there is a collapse they will have taken their profits.

Often it is not just customs, but the shipping company (FEDEX, DHL) that causes the problem. They make money from customs searches. Please try shipping by regular parcel mail and more than likely it will not be stopped. (over 100 shipments and I have never had to pay customs duty)

Mix in a bit of cinnamon and the taste of fresh roasted coffee with raw honey from coffee flowers in the morning can't be beat and is very healthy.

I think I will have to get them out to quote me since my driveway is already there so they just have to add a layer on top and then stamp it Im guessing that since the driveway is already there it will be cheaper ?

Please let us know, as I have a cement driveway and also interested.

I am from the 2007 batch and still waiting approval

I had a very unreliable connection with true, until I unchecked the firewall options in the router. Now the connection is perfect.

And besides the tax on 60K (wasn't it 65K) isn't all that much, especially considering that you also get pretty useful social health insurance.

It all depends on how much a business is actually making, but these days - with far fewer affluent Western tourists - for many of us, every baht counts.

My book keeper told me that the foreign owner of a business can't get the social insurance. If she is wrong, I would like to know.

If you are on a work permit, you are paying social security, which entitles you to have social insurance. This entitles you to health care and even monthly retirement income if you have worked a certain number of years.

It is still open, you should be able to pay at any other open branch. Why is it still open? Maybe the rent has not run out yet.

I had this problem a bit yesterday (19 july).

I have not been able to access Thaivisa for 3 days

The first phase which is moving exiting animation facilities from Kat SuanKaew is almost complete with all staff to be relocated within a month or two.

Most of the land for the project has been acquired. BOI has given approval for many of the companies and projects that will be operating there.

But as has been mentioned, the success of the project and the other phases depend a great deal on getting investments. They have hired a new CEO especially for that purpose. Plans have already been developed for all phases of the project.

It is happening, it is just a matter of how much investment they will get, and how quickly. I would say another 5-20 years to realize the full project.

Since no one seems to have answered the original question here it is:

Land: Anywhere from 80-120K per Sqare Wah

Building: If it is the townhouse next to maze Cafe then probably 5-8 Million.

Most software installation CD/DVD's (including Windows) have an autorun.inf file at the root for the sole purpose of executing programs on the disc. This is nothing new. The infection (if you can call it that), is coming from another source -- possibly your ISO flash drive.

No he specifically says that it is on the source install CD. The next question would be is this possibly a counterfeit CD that looks very genuine?

Probably nothing to do with the dell technician if the trojan is on the CD, but the bigger question might be is where did you get that cd?

Before this thread gets out of hand, I want to point out that coerced prostitution and human trafficking are thoroughly documented realities in Thailand, especially where minors and migrants are concerned. As foreigners, we generally aren't exposed to these aspects of the industry, but instead to voluntary and willing service providers-- bargirls, freelancers, etc. Please let's not confuse the apparently happy-go-lucky friends at No 1 Bar with young girls held in debt bondage in brothels. Raids on such places are initiated by special police and social welfare agencies, not the local cops on the take. "Rescue" may be an awkward term, and in this particular case who among us really knows the facts, but stopping this kind of exploitation is the right and lawful thing to do. Anyone care to disagree?

Well unfortunately this raid will not likely have any effect. First, if the girls are under debt bondage, they probably will not be willing to testify for fear of violence against them or their families. Second they will be forced to pay back their family's debts. They are also probably supporting their families financially. Third, it will be hard for them to go back to their villages and not be stigmatised.

So even-though the girls are under 18 and this is illegal, they are likely to be back on the streets in a short time unless they get very good support from local NGOs and their family gets financial support to replace lost income.

Many hill tribes get married around the age of 13-16 so having them understand the legal age of 18 is a foreign concept.

In a desperate situation, some believe that they have an asset, which may be their looks or sexual appeal and they should have the right to use their assets for monetary gain considering the desperate situation that they are in.

You could go so far as to say that by having a raid like this, you are depriving the girls of much needed income, putting them and their family in grave danger of violence against them and leaving them and their families in a more desperate situations because the lack of money.

I think the only solution is to provide job training, and replacement income until they are able to be financially stable. Not easy.

This is not likely to work unless there is strong enforcement and shutting down these kind of places.

Deport him with no jail time and no possibility of returning. That would be punishment enough and would cost Thailand nothing.

These are not really hard drugs, but the quantities that he was arrested with are rather shocking.

The main reason for punishment is to deter others from doing it. I don't think deporting him would deter others from doing the same thing. Jail is probably not be the best way to punish anyone, however it is the only way that the authorities know how to use.