dsfbrit

i bank with the HSBC in england and asked about a account in thailand to pay into but was told no

i've got a hsbc account in thailand and i bank with the hsbc in the uk.

you need to approach your bank manager in the uk and get him to write a letter of reccomendation to the bank in thailand and give that letter to the bank then you can open an account.

I have as well - in fact the HSBC branch in the UK did all the paperwork for me for the account in Thailand. I wasn't even an HSBC customer at the time and so opened both the UK account and did the paperwork for the Thailand account at the same time - in the UK.

Mind you this was 4 years ago now - so maybe times have changed?

By the way you do have to pay charges if your balance drops below a certain amount. I pay 300 baht a month as the balance is below 500,000 baht. I believe their 'premier' account is a much higher charge.

Few marriages in eh West last a lifetime. There is no reasont o believe that yours will be any different. Most marriages end with a lot of infighting. If this is the case, you will lose what you have put into it.

It is their problem, not yours.

A great post - just in time!

Indeed. Having conversation with my TGF - she lives in the house and I give her 15,000 baht per month. Just come back and she started talking about new car (already have new bike) - then said what about rent shop for her and her sister - I thought 'here we go' then now it is for house in the home town for family so she could be there!

Means the car and the business will be no good - now I think - continue to give money and then as you say 'their problem!

Sadly I agree with both of you to a point. I would tongue-in-cheek say though that women all around the World have an inbuilt ability - its in their genes - to get their own way in the end, but I wish you luck with your approach.

A more serious comment I would add is that you can lose a wife in another way and that is of course through death. Not a nice subject I know, but its one of the concerns I have about this whole land/lease issue.

I think all posters here agree that a farang would probably not want to live with/near the family

after 'winning' a legal case. I suspect being involved with the family in a 'legal sense' would also not not appeal to most farang if their wife dies.

However, if a wife dies in 20 years time - who will take over the lease if it isn't the family - I know there's a Will - but...!

As I have posted elsewhere, I am considering options relating to the company / land ownership thing and one of those options is this lease approach favoured by some - including Dragonman, who has offered good advice and a solid argument about leases - both in this thread and elsewhere.

I have to say at this stage it feels a bit like the 'frying pan into the fire' and perhaps when I am forced to make this decision - selling and renting is the safest bet.

Dragonman, what is the situation on the 'death' scenario, I believe the farang gets the land for a period (1 year), then has time to dispose of everything or find someone to take over the lease.

qqqqqq

Buying land legalities.

Am in the process of buying and haven’t paid for this land as yet. I was wondering that if I purchase land in my GF name and we break up well land is gone.

Should one wait till the new Thai constitution is completed next year or do I buy it on a lease back.

Land will be used by Family members in total 69 rai in 3 lots.

This my GF says. I quote will at least leave her free to pursue life with me for the next 10 years in my home country without having to worry me about sending money to support her family. Land will be there for us when we retire fully to Thailand and to build house on.

Father has only six rai at the moment to support family had more but sons got married.

Thai culture.

Gf is from Issan area and I have known her for 4 years

Maybe Sunbelt can clarify this minefield.

I don't think I can offer you much from a legal perspective. A lease or usufruct would I suspect not be of much practical use for someone who has split up from their girlfriend/wife and then has the prospects of taking possession and farming, or living on, land in close proximity to all her relatives.

It is quite a large area and presumably not exactly peanuts to acquire.

You must really decide if you are happy with this as a gift, as I am sure this is what it will be considered to be. Also do not consider (from personal experience) that this will be the end of support for the family. There is always a new "venture" that can make them a fortune.

As dsfbrit stated, the Constitution will have little relevance. A Land Code Amendment will be required.

Would concur. Was thinking exactly the same as Dragonman when saw his post. Make it a gift to your future wife and know you will have other gifts as well.... tractor, labor, etc.

What good does a lease or usufruct do on farmers land? It would be like hel_l on earth if you need to enforce this. Are you going to farm it? You can't as a foreigner. If you want to transfer the lease or usufruct... to who? Ever been to an auction, with everybody having their hand in their pocket?

If you do this, just consider the money is gone, it’s not yours anymore.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

I would never consider taking an opposite position to Sunbelt nor Dragonman - I am much too humble.

I suspect that anyone who reads SeanOCasey's post will be, like I was at first, quite horrified at what he is suggesting, for many reasons.

I would say though, that although your legal comment on leases is, I am sure spot on, from a practical human point of view, if SeanOcasey feels obliged to do this land thing - then something (a lease?), anything is better than nothing. My wife keeps having great ideas similar to this - she is from Issan too - and I tend to say no - then buy the odd cow here and there to appease the family -

a lot cheaper than several Rai of land!!

As for leases being enforced - I know Dragonman states in another reply that he know of cases farang have won - but how many cases have been tested recently in the courts for these leases that are being set up for small plots of land? - its one of the reasons I am in a wait and see position on the company / land thing. I have no real confidence in the lease thing at all.

Am I wrong?

How do we Farang get ourselves in these situations !

Sunbelt, Dragonman - I am not trying to be a smart-arse - just trying to make sense of this legal jungle!

Buying land legalities.

Am in the process of buying and haven’t paid for this land as yet. I was wondering that if I purchase land in my GF name and we break up well land is gone.

Should one wait till the new Thai constitution is completed next year or do I buy it on a lease back.

Land will be used by Family members in total 69 rai in 3 lots.

This my GF says. I quote will at least leave her free to pursue life with me for the next 10 years in my home country without having to worry me about sending money to support her family. Land will be there for us when we retire fully to Thailand and to build house on.

Father has only six rai at the moment to support family had more but sons got married.

Thai culture.

Gf is from Issan area and I have known her for 4 years

Maybe Sunbelt can clarify this minefield.

I dont think the new Thai Constitution is the major concern here.

I have a Thai wife and bought land here through the company route. I am therefore what is known by the flamers here as an IDIOT.

If I were fortunate enough to be in your position ie: deciding my options I would do the following ( this is what I have learned after I bought the land 3 years ago)

- do not invest more money into Thailand than you can afford to lose.

- read up on this forum about land issues especially USUFRUCT and LEASE. Read all you can and understand ALL land issues before you part with any cash. It may take several weeks of reading, but it would be worth it - hey if only I could have done this before I invested in land out here.

- remember, as you point out, you can not own land here as a Foreigner - but many Farang have opted for buying the land and putting it in their wifes name and leasing via the 30 year lease route. It is generally accepted that despite what some people may tell you - you can only get leases for up to 30 years.

I guess you will have to do the land thing in the end for you GF (wife), lets face it its better having the family working the land and having self respect - than you just sending money for many years! - just be very very careful.

I will leave Sunbelt and Dragonman to go into the detailed legal aspects of this, but I would feel very happy if I could prevent even one more unsuspecting Farang falling into a similar trap as me.

good luck

why why why do people still tihnk you can by some silly trick buy land - you cant - get it - its not legal - whats wrong with you all you deaf - sorry u can if you invest 40 mill baht

idiots

I agree with you, but being one of those self confessed idiots who did this 3 years ago, I am interested to know if you are aware of any follow up by the authorities in the last (nearly) 6 months. Have any lawyers offices been raided, or any farang been separated from 'their' much loved land yet?

I would be interested in any horror stories you may have.

Where is your Pattaya Office - I have seen an advert near the Dolphin on 2nd road, but could not find the building??

Pattaya Bazaar, 2nd Floor

265/62-63 2nd Rd,. Pattaya

Intersection 2nd Rd and North Pattaya Rd

03-841-2828

[email protected]

Thanks - I was right next to it - must be going blind!

I will qualify for a "retirement" visa next year and I was just wondering if anyone had any insight into how the 800,000 baht per year figure was arrived at. The figure would appear to be quite high, what level of seniority would a Thai police officer, government official or military officer have to reach in order to receive a salary of 65,000 - 70,000 per month (not including tea money)? I am also surprised that there seems to be no consideration taken as to the location and circumstances of the retiree, clearly if someone opts to live "by the sea" or in Bangkok then their expenses would be considerably higher than a person living in Khon Kaen, Udon Thani or Mahasarakham in a house that they had paid for to be built and so would not have to make provision for rent each month. I also notice the disparity between the amount required to gain a visa "by reason of marriage to a Thai national" (400,000 baht per year) and the retirement visa cost. How can it be assumed that a retired person, possibly living alone, would need twice the income of a person who is maintining a wife/family, it just seems strange to me.

Many countries want to see something in the bank so you don't become a burden should anything go bad for you. Countries can set the amount they deem appropriate and for Thailand they want to see 800K in the bank (or 400K if you have a Thai wife).

This is about US$20K which seems to me about what would be necessary for a reasonable standard of living and/or enough to pay for serious medical expense and airfare home if need be. Marriage to a Thai may seem in their eyes a reasonable form of commitment to the country.

Anybody who can't scare up US$20K to keep in the bank is obviously not the type they want and where is the problem with that? Who wants people using their country as a flophouse? I don't want it in my country and I doubt many others would want it either.

Some people think its their right to live in someone else's country no matter their circumstances. Well its not, its a privilege.

This and recent postings by Baboon, Pringle & Modi D'Ark seem to me to be the most intelligent and compassionate responses to the various issues of late.

I am in a very odd situation - basically "sitting on the fence". I'm here in the UK having had my house on the market since April and am waiting for the offers to match my asking price. Meanwhile I'm working and earning money for the retirement pot and the privilege of spending it in Thailand.

I'm single, over 50 and, by TODAY'S rules, can easily qualify for a retirement visa.

I have already decided to rent somewhere to live in Thailand rather than buy - on my last trip in April, I came to that conclusion based on the fact that I THOUGHT that the "30 year renewable" leases and company house purchase schemes were both vulnerable. With regard to the former I still think the same and I gain NO satisfaction in being proven right about the latter.

In the course of 7 months, the "established" means for Farang to live in Thailand have been rocked to their foundations. Now I realise that SOME of the visa rule changes are actually just enforcements of existing rules and not really changes at all. The uncaring would simply say (as many have) "Som nam na" to those who have been bending the rules - personally I have friends in that situation and I am truly sorry for them.

OK there is a "chancer" element amongst the Farang in Thailand. I don't beleive they are all bad people just as I don't beleive they are all good.

So what's my point? Well, I have been planning my retirement in Thailand for the last 5 years - I first thought about it 10 years ago! Now what do I do? Sell up and say "retire and be dammed" and HOPE THAT THERE ARE NO MORE CHANGES TO COME or give up the dream that has been just out of reach for so long? This is clearly a rhetorical question - as someone said on here "it's my life" so I shall make the decision, but it gives me a feeling of severe unease, when retirement is surely meant to be a relaxing time to which one looks forward.

As for those already in Thailand with nowhere else to go, who were doing things as they thought they should and hitherto felt secure - you have my sympathy and good wishes for your futures.

Finally my thanks also to TV, George and Sunbelt for keeping us up to speed.

Mike

Come over - enjoy it. I am also 50 years old and have a reasonably sized house just outside Pattaya. I bought it through the company route - which I now think was a mistake - oh well.

With all the changes that have 'rocked foundations' etc... I personally have noticed no difference to my life on a daily basis whatsoever. True I have looked into all the options of this company land ownership thing, but as I have a Thai wife I am not totally without options - but that is a different forum topic methinks. If you come over here now and rent a condo or buy a condo - not through the company route! or rent a house, and keep your money in the UK earning interest - what real risks are there. AS long as you follow the rule I read a few months ago on this forum 'DO NOT BRING ANY MORE MONEY INTO THAILAND THANYOU CAN AFFORD TO LOSE' Now get back to looking forward to coming and retiring over here - you wont regret it!!

And I agree its a great pity for those who cannot live here and may have to leave, but that isn't you or me - so good luck...

Thanks dsfbrit - what you say makes a lot of sense ESPECIALLY the money angle! That one I'd already decided about - bring to Thailand what I NEED - leave the rest in UK banks etc.

My worry is that there will be more changes like this to come - we really do not know, despite all the conjecture, why the Thai Government has started to enforce all these rules NOW. Then again I guess we may never know.......

TIT

Mike

I am certain over the next years there will be changes. However I am 52 years old now and I currently am thinking of switching from the so-called 'married' visa to the retirement visa next year.

Why? Simply because I think that this group of people are at the end of the 'food' chain, as it were when it comes to visa clamp downs.

The thing is people under the age of 50 who want to live here may well decide to get married to achieve this and the Thai authorites know this too. The clampdowns - this one included - sadly catches the people who genuinely want to/are married as well.

Its very hard to 'get over 50 though' isn't it. Either you are or over 50 or you are not!!! You cannot suddenly get over 50 just to get a visa. So you are one of the lucky ones when it comes to visa groups.

My thinking is a as long as I always follow the rule of being able to walk away from what I have bought here and not be financially ruined - and have enough money to continue elsewhere - then where is the risk.

Hey my apologies for boring you with my thoughts on life - but it hurts me to see someone worrying about coming to live here just because of the potential problems they read about on this forum. We love it here !!! come over and give it a go!!

All good stuff. However, the crack down is not new law, It's a tightening of existing legislation. Now I have been told that if/when a knock on the door comes, this existing law gives you one year to get your house ( pardon the pun ) in order. This being the case why jump in now ? Why not sit tight until the dust settles with the new administration and the true future direction is known. Who knows, a 99 year lease may be just round the corner, why go to the expense of a half-way house, 30 year number now, when the knock may never come, and you'll have a year to get sorted if it does ?

Time for the flames.

Before we get burnt to death - I would add that I agree with you. I have been looking for a so-called

'tipping point' and unless I see that there truly is evidence of people with the company/land method getting 'burned' from the government rather than just from the forum flamers - the best option may be wait and see ?

Have you heard of any bad stories yet???

I notice you joined TV forum the same time as me - probably to read about this land issue! I have to say I wish I knew about this web site before - I would NEVER have bought land out here had I know all the issues. For any potential flamers - I really really did not know it was against the law to own land - I researched this topic a lot and never found a decent forum like TV until 6 months ago that had all the issues explained - really!!!

Same conditions, I did not know in Jan 2006 when I set up my Co Ltd either, otherwise forget about...

In any case now we are IN and I agree in sit and wait, I will move in LOS in 2007 because it was planned already and house there should be finish on April, I can not do much at this stage.

I will come there, see around and decide what the best to do... Keep / Sold / Lease.

Not even sure if is better put the house under my Co ltd who own the land (I'm MD but only 35%..) or under my name directly, do not know the difference when I'm going to sell...

For sure I do not need add headhake, so I think to sell everything and rent an house to leave and find a Job who allow the WP and extention Visa. Remeber that if you close the Co.Ltd and nobody sponsor you for a job, you will never have a Non Imm B....

I am not an expert, but my investigations have led me to the conclusion that if the land is not held by the company, then it is best to put the house in your name and kill off the company. Otherwise you are incurring the 15000 baht a year cost to do the company accounts - for what - you can get the house book in your name legally anyway and the land will have been leased or usufruct(ed).

I like your phrase 'headache' - that sums it up - I dont lose sleep over my situation, but its a 'headache' I could do without.

I know this is a stupid question and no doubt you are aware - but just in case- have you been made aware of all the visa changes that came into play on October 1st?

If not its all there in the Visa section of Thai Visa (I love this web site for information!)

I currently have a so called 'married' visa extension, but may switch to a Retirement extension next year - with all the new hassles for other extension types. I reckon the B visa may be a a bit more difficult in the future - but hey what do I know.

If you hear of any horror stories over the next period perhaps you could post it here.

good luck with it all...

No horror stories at all from people I know, call here and there and everybody stay "low profile".

In any case the most valuable advise it to get a VERY GOOD lawyer, if I know about this forum earlier for sure my choice : Sunbelt. But I can not complain about mine at the moment.

About bold sentences above, yes I'm aware of the new Visa rules, that's way I wrote that if nobody sponsor you and if you can nor sponsor yourself Forget the Non Imm B.

Of course I talk for people like me which is far away to pension....

Yep - I think all of us who have commented agree 'low profile' it is. Like I say if there is no 'breaking news' on this subject by the new year perhaps we could all meet here again and compare notes in January!!

Enjoyed the debate - bye bye for now!

Has anyone actually sold a house via the company route recently and got a reasonable price for it?

Why would they get a lower price? The company just sells the land and house to the individual. Just because it is a company versus a individual being a seller, makes no difference on price.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

So you know of actual cases of farang like me selling their house/land to other farang. What method have the buyers used? lease/usufruct ??

I understand now your question better. I was going off the basis that a house is selling for 3 million Baht and on the basis you felt it would be cheaper because the seller is a company. This was not what you were asking. If it was your question, as I stated it would have no difference in price.

You were in fact going on the basis, the price of the house is no longer 3 million, it may be 2 million because the supply and demand issue.

We have not been involve as a broker with land transfer, so can't judge prices, however I hear quite a bit of activity at the Land dept these days.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

Thanks for commenting Sunbelt. Yes my query was as you described it above.

It was not really that important - I dont intend selling at the moment - or in the future if I can help it - anyway.

I was just interested as I have noticed a couple of farang houses on sale nearby for at least 6 months now. One was advertised for 7.5mill Baht then 7.0 mill baht then 6.8 mill baht - I do not know what its at now - the rain washed the latest price off!!!

My major interest was if there had been any 'knocks on the door' or prosecutions - or anything ???

Seems to me keeping very quiet and hoping it goes away is be the best option for now - I will

ask the same questions in 3 months time if there has not yet been any 'breaking news' on this!

Where is your Pattaya Office - I have seen an advert near the Dolphin on 2nd road, but could not find the building??

72 talangwah x 20,000 / tw x nearly 7% = 95,000 baht in taxes that she paid for the company as she was the one who wanted to take the proerty out of the company. Then, there were an additional 30K+ of other fees for her. She paid 130,000 at the land office. She looked at the agent and asked if I was going to pay a share. I toldhe agent that she very well knew we were selling only the shares of the company and that all of this falls on her, so it was off to the bank she went.

Could you please explain the calculation. I am considering removing land from the company to my Thai wife and doing the lease/usufruct thing.

I have 300 TW outside Pattaya bought at 5000/TW so that comes out at at 300TW x 5 x 7 % = 105,000 baht???

I have made the calculation twice and keep hoping I made a mistake!! When we put it 'into' the company I paid just around 50,000 baht. I guess the rate has changed has it in the last 2.5 years?

Excellent informative stuff and a breath of fresh air from calm, well informed folk, not the usual scare mongers. Sadly I have no Thai family at all, so the waiting game is just about all I can do. However, I still hold on to the hope that better days are ahead. Not all Thai's hate farangs and not all farangs are seedy sex tourists. Spain and the like for Brits/Euros is not as attractive as it once was and as more and more post baby boomers choose to retire early, the lure of their retirement investments into the Thai local economies will become a powerful force for reason. I will wait and see. I loved the place this time last year, and as far as I can see, I will feel the same way this time next .....................fingers crossed.

I agree - nice to talk to you and the others. I haven't come to any decision - I think I will wait for another 3 months and have a think. Getting the signed papers off the lawyer is a priority I reckon.

I too love it here in Thailand.

Hope your plans go well for your move here next year

regards

Dave

.

1 you put the house and land in your wife's name - not just the land - was there an advantage to this?

Thanks in advance for your advice

This is "superficies", not "usufruct". The house would not belong to you under usufruct. Superficies is not now strictly required under Thai Law as the Lease Terms may include a clause allowing for building and registering your own property. Advantage of this you can pass on the lease and building to anyone on your death. Disadvantage, some lawyers believe a usufruct is for life for foreigners, same as for Thais.

Thanks for the feedback - I undersatand now. I will keep this in mind.

I will leave this for about 3 months I reckon and ask again if anyone has heard of any horror stories.

Very interesting. I would like your feedback on the following, because you have actually done this as opposed to those who can offer advice, but are not 'living' it as well.

1 you put the house and land in your wife's name - not just the land - was there an advantage to this?

2 when you shut down the company, did you get any grief from the lawyer as he was about to lose the 15000 baht a year to do the accounts? - how much was the total cost ?

3 Before you shut down the company, did the lawyer keep/look after the originals of the pre-dated thai 'shareholders' letters or did you have these?

At the moment my lawyer stores these plus some other valuable documents in a fire proof safe. If I did decide to shut down the company in the future, depending on your reply to 2 above, I might quietly request he lets me store these now.

4 Here is the big question - impossible to answer I know, but lets give it a go - do you really feel more relaxed now? I know I should do what you have done - but I just cannot bring myself to do it.

My wife loves this house and so do I. However, if I decided I wanted to move sometime in the next years - she would NEVER agree to it. I have asked her. Especially if I wanted to move to a condo and asked her to sell HER land (say). I would never convince her of this move and she would have all the control! Its not about trust its about being flexible.

5 You are aware of land transactions taking place, are these new properties that have been commenced before this issue blew up, or are farang still buying properties like mine ie: not new, 3 years old.

I was surprised Sunbelt said there was no impact on the sale price of properties like mine, but he did not come back with any examples, nor further comment - I think everyone is concentrating on forum with all the changes to the visa regulations this month!

Like I say, if I had known then what I know now etc... I would never have done this in the first place.

Thanks in advance for your advice

1. Just that it kept things simple. I'm sixty - I'll be lucky if I make it to 80. The usufruct is good enough for me. Separating the building and land is fine in principle, but it certainly complicates things and cranks up the costs, and it also rams home to the wife that you really don't trust her. The usufruct is a gift of "love" from the wife and as such will be much more acceptable. Of course it depends on the relationship etc. Another important point is that the wife has now put her name on the tabian bahn as head of the household and she is happy with that. I am in the process of getting my own"yellow" residence book form the amphur, and that'll do me fine.

2 & 3 I was in possession of the original company papers, plus the undated share transfer forms from the nominee shareholders. I engaged a new lawyer (Sunbelt) to take care of transferring the property and closing the company. They were able achieve this without the old lawyer being aware of what was happening. They still don't know - and there will be no come back as I went through an internediate shareholder stage, so that the nominees did not own 51 % of the company when the house and land were sold to the wife. I am sure I will not get any giref from the lawyer - he made his money out of me, and in the present situation he's not going to rock the boat. Anyway he's got too much business to worry about losing mine. I strongly recommend that you request he give you the original documenmts - it's your company - you're entitled to have them.

4. By nature I'm a bit of a worrier - especially where my future well being is at stake. I've had some scares in Thailand through the years (including a brief spell behind bars yonks ago when someone lied to the court about me) - and I can say that I do now feel 1,000 percent more relaxed. The only things that can now disturb my equilibrium is the wife - and I don't think she will do that - and anyway, she would have a really hard time trying.

Unlike you, we have discussed selling up and moving - and one day we may do that. We have an enormous spread outside Pattaya, and while we are enjoying it now, one day we might try and cash in and go for something a bit smaller. But that's for the future - when I'm old and infirm.

Hope the above helps.

Its been a great insight thanks - and I will quietly get those letters from the lawyer.

thanks again

I sympathise with you predicament.

Are you saying that last year you had a so called 'married' visa extension and this year you went to renew it for another 1 year married visa extension and you were refused as you supplied just proof of having 400k baht?

Or last year did you have a different sort of visa extension not based on the Marriage criteria?

It is only supposed to be for NEW applications after 1st October that this rule ie: have to have monthly income fir married extension - was supposed to come into force.

I haven't read through this thread for about 3 days - surely the rules haven't changed again?

Apologies in advance if I have misunderstood what you have said. May I ask which Immigration Office this was please as I am currently applying at Jomtien.

Bangkok but the same thing just happened to my friend in Jomtien and also to another mate up in Chiang Mai. My mate in Chiang Mai had his 6 year old daughter with him and asked the lady in immigration if she would like to now explain to her why Daddy has just been forced to leave the country or get his rear end down to his embassy to do some creative fudging.

Good heavens - very traumatic. May I ask what they stamped on the passport - was it just a 7 day extension or 30 days to sort things out? I am sorry I cannot offer some good advice - I am pretty sure that Sunbelt or someone will have have a 'creative fudge' that will work.

I hope so for your sake and mine - as it is quite possible that my next trip to Jomtien in 2 weeks time - may end with a simlar result!!!

good luck.

I bought a house through a 49/51 % company about 18 months ago, and even before the crackdown, was considering transferring it to my wife on 30 year leaseback arrangement, as I was uncomfortable with my 51 % nominee shareholders, always lurking, maybe ready to pounce at some future date and cause me some headaches.

The crackdown made the decision for me and I decided to get the house out of my company, transferred to my wife, and, following legal advice, to arrange a lifetime usufruct. All this has now been achieved - it was quite expensive - especially the transfer taxes and "backhanders", but in my view, worth it. I can now sleep easy not worrying about that knock on the door giving me one year to dispose of my property. Ok I know it may not - and indeed probably will not - ever happen , but for me it's sod's law that I will be knocking on 70, somewhat infirm, and some court official tells me I've got a year to vacate. (or even worse, that I'm being prosecuted for breaking the law and my property is confiscated.) Another point is that disposing of property in Thailand with a court looking over your shoulder is not as straight forward as you might think, and based on previous experience in a similar situation, it is at least possible, that a "forced sale" might result in the property being sold way below market value.

OK, I know I'm not 100% safe now, as my good friend dragonman is quick to point out. But firstly, the house is owned by the wife, and the company has been disposed of - so the house now has 100% legal Thai ownership. If I break up with my wife, there is a very small possibility, that my wife may successfully challenge the usufruct in the courts. Well, first of all, I don't think we will break up, secondly, even if we did, unless it was monstrously acrimonious, then I really don't think she would have any idea, let alone any intention to go to such lengths as to challenge the usufruct. And last but not least, my trusty lawyers have assured me that the usufruct is 100% watertight, and is even better than a lease.

If the law is amended and relaxed in some way - then good luck to all those who have adopted a "wait and see" approach, but for me, at 60, with probably around 10 good active years left, I can't afford to wait.

I think there is a conspiracy of silence at the moment. Land is being transferred from Thai company to Thai company, and the foreigners are then transferred in as shareholders. I know for a fact that this is going on every day at the Pattaya land office. But all involved are keeping pretty low profile on this - from the developers, to the lawyers to the farang sellers. They know what they are doing is highly suspect, but they have little choice and are just going ahead and keeping their fingers crossed.

I suspect many of the recent buyers are not aware of just how thin the ice may be.

Very interesting. I would like your feedback on the following, because you have actually done this as opposed to those who can offer advice, but are not 'living' it as well.

1 you put the house and land in your wife's name - not just the land - was there an advantage to this?

2 when you shut down the company, did you get any grief from the lawyer as he was about to lose the 15000 baht a year to do the accounts? - how much was the total cost ?

3 Before you shut down the company, did the lawyer keep/look after the originals of the pre-dated thai 'shareholders' letters or did you have these?

At the moment my lawyer stores these plus some other valuable documents in a fire proof safe. If I did decide to shut down the company in the future, depending on your reply to 2 above, I might quietly request he lets me store these now.

4 Here is the big question - impossible to answer I know, but lets give it a go - do you really feel more relaxed now? I know I should do what you have done - but I just cannot bring myself to do it.

My wife loves this house and so do I. However, if I decided I wanted to move sometime in the next years - she would NEVER agree to it. I have asked her. Especially if I wanted to move to a condo and asked her to sell HER land (say). I would never convince her of this move and she would have all the control! Its not about trust its about being flexible.

5 You are aware of land transactions taking place, are these new properties that have been commenced before this issue blew up, or are farang still buying properties like mine ie: not new, 3 years old.

I was surprised Sunbelt said there was no impact on the sale price of properties like mine, but he did not come back with any examples, nor further comment - I think everyone is concentrating on forum with all the changes to the visa regulations this month!

Like I say, if I had known then what I know now etc... I would never have done this in the first place.

Thanks in advance for your advice

All good stuff. However, the crack down is not new law, It's a tightening of existing legislation. Now I have been told that if/when a knock on the door comes, this existing law gives you one year to get your house ( pardon the pun ) in order. This being the case why jump in now ? Why not sit tight until the dust settles with the new administration and the true future direction is known. Who knows, a 99 year lease may be just round the corner, why go to the expense of a half-way house, 30 year number now, when the knock may never come, and you'll have a year to get sorted if it does ?

Time for the flames.

Before we get burnt to death - I would add that I agree with you. I have been looking for a so-called

'tipping point' and unless I see that there truly is evidence of people with the company/land method getting 'burned' from the government rather than just from the forum flamers - the best option may be wait and see ?

Have you heard of any bad stories yet???

I notice you joined TV forum the same time as me - probably to read about this land issue! I have to say I wish I knew about this web site before - I would NEVER have bought land out here had I know all the issues. For any potential flamers - I really really did not know it was against the law to own land - I researched this topic a lot and never found a decent forum like TV until 6 months ago that had all the issues explained - really!!!

Same conditions, I did not know in Jan 2006 when I set up my Co Ltd either, otherwise forget about...

In any case now we are IN and I agree in sit and wait, I will move in LOS in 2007 because it was planned already and house there should be finish on April, I can not do much at this stage.

I will come there, see around and decide what the best to do... Keep / Sold / Lease.

Not even sure if is better put the house under my Co ltd who own the land (I'm MD but only 35%..) or under my name directly, do not know the difference when I'm going to sell...

For sure I do not need add headhake, so I think to sell everything and rent an house to leave and find a Job who allow the WP and extention Visa. Remeber that if you close the Co.Ltd and nobody sponsor you for a job, you will never have a Non Imm B....

I am not an expert, but my investigations have led me to the conclusion that if the land is not held by the company, then it is best to put the house in your name and kill off the company. Otherwise you are incurring the 15000 baht a year cost to do the company accounts - for what - you can get the house book in your name legally anyway and the land will have been leased or usufruct(ed).

I like your phrase 'headache' - that sums it up - I dont lose sleep over my situation, but its a 'headache' I could do without.

I know this is a stupid question and no doubt you are aware - but just in case- have you been made aware of all the visa changes that came into play on October 1st?

If not its all there in the Visa section of Thai Visa (I love this web site for information!)

I currently have a so called 'married' visa extension, but may switch to a Retirement extension next year - with all the new hassles for other extension types. I reckon the B visa may be a a bit more difficult in the future - but hey what do I know.

If you hear of any horror stories over the next period perhaps you could post it here.

good luck with it all...

I went along to renew my annual visa the other day showing sufficient funds for a marriage visa only to be informed that as of 1st October I now also need to show a stipend of 40,000 baht per month as family income because the showing of funds was insufficient.

The reason for this request is well known of course because it is designed to stop those borrowing money for a short time from doing so to hoodwink the immigration bureau, however what this new rules has done is to make it harder for the legitimate owners of such funds to continue to stay in Thailand and if like me you keep 1.5 million baht in your Thai account at all times and own a Condo, it can be a little frustrating and disconcerting.

This new income rule, states that it has to be either earned by the wife or by myself or jointly. If the source of the funds is from Thailand then it needs to be supported with either a paid up tax receipt and/or work permit for the foreign husband. However if the income is earned outside of Thailand then a letter from my embassy confirming where my salary is coming from and confirming that I do indeed bring in 40,000 baht per month to support my family is required.

All well and fine, however, what if like me and the several thousand others who are currently too young to retire but who don’t necessarily need to work because they are self sufficient to not need to do so. How are we supposed to show income to satisfy Thai immigration requirements? For me to show the embassy my offshore earnings as well as to get them to certify that my funds offshore funds are genuine would require a huge leap of faith and trust from both me and them to certify my claims (not to mention paying tax on offshore funds coming in as income thus defeating the whole object in the first place). It would also require me to waver or contravene my rights to privacy under both European and USA laws.

The argument then is that I should work here or provide a way for my wife to earn 40,000 baht per month to show as income but let me ask, how many educated MBA Thai’s like my wife actually have the opportunity to earn a decent salary here in Thailand when the average salary for professional educated and qualified workers is 15,000 baht. One solution of course is for me to hoodwink the process by just getting the wifes boss to declare that she is earning a slary of 40k, to paying the tax on it and to just showing a receipt of tax payments at 2700 baht per month instead.

I could of course work instead, but has anyone looked at the Thai employment market lately?

Please explain to me how a highly educated and experienced foreigner in Thailand is able to get a job outside the English teacher profession; and let’s face it, not all of us want to be English teachers; when all of the normal professional job advertisements in my field are for Thai citizens only with 10 years experience whilst being under the age of 35. Quantum physics especially as my field is only about 3 years old in thailand with no locally grown Thai talent in the field either. I could become a consultant but even that is no longer allowed.

This leaves me with the option of investing in a business here but as Thailand has currently limited foreign investments to the point of taking the money but asking the foreigner ‘to please wait outside’ then this no longer becomes a viable option either.

So now I am in a dilemma because the Thai government in its drive to rid itself of the undesirables has also created a whole new string of casualties by turning away the decent foreign folk of Thailand as well. Hasn’t the Thai government realized that they are also letting their own citizens down by doing this because as I see it, they are sending out a very clear message that should a Thai citizen decide to marry a foreigner then they too are also putting themselves at considerable risk in their own country and indeed they are effectively being abandoned by their own country for their decision to fall in love with a foreigner. I wonder how many absent foreign fathers or divorces it will take with its inevitable downstream impact before Thailand wakes up and realizes that it’s not only hurting its own sons and daughters but its economy too. Do they care?

It’s time to wake up Thailand, we are living in the 21st century for crying out loud and if Thailand continues to do things this way then they shouldn't be too surprised when the tourist planes start passing over their new airport stacked full of foreigners off in search of more foreign friendly lands.

Now will the 10 year old that came up with these new visa rules please come to my house and explain to my wife why I won’t be allowed to stay around to spend time with her in her own native born country anymore.

I sympathise with you predicament.

Are you saying that last year you had a so called 'married' visa extension and this year you went to renew it for another 1 year married visa extension and you were refused as you supplied just proof of having 400k baht?

Or last year did you have a different sort of visa extension not based on the Marriage criteria?

It is only supposed to be for NEW applications after 1st October that this rule ie: have to have monthly income fir married extension - was supposed to come into force.

I haven't read through this thread for about 3 days - surely the rules haven't changed again?

Apologies in advance if I have misunderstood what you have said. May I ask which Immigration Office this was please as I am currently applying at Jomtien.

At last a similar voice in the wilderness. Yes, I joined up to try to get a different angle on the land issue, and have enjoyed the debate thus far and yes, I too, was told all the ups and downs by my Thai lawer, who honestly belived that if the company remained " quiet ", all would be well. He is as shocked as most of us who were of the loop at the recent happenings, but as it stands, the many of us who wished to be " quiet " investors in the LOS, have been done in by the greedy.

Good on the Thai people for having the bottle to go after the powerful within their own society, sadly, a few of us at the other end of the scale are having a bumpy ride. I still love the place and will not jump until the ship sinks ( hopefully I will spot the bugger filling with water ). Ido not feel LOS has reached that stage yet, many on here do and I respect that opinion. I just hope when the penny drops about the potential loss of revenue from us, the " quiet ones ", up and leaving, Asian pragmatism will kick in and a middle path acceptable to both will be found.

I am not sure we are in the wilderness, I suspect we are the silent majority? I often notice that on major issues there can be hundreds of people reading a topic, but only a few people actually post a comment. Often its the same names that reply. Some like Dragonman, Sunbelt provide good advice, others offer to explain their situation and how they have resolved a problem (what I usually do - I am not a general expert!) - others flame - but the vast majority say nothing!

My problem is I cannot judge whether I am understanding what is actually going on at the moment. Its why I am trying to find any examples - good or bad - of what has happened to people in our situation. I expected at least one flamer to come on and gleefully tell me of a land 'owning' farang they knew of that had been carted away in the middle of the night and put in the worst cell in the Monkey House!

Maybe its too soon and I will try again in 3 months or so?

Make sure you buy a big baling - bucket. Me I wont leave Thailand whatever happens - unless they make me of course.

good luck

All good stuff. However, the crack down is not new law, It's a tightening of existing legislation. Now I have been told that if/when a knock on the door comes, this existing law gives you one year to get your house ( pardon the pun ) in order. This being the case why jump in now ? Why not sit tight until the dust settles with the new administration and the true future direction is known. Who knows, a 99 year lease may be just round the corner, why go to the expense of a half-way house, 30 year number now, when the knock may never come, and you'll have a year to get sorted if it does ?

Time for the flames.

I agree with the "wait and see" in principle, and have suggested such in the past. The only problem is that if "the knock on the door" does come, you have come to the attention of the Authorities, and hence leaseholds, usufructs,etc may be looked at much closer than an "unknown" case. The lower profile you keep out here the "safer" you are.

I think you are right and its my preferred option - keep quiet and wait and see. Its why I was so surprised to see that I had an additional option, put forward by Sunbelt in the reply above.

He says I could sell (now I guess?) and the market is still OK for selling this type of property. That surprised me and not an option I had even considered! If the knock on the door comes I will almost certainly try to sell at that time. If its just a knock on my door then I guess I could still sell. If its general legislation and all our doors are 'knocked' at the same time !- oh well never mind!

Here is a an interesting thought - which I would like your opinion on. If I bought a business here for my wife - which was legitimate and I pay all my / my wifes taxes etc... could I use this as a vehicle

to make the company legit also. The house has an 'office' - its where I am typing from now!

It would not be anything massive, perhaps a small karaoke bar - she would enjoy running that (nowhere near here though - god what a din!!).

All good stuff. However, the crack down is not new law, It's a tightening of existing legislation. Now I have been told that if/when a knock on the door comes, this existing law gives you one year to get your house ( pardon the pun ) in order. This being the case why jump in now ? Why not sit tight until the dust settles with the new administration and the true future direction is known. Who knows, a 99 year lease may be just round the corner, why go to the expense of a half-way house, 30 year number now, when the knock may never come, and you'll have a year to get sorted if it does ?

Time for the flames.

Before we get burnt to death - I would add that I agree with you. I have been looking for a so-called

'tipping point' and unless I see that there truly is evidence of people with the company/land method getting 'burned' from the government rather than just from the forum flamers - the best option may be wait and see ?

Have you heard of any bad stories yet???

I notice you joined TV forum the same time as me - probably to read about this land issue! I have to say I wish I knew about this web site before - I would NEVER have bought land out here had I know all the issues. For any potential flamers - I really really did not know it was against the law to own land - I researched this topic a lot and never found a decent forum like TV until 6 months ago that had all the issues explained - really!!!

Check out www.tropical-living.com/06-09sep/01debate.htm

A good, well researched article.

Thanks Dragonman - I will go and read this now.

Ok read it - a good read indeed. So basically my best option today as I want to stay in this house

and would prefer to be 'legal' would be:

1. Remove land from company and put into lease - for 30 years and hope this may change to 90 years some time

2. Remove house from company and put into my name

3. Shut down company

Seems simple - why I have spent so long thinking about it?

I suppose point 1 is the interesting part - this would be the usufruct or lease option would it?

Just been off to read this link about usufruct / lease

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=83374 - the lease would be from whom? who would be the 'owner'

Hi Khun,

...

Jimmy

Thailand is getting more xenophobic by the minute, i wouln't count on it that you will be able to legally own your land and house. Rent/lease is the only sure way.

What your developer probably meant to say is that with the 'right' people and the 'right' tricks it can be registered again. Problem with that is that it wil still be against the law and you have the risk of being kicked out of your house in the future. Not nice when you plan to retire.

Why wait until you paid everything, decorated your house and live there comfortabley in an ignorant is bliss state.

The knock on the door will bring you back to earth again.

Probably you will get a year to sell everything or otherwise it will be property of the crown.

Problem is when that happens, who is going to buy it.

I don't call that an easy retirement, you will worry the rest of your time here. Unless al the money you spend is just peanuts for you.

As i said before, up to you. Just go in with your eyes open and with knowledge of the law, not the law as told by the one who is benifitting from the deal.

It is not for any other reason owners and buyers are getting very nervous and are taking measures to try to protect there property, well actually the property of the 51% shareholders.

Having bought a house through the company route a couple of years ago, like many others,

I read every article about land ownership when the news broke a few months ago.

I have just been reading this thread with some interest.

Certainly when the news came out at first I was expecting problems like that so eloquently put forward by khun Jean.

I decided to sit down quietly, understand all the options and make a decision when I felt I needed to.

Do I need to make a decision yet? Its been several months now since the news about the land ownership / company route has been around.

Does anyone know of any expat that has had the 'knock on the door'? In fact does anyone have any news that perhaps lawyers offices have been investigated (where their staff were used to set up these shell companies). Are there any 'horror' stories at all???

Has anyone actually sold a house via the company route recently and got a reasonable price for it?

Check out www.tropical-living.com/06-09sep/01debate.htm

A good, well researched article.

Thanks Dragonman - I will go and read this now.

Has anyone actually sold a house via the company route recently and got a reasonable price for it?

Why would they get a lower price? The company just sells the land and house to the individual. Just because it is a company versus a individual being a seller, makes no difference on price.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

Good question which has forced me into thinking a lot about my basic assumptions which were.

I personally would not want to buy anything I did not fully own. The company route meant that any time in the next 40 years - if I decided to move for whatever reason - I could simply do so.

I figured there were lots of people like me - ie like to own something outright ?

I therefore thought that people who could no longer buy land/house via this company route, would opt for other types of investment ie condo in own name.

- hence bringing down prices of this type of property - if you could sell at all.

A well reasoned argument I am sure you would agree - even if it is way off the beam!

I actually have a Thai wife , so could do the 'land in her name - lease thing', but despite I may be 'flamed' for not wanting to do this - not trust her etc... I just love the fact I can ultimately make the decision myself - I dont mind consulting her - but I dont like the thought she could have the veto over my decision to sell.

So you know of actual cases of farang like me selling their house/land to other farang. What method have the buyers used? lease/usufruct ??

In relation to the other part of my question - Have you actually heard of any horror stories yet about investigations?? I am off to read the Dragonman link so maybe that will tell me all.

From all of us sad confused wrecks who use this site seeking information, I can assure you Sunbelt your feedback is always appreciated.

Hi Khun,

...

Jimmy

Thailand is getting more xenophobic by the minute, i wouln't count on it that you will be able to legally own your land and house. Rent/lease is the only sure way.

What your developer probably meant to say is that with the 'right' people and the 'right' tricks it can be registered again. Problem with that is that it wil still be against the law and you have the risk of being kicked out of your house in the future. Not nice when you plan to retire.

Why wait until you paid everything, decorated your house and live there comfortabley in an ignorant is bliss state.

The knock on the door will bring you back to earth again.

Probably you will get a year to sell everything or otherwise it will be property of the crown.

Problem is when that happens, who is going to buy it.

I don't call that an easy retirement, you will worry the rest of your time here. Unless al the money you spend is just peanuts for you.

As i said before, up to you. Just go in with your eyes open and with knowledge of the law, not the law as told by the one who is benifitting from the deal.

It is not for any other reason owners and buyers are getting very nervous and are taking measures to try to protect there property, well actually the property of the 51% shareholders.

Having bought a house through the company route a couple of years ago, like many others,

I read every article about land ownership when the news broke a few months ago.

I have just been reading this thread with some interest.

Certainly when the news came out at first I was expecting problems like that so eloquently put forward by khun Jean.

I decided to sit down quietly, understand all the options and make a decision when I felt I needed to.

Do I need to make a decision yet? Its been several months now since the news about the land ownership / company route has been around.

Does anyone know of any expat that has had the 'knock on the door'? In fact does anyone have any news that perhaps lawyers offices have been investigated (where their staff were used to set up these shell companies). Are there any 'horror' stories at all???

Has anyone actually sold a house via the company route recently and got a reasonable price for it?