Irene

Nice thought! But you need the consent of the Orphanage to go along with your route and also the integrity of the administrators of that Orphanage. The usufruct agreement has to be registered with the Land Department just like a long-term lease agreement.

Personally, I would prefer a 30-year lease agreement with a renewal option of another 30 years with a corporation as a lessor.

I have been given to understand that the corporate route is now fraught with danger.

Also, that You can only lease for 30 years. The renewal of such a lease would be contingent on the original person or heirs of that person who leased it to you. I think you would be standing on the precipe with a blind fold to think that the person would renew your 30 year lease. As of this point in time no one knows of any one who has been able to renew a 30 year lease.

It goes with out saying that you would need the orphanages consent for such an arrangement.

philliphn,

Yes, you are right on the certainty of 30 year absolute right and the renewal right is not cast-iron. The renewal right is a promise given by a lessor to a lessee. Hence, an individual lessor is most vulnerable to break of promise and/or due to death of the lessor.

In having a corporation as a lessor, there is no death in the corporation especially if you are also a less than 50% shareholders of this corporation. Liquidation of a corporation requires 75% votes of the shareholders. If there is a breach of the lease agreement on this renewal clause (which should be less likely if you are also a substantial shareholder), you can take the corporation to court for the court's order to the corporation to comply with the promise.

Normally they are quite respectful to funerals of the Thais. It is rather sad to know of this misdeed.

There should be not much tax on the deceased. Only income tax on his income to the date of his death is subject to tax. There is no inheritance tax in Thailand. However, a court appointment of an administrator of the deceased assets has to be sought. This could take quite a few months even for a simple case. The procedures are simple for a lawyer if there is no mistrust among the beneficiaries. Normally, the legal fee is not much. But there may be some unscrupulous lawyers who may take advantage of the innocence of the relatives. If at a loss in locating a right lawyer, check with the Law Society, first for their help of the case or alternatively to understand the type of charges and recommendations of a lawyer.

Queue jumping is common practice in some post offices. It really annoys me to see them jump in front with a bundle of business, taking many minutes to complete, when all I want is a postage stamp.

In Thailand, queue jumping is common everywhere not only in the post offices. This is one of the many "dislikes" I have to endure in Thailand. Not satisfying with the misdeeds, some even look at those in the queue as "one up on you lot" after their successful act.

Nice thought! But you need the consent of the Orphanage to go along with your route and also the integrity of the administrators of that Orphanage. The usufruct agreement has to be registered with the Land Department just like a long-term lease agreement.

Personally, I would prefer a 30-year lease agreement with a renewal option of another 30 years with a corporation as a lessor.

Thanks Irene.

You appear to be saying once land/property is in an underaged Thais name then there is no way it can be transferred until the child is 20 years old, even with the consent of the guardian?

Chris

Right.

I don't think it's that set in stone, i.e I wouldn't say "no way". I believe it is actually:

"no parent without the approval of the court..." may sell/transfer etc.

That implies with court approval you could so. If you think about it logically there has to be some provision along these lines. Situations could arise where it is everyone's interest, including the child's where a sale may be necessary/preferable

You are also right but in practice the court is reluctant to take side or take up the responsibility.

Thanks Irene.

You appear to be saying once land/property is in an underaged Thais name then there is no way it can be transferred until the child is 20 years old, even with the consent of the guardian?

Chris

Right.

The thing I hate about my girlfriend is that I can not spend the money I want to spend on stupid things... If I want new wheels for my pickup she will just say that the old ones are working... If I want a new plasma tv she will complain because the projection tv is still working...

What I like is that she always ask if I have money, and then when I say no, she will give me whatever she has... I am lucky...

No, she is not a bargirl, she has her own crab business that I gave her money to start up...

5000B start up fee (what the hel_l did I think) Now I get 1000 bath every week.. Nice...

Not only nice, she is a rare gem!!! She must be Chinese related.

Thai girls are the best

An expat friend is buying property in Phuket area and wants to put property in his daughters name. She holds a Thai passport but is only 3 years old. Is it true a Thai must be at least 20 years of age to have property in thir name?

It is possible to have a title deed under the name of the under-age. However, it is not advisable because the land cannot be disposed until he has come to the full age of 20. An underage cannot legally effect any transactions.

Can it not be transferred back to the mother who could then dispose of it if she wished?

Unlike opening a bank deposit account, an underage needs a consent of his parents. In the case of immovable property, ownership could be registered under the name of the underage. From my recollection, once registered, the land cannot be sold or mortgaged until he has reached 20 years of age when he is viewed as an adult and on his birthday of that year able to conclude any legal transactions. So, the underage can transfer the land to the mother when he has come of age at 20. Do check with the Land Department of this understanding.

Sam125,

The responses are in bold type:

I am American and my wife is Thai.

1) Can our minor children (dual citizenship Thai US) be stockholders as part of the required seven stockholders?

Yes

2) Can we issue preferred stock with no voting rights and have part of the required seven shareholders only have preferred stock?

No. Under the law, no stock can be without voting rights. The required six other shareholders could have one-share-one vote each.

3) Can we have a token shareholder as part of the required seven with only on share worth say 100 baht?

Yes

4) Are there restrictions on dividends related to authorized capital and profits?

I am not sure whether I understand the question. Dividend payments are at the discretion of the Board of Directors and subject to approval at the general meeting of shareholders.

5) Does Thailand have the equivalent of a US S corporation which eliminates double taxation at the corporate level?

No. Each corporation is viewed sacrosanctly as a separate entity and subject to tax under each corporate level.

Bet the Thai stock market goes up tommorow.

Why against the tide?

Without having the knowledge of the niceties of your profession but based on my general understanding of the Thai labour law, other posts are correct in advising you not to resign yet. You would make life more miserable for your employer by not resigning.

Second, if your contention of unfair conducts of the employer can be proven as to timing, you have a good case at the Labour Court to maintain that you are not a contract employee. In general, Labour Court tends to favour employees.

Third, if it is unwritten on the question of private tuition, private tuition in your spare time is not in conflict with your employer's interest unless the employer also provides this after-hour service.

The above is only comments made by an outsider reacted from your description of the event. However, you need to look into whether it is wise to have a confrontation or any unpleasantness. Before you decide on your direction, talking to a lawyer should help or quietly approach the Labour Department or Labour Court on your status to find out the best course of action. Unfortunately, I do not know of the contact information at these two places but I am aware of them providing the help to employees.

once the tide rolls out and the foreign speculation ends, it will be interesting......

Avoid the Thai Market: There Are Better Opportunities Elsewhere

http://seekingalpha.com/article/42224

Thank you for bringing this article to our attention.

Dr. von Pfeil's recommendation is good news to the Thai government whose current baht measures are meant to encourage Thais to invest abroad or pay dollar accounts quicker in countering against the inflow of foreign dollars invested in the Thai stocks (so far net inward fund of Baht 130 billion baht) which has caused the baht too strong and damages to Thai export industry. If his recommendation is taken by most foreign investors, then the Thai government's problem on too strong the baht would be solved.

The current baht strength has been due mainly to hot money coming into the Thai weak stock market for capital gain. Their flow of bringing dollar to Thailand's stock exchange has helped them so far of also earning extra exchange gain. For 2006, the exchange gain amounted to 12% and 2007 7% todate. Since the government's current measures have been viewed by most locals and foreigners as not that effective, hence the market still remains buoyant since the announcement of the measures.

Does one think the foreign investors would leave Thailand alone and go somewhere else as recommended by Dr. von Pfeil? Somehow, I do not think they would forego the current opportunity of having two sure gains: capital gains and exchange gains. Those foreign investors would love to see the baht strength being pushed down to 30 baht. The opportunity is too rare for them to let go.

Well, the Thai government may not agree with his reasonings, especially on the growth being built up of inventory, but sure love his recommendation of avoiding Thailand market.

An expat friend is buying property in Phuket area and wants to put property in his daughters name. She holds a Thai passport but is only 3 years old. Is it true a Thai must be at least 20 years of age to have property in thir name?

It is possible to have a title deed under the name of the under-age. However, it is not advisable because the land cannot be disposed until he has come to the full age of 20. An underage cannot legally effect any transactions.

Wonderful reading and I learned quite a lot. As to your contractor role, can your heart withstand the coming frustrations of dealing with all sorts of workers. Anyhow, good luck!

One problem we've had for the last few years is periodic mouse infestation. The mice got above a suspended ceiling on the ground floor and chewed away at the wiring. At different times they have also chewed up the wiring on an outside water pump and an aircon unit. We've also found droppings in built in kitchen cabinets. We have tried traps, including the glue on card variety, but the mice tend to return after a while. I was wondering whether to invest in some electronic pest control devices. These come in the form of an ultrasonic sound emitter or a combined ultrasonic and pulse device. Has anybody tried them or have any experience of how well they work? Most just plug into a mains socket. I have seen UK and EU plug versions for sale in Europe, but haven't seen any in Thailand in the obvious places like Big C or Tesco. Does anybody know who sells them?

When I first moved to a house which is standing at a previous rice field and was inundated by these rats. I also thought of all the contraptions. Then there was one stray cat, the ugliest, called for food, my housekeeper fed her. Since then, we have our cost for feeding that cat with the result of the disappearance of the rats. Unfortunately, the cat is now catching young birds which does annoy us.

oldhand,

Thank you for sharing with us on your experiences and observations. My comments are in bold type:-

A 30 year lease is just that. I took out a 30 year lease registered with the land office way back when I first thought about moving to Thailand. In my contract, I was allowed to renew the lease for a further 30 years which was more than enough for my needs at the time.

At about year 23 the landowner told me that he was selling the land and told me that I would have no further extension of the lease. When I took my contract to the land office they pointed out that the registered lease was for 30 years only. I still own the house on the land but do not have the right of abode there.

30 years is 30 years and that is it! Anything else is not worth the paper it is written on as it cannot be registered at the land office.

That depends on your previously agreed renewal clause whether it was at the discretion of the landowner or that of the lessee with prior agreed rental. Section 540 of the Civil and Commercial Code on Letting of Property provides as follow:-

"The duration of a rental of immovable property cannot exceed thirty years. If it is made for a longer period, such period is to be reduced to thirty years.

The aforesaid period may be renewed, but it must not exceed thirty years from the time of renewal."

The law already gives sanction to the possibility of the renewal. The condition of the renewal is up to meeting of the mind of the two parties.

Section 569 also provides the following:-

"A rental contract of immovable property is not extinguished by the transfer of the ownership of the related property.

The transferee is entitled to the rights and is subject to the duties of the transferor towards the lessee."

Also very important is the fact that the 30 year lease is not transferable. The only way to sub let is to have the original landowner sign a new lease with the new lessor. You cannot sell it.

Section 544 clarifies this point that:

"Unless otherwise provided by the rental contract, a lessee cannot sublet or transfer his rights in the whole or part of the property to a third person.

If a lessee acts contrary to this provision, the lessor may terminate the contract."

With the above said and done I understand that TAT and the original Thai elite card are coming up with some program to provide lifetime transferable leases and that the company that they are setting up is to be listed on the stock exchange - I cannot confirm or advise on the legality of this scheme as I don't have enough info and am not qualified to do so.

I strongly suggest that anyone purchasing property (land) at this time goes the leasing method as it is still the only legal way that a foreigner can secure the land in his name albeit for a limited period.

Good point. A lawyer should be consulted on the best way to protect your interest on the renewal clause. This is especially so when you have a friendly lessor now.

OH

jasreeve17,

My comments are in bold type:-

At first glance Irene's comments looked nicely written, but against logic learnt from living here, as well as my basic, but reasonable, understanding of legal documents.

(I've recently dealt with Thai land offices, Thai lawyers and Thai judges and I'm very pleased that the land office documents, clear Thai laws and a good Thai lawyer were on my side otherwise I would have lost land / money.)[My missus's land of course.]

Common sense tells us that a maximum term 30 year lease means just that. And we also know that liberal interpretation of Thai land laws is not sensible.

Under the law, it allows a renewal period and not a liberal interpretation.

The land office have authority. Registered district offices, recognised district offices, officials and many other terms are generic terms with limited meaning in this case, which is irrelevant anyway because the land office have authority and we must abide by their rules wholely and completely.

Sorry, it was my mistake in using the term District Office. I should have stated as Land District Office. It is the branch of the Land Department.

Irene's last paragraph concerning the lease owner dying and the successor having a legal obligation to respect the contract may be true on a land office authorised 30 year lease, but it won't be applicable to a 30 year + 1 second lease (on the plus segment).

Once a lease agreement is effective, the death of the lessor or the bankruptcy of the lessor company does not affect the right of occupation of the lessee. However, a change of a lessee during the lease period is subject to approval of the lessor.

Nice words don't hide the fact. I would not take Irene's advice.

At least, I am glad that it appears as nice words. It is just my style of not hurting people's feeling. That does not make any difference to me whether my advice is taken so long as I have a chance to state my point of view and not like in one case of telling me to discontinue discussing on this subject.

Sorry Irene. I'm not flamming you, I just disagree with your point. I'm keen to hear your answer to Dr Naam's questions. I'm always willing to learn.

Oh, you are proper and nicely put on your doubt. I understand the feeling once one has this hang up idea of what one understood. Dr. Naam's questions also taught me not ever to use the words, "District Office", "I believe", "encumbrances". That is the whole beauty of this Forum of people trying to help each other.

...because the land is subject to that incumbrance already registered with the officials

Irene,

unspecific claims and expressions like "registered and recognised at district offices" or "registered with the officials" or "i believe" are not very helpful for those of us who are trying to secure our investment in immobile property.

give us details please. most of us do not understand legal lingo but i am sure we would understand if you explain what a district office is and in what form the incumbrance was registered with what kind of officials.

Sorry for being legalistic without realising it.

First,under the Thai Civil and Commercial Code, a lease of more than 3 years cannot be effective if it is not registered with the Land Office. The Land Office is spreaded all over Thailand with each relevant district. (A lease of three years or less does not require this registration).

Second, a lease cannot exceed a period of 30 years but can be with a renewal clause of not more than another 30 years.

Third, when registering with the Land District Office, there is a standard official form issued by the Land Office stating the name of the lessor and the lessee, period involved, the amount of rental charges, and other conditions as an official evidence of the registration. Under the clause,"Other conditions", it is stated as "shall be in accordance with the lease contract signed by the lessor and lessee on 22 November 1999 as attached to this official lease agreement. The attachment shall be regarded as an integral part of this official lease", ( the official registration date was on 31 January 2000). The attachment is the detailed agreement between the two parties covering normal covenants and conditions including a condition of renewal and is officially stamped as evidence as part of the official lease.

Fourth, the official lease has to be signed by the lessor and lessee or their proxy and witnessed by two officials of the Land District Office.

Fifth, the official lease and the attachment are made into three sets, one each for the lessor and the lessee and another set as signed by all the parties shall be kept by the District Office as a public record.

Sixth, there is a payment of 1% registration fee and 0.1% stamp duty on the total rental charge.

my two cents:

for me Singapore doesnt feel "Asian" any more than San Francisco is "Asian" so I wouldnt/didnt want to transfer to SG (although I had the chance with full housing allowance)... (in fact SF felt more "Asian" to me...and also had funky bits, Italian bits, Russian bits, even Japanese-Peruvian restaurants etc.)........

in addition, I really really dont like that pervasive, almost mandatory "kiasu" culture there (and, sorry, the Singlish accent drives me up the wall)...much prefer the "mai pen rai" culture in Siam even if its less efficient and certain......life's too short....

for some reason ALL of my university classmates, grad school classmates and even work colleagues and associates of Sing' nationality are not based in Singapore, do not live in Singapore or even have any intentions of returning there... I wonder why that is.....

its a nice convenient place to pop in 2-3 times a year and shop (but the same things are becoming more and more available here in Bangkok) or chill-out or even attend mandatory seminars or meetings (and will become a bit more attractive when the casinos open...much closer than the casinos in Sydney or Melbourne and surely will be much nicer than the ones in Manila, Columbo or Genting) BUT honestly, I wouldnt want to live there full-time (working or eventually retiring)...

If I was only in it for a full-blast rat-race (for maximum accumulation purposes) I would opt for HK, NY or SF.....

Well said and spot on. You took words from my mouth. The place is like a hospital full of the smell of cleanliness and yet you feel somewhat unnatural. Unlike, the Scandinavian countries, you do feel their cleanliness as natural, not imposing and sincere.

I am confused by the different holidays in Thailand. Can anyone please tell me what days I have to give my staff by law as a holiday?

I understand there are around 14? If I ask my staff they give me all the holidays, bank, government and Buddha days!!!

I own a small company employing 5 staff and I just want to know what I have to give them legally. Thanks for any assistance.

You can get a list of the holidays from the British or American Chamber of Commerce.

The fact is there are naive farang - like I was 5 years ago - who read and take at face value the views of well intentioned decent people like yourself.

It was nice decent people like yourself as well as Estate Agents and others that told me it was OK to buy my house and land in the company name. I believed these people.

Now I hear all over the place 'its OK to buy your property with a 30+30+30 lease'.

Its almost the same mantra that I heard 5 years ago about land 'ownership' through the company route.

And look at us lucky landowners now!!! Awaiting the result of the FBA - oh joy!!!

Acquiring your land through a lease is only guaranteed for 30 years if registered at the land Registry.

Anything beyond this is at the discretion of the land owner, whoever that may be in 30 years time.

So I would please please please politely ask you to stop saying otherwise.

I however repeat, I am not an expert, just a farang who got conned 5 years ago and now do all I can to warn others of the

the folly of listening to stuff like this.

Just because you were conned 5 years ago, now you like me to stop saying something that is at variance with your belief. Unfortunately, I cannot oblige since I am born as a free person and still believe that 30+30 year lease is possible. I am not in an estate business but a person with independent means with no ulterior motives in joining this TV forum which is the best I have ever experienced. I may be wrong and I may be right that is up to the readers to judge on our rationales. There is no monetary reward or reward of any nature in sharing my knowledge and experience with others.

I have promised myself on the TV forum not ever to insult people with different point of view from mine or cast on their intelligence just because of my knowledge and experience being different from theirs. I have seen a few ugliness in this forum when the exchange was reduced to childishness. In sticking to this principle, I have learnt quite a lot from others and it has also changed my thinking and attitude when I was proven wrong.

To state that "Anything beyond this (the first 30-year lease) is at the discretion of the land owner, whoever that may be in 30 years time." is a generalised statement without recognising the free intention of the lessor and lessee. It also reflects on the lack of impartial reading of my message. My message was that even if the landlord dies before 30 years is up, the successor to the property is still obliged to the legal commitment as previously made by the deceased because the land is subject to that incumbrance already registered with the officials. It is not 100% protection but rarely has the landlord won the case when there is this dispute in court which is not often. Similarly, if the landlord is a company, the company's liquidator is obliged to follow the legal commitment previously made by the company. All I require to hear is for someone to tell me that I am mistaken and why. If I am wrong, then I would apologise and learn of the new ground and become a better man. If I am right, then others could benefit from this TV forum in knowing the right standing of the renewal clause of 30 years.

Irene, please define "officially registered" (as mentioned by you).

It means the whole lease agreement covering the covenants and conditions are registered with and recognised by the government's district offices. This is stronger than a contract concluded by two parties and witnessed by others.

Very noble of you to notice that. Do you notice that they still look so happy in this wretched condition. I always wonder why they look happier to some of the millionaire families. Must be Buddhism.

So what about the huge number of Indians - how are they regarded ?

I have always gotten the feeling that they are looked down on by the other races.

Looked down on may be too strong. On guard may be the right expression. They are looked up in legal and medical fields.

Rough stuff indeed. Brave of you to come out and share your story. Hope some of the folks who are quick to brag about their bareback sex tourist romps around Asia and Eastern Europe read it... along with all of those folks who are still in denial that HIV even exists and continue to lead their lives without a single concern for others.

Heng,

You are right on the spot of the gallantry of the man to share the story with us. I had a lump in my throat while reading the story. Unfortunately, I am not good enough to give advice on this nature.