OKF

Thnaks but unfortunately that does not help me, I do need google data to see where it is in relation to my property

Bophut Hill consists of several Hills really, to understand where this GECKO ist I need a position so I can see where my land is.

I have read that posting about GECKO but I cannot make out where exactly it is located. Can somebody give me the google coordinates or a proper google link so I can have a look.

Well if you do not pay the couple I may end up like you ended up :-). I had the impression that if you want to make sure you hire a couple that you pay and that lives there and also of course does the maintenance, garden etc. However if there is a better and cheaper way I am open for suggestions. Police does go around several times a dy? Is this sort of official, so you pay them officially and the come and sign a book? Sounds a good way for me if I understand right? Anyone any experience with that sort of thing?

can somebody give me the google coordinates or a google link so I can see where exactly that GECKO thing is?

yes, something one has to know in Samui, better avaid taxis. Whenever I am on Samui I rather walk then use a Taxi just because they are so rude and rip you of. I rent a car or use the trucks going around the island. They are the better of the worse.

Thank you for your thoughts. I will certainly investigate and discuss that issue when I am in Samui next week.

You say 12 moth or five years. I have read that some people after 10 year renew the formerly done 30 year lease for another 30 years, what I do not understand how the payment is done? So if you do a 3ß year you pay for exampel 2 million Baht. If you renew it afre 10 year for new 30 year you have lost 2/3 of what you paid or how does it work?

@backsoon

As I said I found it on www.thailaws.com and lots of countries are covered there

@all

Thnaks for sharing your views. Yes I felt he same, maybe not worth the paper written on and I have asked the political admin in the german embassy but the answer was no commetn and a list of lawers. I will have a go at them agein becaus eit is a political thing nothing to do with the laws in particular and see what the out come is (just for the fun of it)

sorry I attached wrong, this is the most up to date one but similar when it comes to the point of property.

Maybe tha ADMIN can delete the wrong one

Hi @ all,

I found the attached doc on thailaws.com and I am sure it will be very similar with other countries. When I read it to it says clearly that if a Thai can have freehold in my country (which he could) I can have freehold in Thailand. Did anybody ever look at this? What is you thoughts about it?

so you would also rule out using it as exit strategy and start to proceed with the company structure and respond to possible problems by switching over then?

Hi @ all,

my I use this posting to ask a question how you take care of the security issue. I am planning to built a house on Bobphut Hill and the big question would be is it a neccessity to have a Thai couple living in there for security puroses or is there other ways and means to have the property secured if not there most of the time and only have it rented out here and there?

@123ace:

Coming back to my question. As explained above it is not meant for resale and not meant for investment it is for retirement purposes and maybe rent it out here and there to cover some of the cost etc. see above...

So is the sale and leaseback or staying with the companies better?

Maybe keeping the sale and lease back as an exit strategy?

@oracle:

I do not think the guy is looking for any investment so why should he involve his money into my company?

@langsuan man:

Oh I see, no problem, actually the guy would not be nominee, it would be a straight forward deal, the guy is not poor and he is educated and well aware of the property issues.

@123ace:

Okay I got you and we are bottoming my problem. As a further explanation, yes it is not meant for resale and not meant for investment it is for retirement purposes and maybe rent it out here and there to cover some of the cost. I have looked for 3 years for good people on the island and finnally found them so I would think I have the right people for building supervision, the right guy for plumbing and electricity (which is a key issue from what I know) and will find the right building company through all these people. I stay away from all the developing and keyturn ready builders with their nice drawn concepts which can hardly be built in Samui and which are not feasable for the tropics and so on and on and on. So you seem to understand the issue very well and come to the point precisely. Coming back to my main point, is the sale and leaseback or staying with the companies better? Maybe keeping the sale and lease back as an exit strategy?

thanks but I do not get what you mean, Do you think is the lease is better or is it better to keep the company structure (referring to my original question)?

@langsuan man:

1. I 'sell' the land to the trustworthy Thai person I was refering to

Every time I bring up this "trustworthy Thai person" argument here on Thai Visa I get the old refrain that I cannot use a nominee to get around the legal restrictions

I do not quite understand what you mean? The person I would use is not a nominee?

@123ace:

You say: 'this route as your already know will not hold to scrutiny (beyond year 30)'

What do you mean with this?

I understand what you mean related to old leasing contracts but my case is a bit different. No house built yet. I am in the satge of deciding what to do therefore I am asking all these questions. Maybe I can avoid the one or the other problem.

Are you suggesting at the end of your posting that I should go the route of leasing as I described above?

@oracle:

From what I understand the fact that I control the company that holds land is illegal. I do have a cross share system with 2 companies so both hold shares in each other and the Thai persons are holding nearly no shares something like 5 of 10.000 so at least nobody there could turn funny. Also the companies are located in BKK and not in Samui. I am aware that some taxes maybe involved but have not loked into that in any detail. Where and what sort or trobe would you expect when I would go that rout? Is it a problem to close the companies?

The 'business' is another problem. The holding company does not do business and the company that holds the land does not either. So the original idea was to do an annual renting contract as I cannot see any logic in doing a 30 year lease with my own company? What do I gain from that? With some annual rent the company has some income and the taxman is happy. The 30 year lease may be works the same way, I do not know as this is a singel payment only. That problem of the company not generating any income apart from the above mentioned may need discussing as well? If that is a problem it could be another reason for going the route of sale and lease back.

@123ace: There is no freehold condos to buy in Samui and I have the Companies and the land already.

@Abrak: What difference does it make to have a Thai Company or a BVI Company. A BVI will add further cost to everythig and it would still mean that I as a foreigner own land in a more or less illegeal way. Or do I miss something here?

@thaiwanderer: You write: 'In any case you may wish to hold your lease and or superficuary rights in an offshore company name if inheritance is an issue with which you are concerned.' I do not know what you mean, to hold something in an offshore company.

@all: thank you so far

Going a bit further with my question or proposal to get rid of the 'illegal' situation I am automatically in:

1. I 'sell' the land to the trustworthy Thai person I was refering to

2. I lease the land from that Thai person

3. That Thai person would put a will in place leaving me the land as he can will property either freehold or leasehold to anyone he likes to.

4. To safe guard the next thirty years, the Thai person signs all sales documents over to me. It basically means that I would have a 30 year window to either wait and see what the Government does to change the law of foreign ownership or in year 29, I do re-open a Thai company and transfer the land and/or house into that.

Does that sound like a good and fairly 'safe' way or would there be objections to that.

The only thing I do not know is what can I do in case I die during the lease period, so my friend or heirs can continue to use it? Could I incorporate more people into the lease so if one dies the other can continue to have it? Also could such person be changed within a leasing period?

just read about 'superficies'...would that solve the problem in case I die that the lease continues for the time it is still valid so I can pass my leasing rights on to someone that should inherrit my building and maybe belongings?

Another way is for the company to become legal. You still can have control. Buy a few cheap condo's that the company rents out. Then build a house that you rent to yourself.

This way the capital stays in the company and later the company can sell shares or sell property.

Nothing complicated about that. It will cost you probably a few 100k baht more initially, but you will have the benefit that that money (although locked up in real estate) will stay yours.

This will only work if you are willing to fulfill the requirements like meetings, accounting etc. All that can be done for a few 10K baht.

Sorry I do not understand what you mean? I have control in my company but therefore it is illegal as I hold property in the company whcih I am not allowed to as a foreigner.

Hallo @ all,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Yes, I have read here quite a few postings but my situation is slightly different to what I mainly read. I am clear what a lease means. The main question is whether it makes sense to give up the company, and sell the land to a trustworthy Thai person and lease it back and therefore not being involved in any illegal company construction and also saving the bookkeeping for 30 years for my 2 companies which is approx. 2.1. mio baht for the period at least. I am also clear that I can build in my name when I own the land via the company and also when I lease the land. I am also clear that I have to consider everything invested in Thailand as a write off but when I am lucky everything works out. The downside from what I understand here would be that:

1. when I die the lease contract is dissolved

2. no real extension possible, so 30 years and thats it

3. the house that I built sort of belongs to the owner of the land

But could I incorporate a second person into the leasing agreement, so if I die that person sort of steps in and the lease continues?

Regarding no. 3 above I was under the impression that a building in Thailand is a seperate issue to the land and although it is sort of connected to land it is treated seperately but some posters here say that is not the cas?

Somebody said there is a standrad form for a leasing agreement as it is not worth going through the trouble of a lawyer preparing something. Where can I find that form?

Thanks & regards

Oliver

Hi @ all

I am foreigner and I own land via my company. Not to do things illegal I am now thinking of 'selling' the land from my company to a Thai person which is not a spouse or similar (I trust the person and do not want to discuss that issue here) and lease it it back so I can built a house on MY name on the land. From what I understand the 30 year lease would be fairly safe. Because I ma like to use the land after period what could I do to make more or less sure that that I cance continue the lease?

1. Is it a good idea accepting that the person is trustworthy

2. Is the thirty year lease safe?

3. If into the lease contract I incorporate that the building if the contract is not renewed will have to be paid for by the owner of the land at time value would that help to decrease my risk of looding to much or everything

4. In addition to 2. does i make sense to agree on a 60 or 90 year lease (which from what I understand makes only sense so after 30 years there is no further payment due but does not give you any rights)

I am asking that because the new owner may die and some family may inherrit and may have funny ideas about the property after the 30 years.

All I want to know how I can get max protection if give my property away. How do I do it right under the described scenario. Thank for your input and advice!

yes, all illegal but everybody does it. Come on guys?

What happens now is that the DSI starts to look at structures with property above 2 rai. Do you seriuosly think they are after the small 1 rai slices where private people build their holiday home? Everybody makes a good living on it, lawyers, property developers, land bankers, small stores etc. Seems to be unrealistic doesn't it?

Also who will go to jail for having a company with illegal structures? What would happen is maybe that you give a warning that you have to restructure with a year or two. Isn't everything eles written here making a bit of a panic?

Hallo again

Accidentially I am in contact with a lawyer and accountant of my nationality working in a law office in BKK. He said my company construction is critical and risky and from what I understand he prefers the standard nominee structure (not 100% clear yet) and says I am in need for good advice regardless of what advice I got in the past. He also implements that the 30 year lease seems to be a neccessity.

In this posting 'thaiwanderer' said:

'However IF your ownership of the land is complete and legal then there is no reason why any lease is necessary'

So if it is not which is implemented that means I should do a 30 year lease. What would I gain from that? Lets say my company is found illegal and disolved by the authorities, what difference does it make to the agreement. If made with an illegal company it can be deemed illegal as well, right? I do not get the point about the 30 year lease.

Thanks & regards

Oliver

What is the current land title?

I remember 2 years ago when I asked a builder how much it would cost to change from Nor Sor3 to chanote he quoted approx. 50.000 Baht

I understand yopur points, thank you for that, but I am sure you are missing something. Of course it is not only about the 5 Thai persons. The company shares in each company is 'Thai' as well but as it is the companies which I control. This is why it is a Thai company without having Thai people in. I will sent you a pm that is maybe better.

hm, I cannot see what you mean with a nominee structure. The fact that it has a few Thai people as minorty share holders means that? Looking at the typical nominee structure I find it a huge difference. Number 1 is that I am in full control of everything an do not have to differenciate between normal and preferential shares and number 2 is that the Thais had to pay such minimal capital for the shares which is easy to proof.

But if you think it is more or less the same do you then think a 30 year lease is a neccessity and if so why?