Buying a House for Americans

[simoh1490]

16 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

 

Well it could be as I know someone that did this purchasing a house in Chiang Mai.

He set up a contract payment plan with the Thai seller who had the house free and clear.

A win win, the guy got the house and the Thai is making decent interest and getting a monthly income.

It is not a lease.

 

To answer your question... I am just putting out a possible option which obviously you have none.....

It would be almost impossible to make a Land Contract work here, as you point out the sale is not recorded at the Land Office hence the foreign buyer could never take legal ownership.

[EricTh]

On 2/23/2018 at 9:28 PM, bkk6060 said:

Just marry a Thai girl, buy a house, and put everything in her name.

That always works out for the best.......

There are cases where Thai girl kicked out the hubby from the house after everything is put in her name. 

 

Just watch Youtube for cases.

 

[EricTh]

On 2/24/2018 at 4:07 PM, LivinLOS said:

Glad your happy.. But that 'first right of renewal' clause is pretty much non enforceable. 

 

Its a contractual right not a 'real right' under Thai law. Enforcing future contract obligations is not easy.. If the landowner changes the new land owner is not bound to that contract either. 

 

But as long as your happy with the 30 and pricing its a solid option. 

 

Wow. I am confused, what is fake right and real right?

 

Can the landowner sell the property without the house owner consent?

[bkk6060]

1 minute ago, EricTh said:

There are cases where Thai girl kicked out the hubby from the house after everything is put in her name. 

 

Just watch Youtube for cases.

 

Seriously??

You are probably the only person on TV who can't figure out sarcasm......

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

It would be almost impossible to make a Land Contract work here, as you point out the sale is not recorded at the Land Office hence the foreign buyer could never take legal ownership.

The Thai government is pretty hard on those that seek to subvert the legal process by using dodgy schemes.

[xylophone]

On 24/02/2018 at 12:47 PM, ChristianBlessing said:

My (American) wife and I bought a small bungalow outside of Chiang Mai, signing a 30 year contract. Frankly, the lease may outlive us. We did have a lawyer draw up the contract which includes first right of renewal. We take no small measure of comfort in knowing we're on a pretty solid legal footing.

Sent from my Mi A1 using Tapatalk
 

Not so if it was bought through setting up a company and the Thai nominees have invested nothing in it........or indeed if it is not operating as a company/business.

[xylophone]

On 25/02/2018 at 6:30 PM, scorecard said:

 

All true, however there's a bit more detail:

 

- By Thai law, a foreigner (any foreigner, regardless of nationality) can only own 49% of the shares in a Thai company.

 

- The other 51% must be owned by a Thai person or a group of Thai people.  After registration the Thai shareholders cannot sell their shares to the foreigner. (The 49%/% / 51% ownership rules always remain.)

 

- When the company is registered at the Thai Companies Office, the official articles of association written and agreed by the owners can state that:

 

- The company has a Managing Director or CEO position and in the registration process it can also be stated (in the articles of association) that the person appointed to the MD / CEO position is specifically you. and also state that MD / CEO is the only person who can sign any documents about anything on behalf of the company. 

 

The last sub-point need further checking because there was some earlier discussion that this could not be done at the company registration time but could happen at a later date.

 

Other members of TV can provide the up to date answers to this point.

 

The initial registration process is not difficult and not expensive (although many Thai and foreign lawyers will tell you it's quite difficult and needs careful negotiations and hefty fees and commissions - not true. But better to get a lawyer to do it for you. However move along if a lawyer asks for anything above say 30,000Baht all up. In reality many other agencies can do this work and tey often charge very nominal fees.

 

When the company is all set up the company can buy land and buildings in the company name.

 

Yes by Thai law the company must submit an annual company report every year, the company must firstly get an accounting statement, pay any due company taxes (usually calculated by the accountant, and get official tax receipts and must also have a registered auditor sign a statement that the acct. / tax documents are in order. These documents must all be submitted with the annual company report to the Thai companies office.

 

Fees for the preparation of all of these documents and actual submission to the companies office for all of this range from perhaps 100,000Baht total a year (rip off lawyers) or down to maybe a total of say 15 - 20,000Baht all up (perhaps a knowledgeable local accountant)

 

Failure to submit all of the above can create the risk that the company gets automatically de-registered meaning a possible nightmare in terms of what happens to ownership of any land and houses owned by company.

 

Good luck. 

 

Nice info but the fact remains that it is illegal to set up a Thai company for the sole purpose of buying property/land ownership, irrespective of the fact that the company pays taxes etc...........it has to be a legitimate business employing a certain number of Thais AND the Thai nominees can be investigated to show how much they have invested in the company and what their returns in that investment are. See below...........

 

Articles on foreign ownership in Thailand………..

A). This from the Land Department Minister (office of)...........
 
"If it is appears that the company is having foreigner as shareholder or Director or if there is a reason to believe that it is nominating the Thais to hold shares for the foreigners, the officer is to investigate income of every Thai shareholders in the legal entity by looking into their work history of what kind of work they have done and what monthly salary they earned, all of these proved by evidence.
 
If the purchased is funded by loan, then loan evidence must be provided. If after the investigation, it is led to believe that the application for land ownership is circumventing the law or any individual is purchasing land to the benefit of foreigners under the Land Act 74, paragraph 2, the officer is to investigate the case in detail and report to the Land Bureau to be waiting for further advise from the Minister".
 
Some more info... http://www.thailaws....business_42.htm

B). Link to an article in the Telegraph....
 
"Expats who own land illegally in Thailand could be deported under tough new laws being drafted by the government.

Thai ombudsman Siracha Charoenpanij said earlier this month that he was drawing up "carrot-and-stick" legislation to protect the country from illegal foreign nominee ownership.

 

Under Thai laws, foreign nationals are not allowed to own residential land. They can, however, buy apartments so long as no more than 49 per cent of a development is owned by foreigners. They can also purchase detached villas, but while they can own the house, they cannot own the land the house is on and are only able to lease it for 30 years at a time.

 

To get around these restrictions, some have entered into complicated structures whereby a company is set up to purchase the land. A Thai national holds the majority of shares in that company, but in reality may have no financial interest in the company and may own it on behalf of the foreign buyer.

 

It is these such "nominee ownership" arrangements that the government now wants to crack down on, and Charoenpanij has also proposed a reward – of 20 per cent of the land’s value when sold – for those providing information about illegal ownership. His plans also include penalties for lawyers or consultants who advise foreign buyers on nominee structures".

 

C). 1). Unquestionably it is illegal to buy a house via a company. 
 
 The Thailand Alien Business act is quite specific, and there is a blanket offence of circumventing land ownership laws that means anything that appears to allow foreigners to own houses is actually illegal.
 
2). Be careful here because it is illegal for a company to be formed with the sole purpose of owning a property. If the company is a trading/working entity employing Thai workers, paying taxes etc then a property can be purchased, but then again the company has to also have a majority Thai ownership (Amity exempt) and these majority Thai shareholders must be able to show how much they have invested in this company and from whence the funds came.

 

This is to prevent the “Thai nominee company” illegal workaround and nominee companies are illegal...

http://www.thailand-lawyer.com/land_purchase.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/expat-money/9413075/Expats-warned-of-illegal-home-crackdown-in-Thailand.html

 

http://www.thailandlawonline.com/66-real-estate-legal-issues/14-can-a-thai-company-be-my-nominee-for-land-acquisition

 

http://www.thailandlawonline.com/article-older-archive/foreign-business-nominee-company-shareholder

[bkk6060]

39 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The Thai government is pretty hard on those that seek to subvert the legal process by using dodgy schemes.

Contract sales are used in other countries and are not "dodgy schemes".

 

But, if one does not understand the concept, I guess they will label it as they please.

Edited March 2, 2018 by bkk6060

[Dante99]

3 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Contract sales are used in other countries and are not "dodgy schemes".

 

But, if one does not understand the concept, I guess they will label it as they please.

Contract sales are not the greatest because the title does not transfer until the last payment has been made and before that time the owner could dispose of the property in another way.  Or he could sell it to multiple buyers at the same time.  Dodgy?  I do not know but for sure risky and often advised against for good reason.

[THAIJAMES]

32 minutes ago, xylophone said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/expat-money/9413075/Expats-warned-of-illegal-home-crackdown-in-Thailand.html

Link is from July 2012 and nothing ever happened.   Too many big wigs are involved in Real Estate Projects.  Such laws would only hurt their interests.

[xylophone]

9 minutes ago, THAIJAMES said:

Link is from July 2012 and nothing ever happened.   Too many big wigs are involved in Real Estate Projects.  Such laws would only hurt their interests.

Say what you like but the fact remains it is illegal and CAN be acted upon as a few have found out, so why take the risk because if anything happens you haven't got a leg to stand on. 

 

A friend here found out the hard way when his lawyer forged docs and sold his house whilst he was overseas. He tried to fight this but is getting nowhere because his purchase through a company was illegal in the first place!

 

Illegal is illegal, no "ifs or buts".

[Dante99]

13 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Say what you like but the fact remains it is illegal and CAN be acted upon as a few have found out, so why take the risk because if anything happens you haven't got a leg to stand on. 

 

A friend here found out the hard way when his lawyer forged docs and sold his house whilst he was overseas. He tried to fight this but is getting nowhere because his purchase through a company was illegal in the first place!

 

Illegal is illegal, no "ifs or buts".

Not the first lawyer to do that nor the last.

[scorecard]

23 minutes ago, Dante99 said:

Not the first lawyer to do that nor the last.

 

Another version, a farang friend needed legal advice because of pending divorce, one house with land owned by a shell company, farang 49%, Thai wife and her relatives 51%.

 

Advice from farang lawyer - transfer the land title quickly to the shell company 49% owner by the farang lawyer then nobody can touch anything.

 

Friend declined. 

 

 

[ericthai]

21 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

 

Well it could be as I know someone that did this purchasing a house in Chiang Mai.

He set up a contract payment plan with the Thai seller who had the house free and clear.

A win win, the guy got the house and the Thai is making decent interest and getting a monthly income.

It is not a lease.

 

To answer your question... I am just putting out a possible option which obviously you have none.....

but the guy is paying for something he dont really own. If it's not registered with the land department then the thai still owns the house/land.  They have a contract in place saying what? A foreigner cant own land so....  

[ericthai]

On 3/2/2018 at 6:39 AM, scorecard said:

 

Another version, a farang friend needed legal advice because of pending divorce, one house with land owned by a shell company, farang 49%, Thai wife and her relatives 51%.

 

Advice from farang lawyer - transfer the land title quickly to the shell company 49% owner by the farang lawyer then nobody can touch anything.

 

Friend declined. 

 

 

sounds like the lawyer gave bad advise!

[scorecard]

9 minutes ago, ericthai said:

sounds like the lawyer gave bad advise!

 

The farang lawyer concerned has an office in one of the beach resorts and is nothing more than a rogue, no hesitation to try obvious unethical rip offs. 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎3‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 5:08 PM, xylophone said:

Under Thai laws, foreign nationals are not allowed to own residential land. They can, however, buy apartments so long as no more than 49 per cent of a development is owned by foreigners. They can also purchase detached villas, but while they can own the house, they cannot own the land the house is on and are only able to lease it for 30 years at a time.

Thank you for confirming my belief that farangs can indeed own houses as well as condos.

There have been a few on TVF discussions claiming that farangs can not own a house, only condos, though not the land in the case of a house, of course.

 

I wish my own country had been as bent on keeping the land for the citizens, as opposed to foreigners, as families might not be living in cars, as they do now.

I hope LOS does not change that rule.

 

All that remains is for farangs to accept that buying property in LOS is indeed risky business.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎3‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 5:42 PM, THAIJAMES said:

Link is from July 2012 and nothing ever happened.   Too many big wigs are involved in Real Estate Projects.  Such laws would only hurt their interests.

Big wigs conning gullible people in dodgy schemes to enrich themselves are nothing new in any country, but it doesn't mean that farangs can own land at all, no matter what legalese they may employ.

I wonder how many have to get screwed over before all see the light.

Regardless, other than those buying property through the imperative of the small head, I just don't understand why so many farangs want to invest large sums of money into any property under less than cast iron ownership rights.

[THAIJAMES]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I just don't understand why so many farangs want to invest large sums of money into any property under less than cast iron ownership rights.

Everybody is in a different situation.  I agree that for many it is a bad decision.

 

For me it was an easy and wise decision.
In my case, I knew that I wanted to live here the rest of my life.

 

I had already paid 20 years of rent in various houses..  I was either going to pay another 30 years of rent for shitty houses, that are never maintained by lazy house owners and most importantly are not to my standards or I could build my own dream house to my own standards on land that I rent for 30 years.

 

Its a quality of life issue.  The savings in rent may or may not pay for the investment.  I don't care. Having a great place to live that you can maintain to your own standards is much more important.

 

if this investment was the majority of my net worth then that might not be a wise decision..  But it's only a small part.

 

 

 

[xylophone]

On 02/03/2018 at 5:42 PM, THAIJAMES said:

Link is from July 2012 and nothing ever happened.   Too many big wigs are involved in Real Estate Projects.  Such laws would only hurt their interests.

The Thais that have been sentenced to 7 yrs in jail seem to have fallen foul of the "big wigs" and their main crime was using Thai nominee companies (true enough to help their Chinese partners get money out of the country)........so action CAN be taken and the results are not pretty. See below from The Phuket News article:-

 

"Phuket 'zero baht' tour company bosses sentenced to over 7 years in jail, face fresh charges

 

These companies had Chinese or other foreigners using fake identification cards to register the businesses and had nominees using fake IDs to register as shareholders. 

 

Tranlee's assets, including over 100 buses and more than 30 boats, were confiscated by the order of the Civil Court and later sold in a series of auctions.

 

Updating the media on Tranlee's case on March 2, 2018 Gen Teeraphol announced that Phuket Provincial Court ruled Kritchakorn and Weerachai guilty of criminal association at a court sentencing on Feb 15 this year.

 

“They were sentenced to seven years and six months of imprisonment,” Gen Teeraphol said".

[xylophone]

3 hours ago, THAIJAMES said:

I had already paid 20 years of rent in various houses..  I was either going to pay another 30 years of rent for shitty houses, that are never maintained by lazy house owners and most importantly are not to my standards or I could build my own dream house to my own standards on land that I rent for 30 years.

I can see you point and anyway no problem with renting land upon which to build..........but nominee companies are a different "kettle of fish". 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 2:01 PM, THAIJAMES said:

For me it was an easy and wise decision.
In my case, I knew that I wanted to live here the rest of my life.

 

I had already paid 20 years of rent in various houses..  I was either going to pay another 30 years of rent for shitty houses, that are never maintained by lazy house owners and most importantly are not to my standards or I could build my own dream house to my own standards on land that I rent for 30 years.

I understand what you are saying as I wanted to live here till I died, but had I built a house on my wife's land I'd have nothing at all now. Had I even built the house on leased land after we got married she would have made me sell it.

The only way to guarantee I kept it was never to get married, and I moved here permanently to be married.

 

[scorecard]

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I understand what you are saying as I wanted to live here till I died, but had I built a house on my wife's land I'd have nothing at all now. Had I even built the house on leased land after we got married she would have made me sell it.

The only way to guarantee I kept it was never to get married, and I moved here permanently to be married.

 

 

It is possible to have:

 

- The land owned by the Thai wife, and

 

- The building owned by you. Contract to build is specifically between you and the Thai builder, your signature only on the

  contract and proof that all the payments have come specifically from you.

 

But does that possibly bring other complications if the marriage goes pear shaped? 

 

An example, situation as above, marriage goes pear shaped and wife demands you move your house off her property. Could she do this - needs a specific legal answer and not guesses, and not comments like 'in the us....'.

 

 

 

[xylophone]

17 minutes ago, scorecard said:

An example, situation as above, marriage goes pear shaped and wife demands you move your house off her property. Could she do this - needs a specific legal answer and not guesses, and not comments like 'in the us....'.

 

Sorry, this is not going to be a legal answer, however there have been other instances not only on this forum but also others, where life is made intolerable for the farang when a marriage goes south, because the woman moves in her family/extended family/others making it very uncomfortable position indeed.

 

I seem to recall threats being made as well.

[THAIJAMES]

17 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

It is possible to have:

 

- The land owned by the Thai wife, and

 

- The building owned by you. Contract to build is specifically between you and the Thai builder, your signature only on the

  contract and proof that all the payments have come specifically from you.

 

But does that possibly bring other complications if the marriage goes pear shaped? 

 

An example, situation as above, marriage goes pear shaped and wife demands you move your house off her property. Could she do this - needs a specific legal answer and not guesses, and not comments like 'in the us....'.

 

 

 

Yes the land could be owned by your wife and the building registered under your name.

However the wife could legally stop you from entering the land which she owns, regardless if you own the building.

 

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

It is possible to have:

 

- The land owned by the Thai wife, and

 

- The building owned by you. Contract to build is specifically between you and the Thai builder, your signature only on the

  contract and proof that all the payments have come specifically from you.

 

But does that possibly bring other complications if the marriage goes pear shaped? 

 

An example, situation as above, marriage goes pear shaped and wife demands you move your house off her property. Could she do this - needs a specific legal answer and not guesses, and not comments like 'in the us....'.

 

 

 

Her land that she wanted me to build on is a 2 hour drive from Uttaradit, in a small village. 

I'd have built the house myself, with her. It's not difficult. 

There is no way that I'd ever want to live there by myself under any circumstances whatsoever.

Anyway, she could just ban me from walking on her land.

Edited March 6, 2018 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, xylophone said:

Sorry, this is not going to be a legal answer, however there have been other instances not only on this forum but also others, where life is made intolerable for the farang when a marriage goes south, because the woman moves in her family/extended family/others making it very uncomfortable position indeed.

 

I seem to recall threats being made as well.

I left when my wife's family moved into the house. It was very uncomfortable having to stay in my room whenever I was in the house.

They must have been laughing at me every day, seeing all the great stuff they were going to get for free.

In the end they even kept the stuff I wanted for myself, because they banned me from returning to the house.

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, scorecard said:

marriage goes pear shaped and wife demands you move your house off her property. Could she do this -

Why would she do that? As long as it was bought/ built after marriage, she gets 50%, so the court orders it sold and she just has to pay 50% of a very low price, as who in the village is going to buy a house on someone else's land?

[EricTh]

On 3/6/2018 at 12:23 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

I left when my wife's family moved into the house. It was very uncomfortable having to stay in my room whenever I was in the house.

They must have been laughing at me every day, seeing all the great stuff they were going to get for free.

In the end they even kept the stuff I wanted for myself, because they banned me from returning to the house.

That's why I said, never ever marry any girls who marry just for money. Have a probation period to find our her real feelings about you.

 

Whenever I ask some Thai people to recommend me a girlfriend, the first question they ask is whether I am rich. So I told them off, I don't like girls who are greedy for money.

 

I am sad to hear of your predicament. Since the house belong to you, you have the right to demolish the house and just let them live on bare land without any roof. LOL.

Edited March 11, 2018 by EricTh

[LivinLOS]

On 3/2/2018 at 9:43 AM, xylophone said:

Not so if it was bought through setting up a company and the Thai nominees have invested nothing in it........or indeed if it is not operating as a company/business.

Where do you pick up anything about a company ?? 

 

He said he took a lease.. And knows he has 30 years.. He hopes he might have an option to extend in the future but also seems to know that this is not certain.. 

 

Thats 100% legal, 100% strong, and for 30 years at least.. A safe and solid way to occupy a property.